US Politics VI

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nick66 said:
So yeah, now that I've had a chance to look over this indictment, I have to say that, at the moment, Trump's lawyers have to be reasonably happy. There's no allegation of wrongdoing by anyone in the Trump campaign, or any suggestion that any American knowingly colluded with the Russians. Nor does the indictment allege that the disinformation changed the outcome of the election (though obviously no one can rule that in or out, there's no way of knowing).

When you get right down to it, if you read the indictment itself this is more or less an indictment of (very successful) Russian disinformation trolls.

Of course, it doesn't touch on the other issues Mueller is investigating, like the Trump tower meeting where Trump associates went looking for dirt on HRC, or the DNC hacking. So there's still more to stay tuned on. It does undermine Trump's assertion that the Mueller investigation is a 'hoax', but he can still claim there's no evidence of illegal collusion (thus far).
Click to expand...

I think the big message of the indictments is that there was Russian interference with the 2016 elections and the Mueller can (likely) prove it. This will make it more difficult for Trump to "fire" Mueller. Because he's going after the Russians, so ending his investigation would make it seem even more that Trump is in bed with Putin.
Mueller has just bought himself more time to continue his work.
 
Gzusfrk said:
You realize how ridiculous and desperate this flimsy quote sounds.



Strawman 101. So you are comparing the entire Democratic Party "groupthink" blindly changing their views in 10 years, to slavery in 1865 and the election of Donald Trump in 2016.



And of course, if you're not a leftist, then you must love Donald Trump. :lol:



Stick to music, sir. You do better there.
Click to expand...



None of this makes sense, not one word.

I don’t think this is your forte my friend.

You’re honestly ALL OVER the place, what is the point you’re really trying to make?
 
old.jpg
 
Popmartijn said:
I think the big message of the indictments is that there was Russian interference with the 2016 elections and the Mueller can (likely) prove it. This will make it more difficult for Trump to "fire" Mueller. Because he's going after the Russians, so ending his investigation would make it seem even more that Trump is in bed with Putin.

Mueller has just bought himself more time to continue his work.
Click to expand...



This

He’s setting Trump up. Trump won’t be able to fire Mueller as easily.

It’s glorious to watch the MAGAS celebrate when they have no clue what’s coming next.

I truly believe this will be the most treasonous action anyone has ever taken against the country.

While this is my opinion and may not come true or even close

Trump worked a deal with Russia in 2013. Gets deals on his hotels/development in Moscow and he runs for president. Eventually turns into dropping sanctions

Russia changed votes. Not proven but think it’ll come out

Jill Stein is implicated

Obstruction of justice against Trump
Money laundering against Trump
Conspiracy against USA against Trump


And the GOP still won’t impeach
 
BVS said:
None of this makes sense, not one word.

I don’t think this is your forte my friend.

You’re honestly ALL OVER the place, what is the point you’re really trying to make?
Click to expand...

I'm not all over the place, just trying to chase Headaches and others rabbit trails. The leftists here got upset because I said , based on a post by Irvine, that the left have a difficult time not only admitting when they're wrong, but even entertaining the possibility that they may be wrong, or have to apologize for false assumptions. That's all I said before the red herrings started.

As far as this being "my forte ", well I have my views, and I study the political and historical landscape very thoroughly. I may be wrong sometimes and when I am, I'll certainly admit it.

However, since FYM is an admitted, and proud echo chamber for the left, I can see how you could think that this is not "my forte. "
 
Gzusfrk said:
I'm not all over the place, just trying to chase Headaches and others rabbit trails. The leftists here got upset because I said , based on a post by Irvine, that the left have a difficult time not only admitting when they're wrong, but even entertaining the possibility that they may be wrong, or have to apologize for false assumptions. That's all I said before the red herrings started.



As far as this being "my forte ", well I have my views, and I study the political and historical landscape very thoroughly. I may be wrong sometimes and when I am, I'll certainly admit it.



However, since FYM is an admitted, and proud echo chamber for the left, I can see how you could think that this is not "my forte. "
Click to expand...



Admitted and proud echo chamber of the left? Okaaaaay

The fact that you’re throwing Headache in as a “leftist” is hilarious.

No, you said it was a ‘fact’ that the left can’t admit when they’re wrong. That is how a child argues a point, and it’s a fucking laugh riot given the current state of your party.

More facts, less generalization bs, otherwise you’re just an echo of Hannity.
 
PhilsFan said:
The Democratic Party loves the free market, which is a right wing stance.

The Democratic Party loves war, which is a right wing stance.

The Democratic Party doesn't know how it feels about immigration. It's somewhere in the middle. It's certainly willing to give concessions. It's not a leftist stance on immigration.

There is nothing socialist about the Democratic Party. Nothing at all.
Click to expand...
Agree with this, though I'd caution throwing any indications that 'open' immigration policies correlate with the left. Historically, and if you look today at 'left' countries ie Scandanavia, NZ, immigration is a huge topic and often treated harsher than it is in the US.

But yeah, I'm with Philsfan on this one
 
Gsusfrk, my feeling is it's mostly only fundamentalist religious folk who consider gay marriage to contentious.
It was brought into law in my country under a centre-right government. Same in Australia I believe?
Democrats really do seem to be a massive distance from 'left'.
 
Nick66 said:
You voted for Romney in 2008? You were the only one.

Or did you not mean 2008 literally? Maybe 2008 is defined as any year between 2006 and 2012? ;)
Click to expand...

We'll see. If he's not willing to admit being wrong he's a leftist. If he does admit then there's still hope.
 
Gates flips.

This puts pressure on Manafort to work with Mueller as Gates knows a lot of what Manafort knows. And just this weekend Manafort gets his with another banking/finance charge for additional pressure.
 
PhilsFan said:
What fucking good is a Democrat who stands for nothing?
Click to expand...


Well to start, she’d be one more vote for a Democratic majority leader, and a Democratic majority, which would mean Democrats could control the floor debate. And have a majority in all the Senate committees. Could stop the most egregious Presidential nominees. And a Democratic majority could open and control investigations.

Anyone who tells you it doesn’t matter which party is in control is lying to you.

Even a conservative Democrat still goes a lot further if you want all those things than even the most liberal Republican.
 
Last edited:
Trump tweeting that the FBI ignored the tip about the FL killer because they were focused on Russia-only Trump could make himself a victim of a mass shooting when he wasn't even there. Words can't even convey what a flaming narcissist he is. Too busy being a perpetual victim to ever be a leader. And people fall for that. Sad!
 
He was even more embarrassing than usual this weekend.

His comments about the FBI were just way over the line. And it's one thing to go after the FBI leadership over the Russia investigation, it's another to suggest the FBI is responsible for those deaths in Florida. That really IS taking a cheap shot at the whole organisation.

And he couldn't take the minor "victory" of none of his people being indicted on Friday and leave it alone, he had to make more conspiratorial, and untrue, unhinged comments about the Russia investigation....without ever talking about what Russia actually did.

Then, to top it all of, the goes after Oprah and practically dares her to run against him. Idiot. Given the story that it was Obama's mocking of Trump at the WH Correspondent's Dinner that prompted Trump to run, I'd think he's realising he's playing with fire going after one of the most popular women in America.
 
Nick66 said:
Well to start, she’d be one more vote for a Democratic majority leader, and a Democratic majority, which would mean Democrats could control the floor debate. And have a majority in all the Senate committees. Could stop the most egregious Presidential nominees. And a Democratic majority could open and control investigations.

Anyone who tells you it doesn’t matter which party is in control is lying to you.

Even a conservative Democrat still goes a lot further if you want all those things than even the most liberal Republican.
Click to expand...



Exactly, this “they’re the same” bullshit has got to stop.

Learn when and how to pick your battles.
 
I understand that there is a certain game to be played, but conceding to any entrenched Dem who isn't fighting for the base of the party (minority voters being a huge part of the future of the left) is not a good electoral strategy. Joe Manchin should be challenged in the primary. So should McCaskill. No, they're not running for a national audience and demographics matter. But these ideas need to start getting introduced and start getting support across the spectrum on the Democratic side. We can't run and hide from the right side of issues any longer in the name of playing the game.

It's not about proving a point. It's about building for the long term. Short sightedness has been a major problem on the Democratic side. It's why they embraced so greatly the expansion of the executive branch under Obama; they assumed they were going to concede the House and Senate but would hold the presidency and started building their strategies around that. The Democrats need to think differently, and it starts by not being afraid of the issues. It starts by having litmus tests on core concerns.

If McCaskill and Manchin win in their states' primaries? So be it. But let's not do what the DNC has done in the past and create every barrier for entry possible for legitimate challengers with ideas that younger people support. Let's have a real battle for ideas in the primary so that the voters get a chance to know what options are out there, both on the issues and in the candidates.
 
PhilsFan said:
I understand that there is a certain game to be played, but conceding to any entrenched Dem who isn't fighting for the base of the party (minority voters being a huge part of the future of the left) is not a good electoral strategy.
Click to expand...

Well, there are signs that only fighting for the base and not the general electorate (of the state) might not be a good strategy at all. The Republicans were shown that lesson with the Alabama election. And it might happen again in Tennessee (so it might be they haven't learned from it yet). Electoral-vote.com

And it might be good to focus a bit more on ideological purity. But that might be something for California or Massachusetts. Or when you have a 62-38 majority (or, say, 57-43 when you're a bit less ambitious). But not when control of the Senate is dependent on it and you absolutely need Missouri.
Plus, the only reason that McCaskill and Manchin voted for that amendment to get in a slightly better position in their own state was because they were allowed to as their vote didn't have a direct consequence. That amendment was not going to pass, so they got permission. They would not have voted for it if their vote was the 60th one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

DaveC
US Politics XXXVIII: "Patriots" vs Reality
54 55 56
Replies
2K
Views
45K
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
I
2024 shows
Replies
26
Views
2K
DeVaul
DeVaul
DaveC
  • Locked
US Politics XXXVI: Special Masters of our Domain
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
34K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
R
Hello, hello!
Replies
2
Views
886
Ralph_Sutter
R
cobl04
New Zealander and Australian champion DOMINATES and embarrasses NASCAR field on debut
Replies
2
Views
517
cobl04
cobl04

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom