Are you truly still denying that Russia hacked the election? I guess you and the Donald can stick together on that until the bitter end.
President Trump on the Civil War...
- Thread starter RBB89
- Start date
And now we are stuck being the laughing stock of the world. That's awesome! Because emails, you know.Then we had something in common after all (myself & the far left). Who knew.
It had to do with a lot more than emails (for me at least). Benghazi for one...
Donald should have sent her a Thank You card because he never could have done it without her as the opposition candidate.
Also...,if you really believe the Russians swung the election you really are in deep denial. While they may well have loved to have done so their actual effect was minimal, at best.
This is dumb.
This is true.
There is no way to judge this. We just don't know what effect the Russians actually had.
Goat, she left her handpicked ambassador hanging after multiple requests for security upgrades. If she did that to him my thought was: how do you think she'd treat us ( the American people).
If that's "dumb" then I guess I'll happily stay that way...
If that's "dumb" then I guess I'll happily stay that way...
I have yet to read anything that proves they changed even one actual vote.
Did they try to "influence" things? Sure they did! They try to do the same thing worldwide on a daily basis.
Did they actually have any real effect? Not with anyone that I know and there was enough information out there that they were trying to "influence" it that if anything they were having a reverse effect than what they hoped...
This nonsense about the Russians having any type of major effect is just wishful thinking by the losing party. They simply can't come to grips that they lost to a canidate like the Donald... That's understandable but sad at this point.
Oh my... OK, let me fire up the "Go Back Machine"
and see if I can link any of the news articles that have detailed his requests for increased security...Here is a link that may help your recall:
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...department-under-hillary-clinton-refused-sec/
Last edited:
We *can't* know what effect they really had. The fake news enterprise was funded largely by Russia, and it's dumb to assume they had no effect, but it's equally dumb to pretend to measure what actual effect it did have. Of course Russia tried to interfere. They should. We probably interfere in their elections, too.
The real question with Russia should be this: why doesn't it bother you that the candidate you voted for is also the candidate Putin wanted? What are you missing? Because there should definitely be some disconnect there. Forget what actual effect it had. Look at what they wanted and what you wanted. Why the overlap? Doesn't that bother you? At all? Even if it doesn't ultimately change your mind, shouldn't it at least give you pause?
I'm not missing much (aside from indepth knowledge of the tax code
). My vote was simply against Hillary rather than for DT. Does he have skeletons in his closet? I'd certainly imagine so. Are there enough checks and balances not to mention outright roadblocks to keep him from acting against US interests in an overt fashion. Yep, up to and including impeachment.Can't say I'm nearly as worried as I would have been with Hillary in there ((her having already used her position at the Sate Dept. to bring $$$ into the Clinton foundation.))
I have many, many reservations about DT;but that said, I'd vote for him again if Hillary was the opponent again.
That would have been true for Clinton, too. You say you would have been more worried for Clinton, but your explanation for your vote doesn't offer a reasonable explanation for that worry.
Is anyone surprised that a guy who is openly supported by white supremacists has a man crush on a pro slavery President? Jackson may be the biggest POS to ever stink up the office.
I'm not missing much (aside from indepth knowledge of the tax code
Can't say I'm nearly as worried as I would have been with Hillary in there ((her having already used her position at the Sate Dept. to bring $$$ into the Clinton foundation.))
I have many, many reservations about DT;but that said, I'd vote for him again if Hillary was the opponent again.
You'd probably vote for Satan if Beelzebub was running against
Hillary.
While I'm very happy with Gorsuch, and I'm sure I'd prefer him over any HRC nominee, if the only thing that was different in this last election was that she won the Presidency, there would be no chance of her getting anyone that liberal on the court. Someone like Garland would be about the best she could hope for. More likely someone like Kennedy would be about as far to the left she could go. A Republican Senate wouldn't confirm anyone more liberal than that. The gloves are off on judicial candidates now, on both sides.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
His statement, to me, reveals a "context" problem far too common today. He/they dont seem to consider/realize that most problems have causes/histories that are decades-deep minimum, and some go back hundreds of years. Most folks never get past a knee-jerk reaction based on who said something and which political party they are in. An incredible, stunning lack of understanding of history. The "sound bite" thinking prevalent throughout our current culture, and getting worse.
Trump has to keep the white supremacists interested since Bannon is in the dog house.
This has been asked and answered, goat. That really is a dumb question. The last time you asked this identical question, my answer was that it made not a smidgen of difference to me who in the hell Putin, Trudeau or any other world leader prefers as president. They may have reasons that I don't support. You really don't believe that my vote for Trump signals that I agree with everything about him and everything he says or does, do you? That's nuts. But it sounds like you really do believe that. What makes a difference to me is why I want prefer a particular candidate. If somebody agrees with me about that candidate for their own different and distinct reasons, so what?
It seems you and many others are really into this guilt by association baloney. How many times in just that last few days have posters said or implied that just cuz a white supremacist voted for trump, or attends a rally, that that is in any way significant relative to why any other person voted for Trump or attended a rally.
I recall one time in the last year that you and I agreed on something. That doesn't bother me in the least. Apparently it bothered you.
I hadn't heard or read that. Is Alex Jones a Ruskie? Do you have links or more information.
Where was a single vote or even a single registration changed, added or removed by a Russian hack? Name one. Name a state or district where it happened - but couple it with real evidence not this babbling crap the left is claiming. You've been running your mouth for weeks now - along with some of your comrades here - and no one has produced evidence of a single vote changed by Russian hack.
Jackson was a Unionist, and stood against his southern brethren during the Nullification Crisis in the early 1830s. Otherwise, he was a states rights slaveholder. To think he could have somehow prevented secession is comical.
Someone, I think it was Bannon, compared Trumps election to Jackson's. Trump now wants to compare himself to Jackson. Jackson could have prevented the Civil War, and by God he (Trump) could have too.
Maybe Trump could have done a deal to avoid the war. Every western democracy got rid of slavery in a peaceful way, except for us; including the European countries who gave us the institution of slavery. We fought a very bloody war about it. The other countries negotiated it. Lincoln tried, but it was too late. Maybe if Lincoln would have been earlier, he could have gotten it done. Or maybe if there was a strong president between Jackson and Lincoln it could have been done.
By the way, the next time you see a Democrat, thank them for Jackson.
I 'm talking about the stupid question about why I should be concerned why Putin supported Trump, if he did support Trump. If you didn't previously ask it, my apologies, but the question has been asked and answered here.
Depends on what you mean by "hacked." Are YOU saying the got into voting machines and changed or deleted votes for Clinton, or just used info and fake info to "persuade against" votes for Clinton?
Be specific.
Show your work.
I heard the hackers are funded by Soros.
You know what just isn't sinking in through that thick skull of yours? That no one really cares if Russian interference changed any votes. What people do care about is whether or not Comrade Trump and his cronies worked with Russia. Try and keep up.
Very interesting issues there.
Lincoln could certainly have "cut a deal" to end the war by allowing secession and ending slavery in the North. Plenty of Republicans would have done that.
But ending slavery in the Confederacy ...
Well, that would have required international trade sanctions plus who knows what else. Maybe a peasant revolution there?
Maybe 2 or 3 more generations if you wanted slavery to die an economic death? More than that?
Wouldn't it have required a strong president that was anti-slavery? Many of our leaders before the war were not anti-slavery, they were pro-slavery. As such, I don't know what would have happened if they had been a strong leader. The social tide was turning against slavery, there really was not a pro-slavery position that could have extended it later even if the leader was strong.
A big difference between the south and Europe was that the south was born to slavery. It was their custom, their right. It was who they were. Some Europeans profited by slavery, but it wasn't ingrained in their culture like it was in America. And still today, the south is more rooted in tradition than the north. That was a bad combination for getting slavery removed. The people seen as leaders of the south were too heavily invested in slavery. Invested enough that individual states worked on plans for military invasions of Cuba, South American, and Central America to try and expand slavery. I don't know what year slavery could have been ended without war, but it was before 1861. And of course it was after the Constitutional Convention as before then would have resulted in no union. So the period of time was very brief.
And you know this how? Benghazi? I assumed you listened to the hours upon hours of testimony and came up with something new? When do you think the Yemen trials will begin?
I rather enjoyed the Tweet reply by Elizabeth Lee @touraloura which followed Trump's remarks and several other Tweets which resembled this thread.
No one knew the Civil War could be so complicated.
No one knew the Civil War could be so complicated.
Of course I'm not saying someone got into election machines. I'm saying what every single service, FBI, CIA, Homeland Security and everyone investigating is saying. I'm saying they hacked her email , as they did with the GOP. They chose to release hers. They put out all kinds of fake stories that the Trumpsters believed, such as Pizzagate and child porn ring. Those discriminating voters that now love to yell fake news swallowed all of that about Hillary.
Last edited:
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
I assume, then, that you'd level the same criticism at those supporting Israel (as the protagonists of their conflict) with unwavering steadfastness?
Dude, you've been running your mouth going on 50 years. Those who live in glass houses shouldn't walk around with catapults and boulders.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Indiana earns 'B-' for spring transfer portal performance- Latest: ZachBrowning
-
