2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[TheHeel]

Originally Posted by jdandns

"Senate report finds Manafort passed campaign data to Russian intelligence officer."

Say, what was this Manafort's job for candidate Trump again?
Campaign chairman!

And how long had Mr. Manafort been working on influence operations for the Russian oligarch (and Putin's main man) Oleg Deripaska?
12 years!

Glad we had this information in time to stop these mobsters from stealing the 2016 election.
Wait, what?!

**Crickets**

What will be the spin on this gem, jd?

[Jgil316]

This is an eye-opener of a read.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate-...-interference/

[Chris Lyle]

Originally Posted by TheHeel

**Crickets**

What will be the spin on this gem, jd?

Not worth responding to, you will just say how wrong the reply and then throw in a couple of insults.

[RedSoxFan28]

Originally Posted by jdandns

Nice work.
So instead of supporting Bernie's choice in 2016 and getting at least some of what Sanders wanted, you sat on your hands and got the opposite of what he wanted. That went so well, you plan to do it again.
Well-played, you manly maverick, you.

I dont blindly support a party. I dont "vote blue/red no matter who". hillary/biden know what they have to do to earn the "progressive" vote, yet they choose not to, and then blame them when they lose.


(hillary won Maine, nice scapegoating you learned well from hillary)

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by Jgil316

This is an eye-opener of a read.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate-...-interference/

Some quotes:

"The Committee found that Manafort's presence on the Campaign and proximity to Trump created opportunities for the Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign," the report said. "The Committee assesses that Kilimnik likely served as a channel to Manafort for Russian intelligence services, and that those services likely sought to exploit Manafort's access to gain insight into the Campaign. Taken as a whole, Manafort's high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik, represented a grave counterintelligence threat."

In a statement, Republican Senator Marco Rubio, the committee's acting chairman, said investigators "found absolutely no evidence" that the Trump campaign "colluded" with the Russians, but said the committee did find "irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling."

The Kicker:

"One of the Committee's most important — and overlooked — findings is that much of Russia's activities weren't related to producing a specific electoral outcome, but attempted to undermine our faith in the democratic process itself," he said in a statement. "Their aim is to sow chaos, discord, and distrust. Their efforts are not limited to elections."

Russia did not elect Donald Trump, the American people did (by the absolute slimmest of margins based on the system at play).

Russia's main goal was never to have Trump over Hillary, but to sew discord amongst the populace which they absolutely helped achieve.

I'm sure certain countries want certain parties elected.

that Russia's election interference efforts have continued into 2020, and that Moscow is actively seeking to "denigrate" the candidacy of Democratic nominee Joe Biden. China and Iran, which the intelligence community has assessed prefer Mr. Trump not win reelection, are also considering taking action aimed at the election.

To say that Donald Trump won due to collusion, meddling, interference, or whatever is missing the forest for the trees.

[ballhawkdawk]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

You asked why unborn babies don't receive stimulus checks. No babies received a stimulus check, unborn or otherwise, as I answered. I'm not sure what you're implying here. Actually, I am, but I if you could spell it out for me, that'd be great. I wouldn't want to put words in your mouth. That is probably a microaggression... or something.

You're too slow, Heel. I understand taking a position and actually explaining it is difficult, but your "how come they don't pay parents $500 for unborn babies?" is easily countered by referencing the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.

Try to develop a real position. Same for jdandns. Your analogies are sh** ... both of you.

Once the baby kicks, no more abortion. Until then, I'm okay with it. You also only get one taxpayer subsidized abortion. If you opt for a second abortion, you will have your ability to procreate surgically removed. If you pay for the entire cost of the abortion, have as many as you want, but only up until the baby kicks. The reason for the abortion doesn't matter to me.

My two concerns:
- My taxes paying for reckless sexual behavior
- Unborn babies being brutally murdered in the womb. If you've ever seen an ultrasound or felt a baby kick inside of your partner's belly, I have a difficult time believing that anyone would be okay with aborting at that point.

The "life begins at conception, no circumstantial exceptions for abortion" and "her body, her choice" crowds are both insane to me.

[Jgil316]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

Some quotes:





The Kicker:



Russia did not elect Donald Trump, the American people did (by the absolute slimmest of margins based on the system at play).

Russia's main goal was never to have Trump over Hillary, but to sew discord amongst the populace which they absolutely helped achieve.

I'm sure certain countries want certain parties elected.




To say that Donald Trump won due to collusion, meddling, interference, or whatever is missing the forest for the trees.

We know what the intent was from Russia - you pointed it out above - we also know they had disinformation campaigns against Clinton and also worked with Wikileaks on information drops - that Trump and his team knew about, ahead of time.

At this point, I do not see how anyone can say - Trump did not know what Russia was doing and as a potential USA Presidential candidate - he welcomed that assistance with open arms.

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by Chris Lyle

Not worth responding to, you will just say how wrong the reply and then throw in a couple of insults.

No, we're on the same "team".

Oh, I get it, you thought I was Snooby.

Carry on.

Originally Posted by JeremyNick

3 “tries”, 3 kids. I don’t need a fertility clinic, nor does my wife. So then why would I be “in a fertility clinic” and then just walking by. Why do you keep changing your loaded hypothetical situation? I wouldn’t even know a clinic if I saw it. How the heck do I know there is a refrigerator full of zygotes if I don’t own it. Which refrigerator are they in? What happens if I accidentally grab a bunch of lunch bags instead of the zygotes and end up saving a cappicolla sammich from getting toasted too darkly? Why doesn’t the clinic have adequate fire rated refrigeration for its enormous amount of ‘gotes? Hasn’t JCAHO done their reviews recently? Were they cited for inadequate storage of human tissue? If it’s not mine, why aren’t the people that own/work there saving it. Why is there only one baby? I mean what if there were 400 babies and 1 zygote?

I see you have been greatly perplexed by that simple one-or-the-other question.
Mission accomplished.

I will say congrats to you on having "gotten busy" three times in your life.
Around here, that likely puts you in very elite company.

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by Zedlaw

Just for clarity. At this point in each presidency

Obama: 22 pardons and 1 reduced
Trump: 25 pardons and 11 reduced

It's common for outgoing presidents to have a large rise in clemency before leaving office. Obama's was crazily higher than the norm, granting 1500 reduced sentences to mostly drug offenders, not full pardons, in the last years, including 300+ on the last day.

Unsubstantiated and biased opinion: the crimes Trump gave clemency reads like a Goodfellas character

Well done, and just wait for the pardons Trump gives when he's headed out the door. That is when ALL recent Presidents have engaged some hard-to-figure business. With Trump, it will be epic.

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by Jgil316

We know what the intent was from Russia - you pointed it out above - we also know they had disinformation campaigns against Clinton and also worked with Wikileaks on information drops - that Trump and his team knew about, ahead of time.

At this point, I do not see how anyone can say - Trump did not know what Russia was doing and as a potential USA Presidential candidate - he welcomed that assistance with open arms.

That is not collusion though, which is alleged. I'd also bet my life savings that the Russian interference and disinformation stuff had less to do with the election outcome than even James Comey stating he was looking into the email stuff again.

Is Comey a Russian plant? Hardly.

Lot's of different things went in to Trump's election. If any foreign contacts were deemed illegal they should be prosecuted. At the same time, this entire narrative that Russia elected Donald Trump is not based in reality. That Donald Trump was somehow working with the Russians is not based in reality.

[techtre2003]

Originally Posted by TheHeel

**Crickets**

What will be the spin on this gem, jd?

You'll probably hear about as much as we heard from the Trump haters in here (like yourself) about the Durham indictment and all of the evidence of the wrongdoing by the FBI and Obama administration.

[TheHeel]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

You're too slow, Heel. I understand taking a position and actually explaining it is difficult, but your "how come they don't pay parents $500 for unborn babies?" is easily countered by referencing the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.

Try to develop a real position. Same for jdandns. Your analogies are sh** ... both of you.

Once the baby kicks, no more abortion. Until then, I'm okay with it. You also only get one taxpayer subsidized abortion. If you opt for a second abortion, you will have your ability to procreate surgically removed. If you pay for the entire cost of the abortion, have as many as you want, but only up until the baby kicks. The reason for the abortion doesn't matter to me.

My two concerns:
- My taxes paying for reckless sexual behavior
- Unborn babies being brutally murdered in the womb. If you've ever seen an ultrasound or felt a baby kick inside of your partner's belly, I have a difficult time believing that anyone would be okay with aborting at that point.

The "life begins at conception, no circumstantial exceptions for abortion" and "her body, her choice" crowds are both insane to me.

Chill out. You're edgey today.

I am just asking how come they do not get a stimulus check?

Like I said, I am not a supporter of abortion unless under extreme circumstance.

[gopherfan]

[QUOTE=jdandns;16322401][QUOTE=DegaBama;16322363]

Platform will be laid out over the remaining nights, as planned.

Putin isn't done writing Trump's yet for next week.



No need. Trump has doubled Obama's golf trips at this point in their Presidencies, and Obama didn't take his rounds at his own overpriced golf clubs so as to gorge himself on our tax dollars like a pig at a trough.

Originally Posted by Chris Lyle

A regular bologna sandwich is a whole lot better than the rotten headcheese one stinking up the White House now.

I don't know the answer to this, but wouldn't it be cheaper for Trump to play at his own courses? The Secret Service can sweep it more easily. And does he actually pay to play there? My guess is it costs more to shut down a "regular" course than your own.

[Jopeal]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

I... the betrayal... how could you?

[gopherfan]

Originally Posted by ballhawkdawk

Is that the conservative or liberal position? I need to know that first before I decide whether I agree with this or not.

It's my position. I've stated that I am a right leaning Libertarian that wants smaller government and most importantly, fiscal responsibility. Hell, if Biden could tell me a way to lower the national debt, and follow through with it, he might get my vote.

[jdandns]

Originally Posted by GeechQuest

To say that Donald Trump won due to collusion, meddling, interference, or whatever is missing the forest for the trees.

This ignores that Trump himself owes Russia tons of money and also that Putin has in his possession a scandalous videotape containing some of Trump's more salacious activities. Taken all together, it's a rich tapestry.

[RedSoxFan28]

@TrueAnonPod
New image of Bill Clinton getting a massage from Epstein victim Chauntae Davis during the infamous 2002 trip to Africa with JE, Maxwell, Chris Tucker and Kevin Spacey

[GeechQuest]

Originally Posted by jdandns

This ignores that Trump himself owes Russia tons of money and also that Putin has in his possession a scandalous videotape containing some of Trump's more salacious activities. Taken all together, it's a rich tapestry.

It's also not colluding with Russians.

They're not at all synonymous.

[JeremyNick]

Originally Posted by jdandns

No, we're on the same "team".

Oh, I get it, you thought I was Snooby.

Carry on.



I see you have been greatly perplexed by that simple one-or-the-other question.
Mission accomplished.

I will say congrats to you on having "gotten busy" three times in your life.
Around here, that likely puts you in very elite company.

If you are going to create a biased, loaded scenario details are important. Otherwise it’s just a poorly crafted excuse to make an invalid point.

And you took the bait. I debated whether or not to include the “3 tries” comment and I decided to go with it. I gave you an opportunity to show who you were and you just couldn’t help yourself. Good job.

[TheHeel]

Originally Posted by RedSoxFan28

@TrueAnonPod
New image of Bill Clinton getting a massage from Epstein victim Chauntae Davis during the infamous 2002 trip to Africa with JE, Maxwell, Chris Tucker and Kevin Spacey

Busted!

[mike1498]

Originally Posted by RedSoxFan28

Both are hypocrites, bet there are plenty republicans that had a problem with the Harris pick being a political stunt and no problem with the pardon.


Doesn't change the fact both are political stunts.

Yes. What I will say is that one has a bigger impact On everyone though. Both are stunts but I do think picking a VP based on color is a little bigger of a deal than pardoning someone whose dead. That being said they are both political stunts for sure.

[TheFrenzy]

If anyone here is actually interested in discussing Russian interference in good faith, then they've got to tell the whole story.

Russia hated Hillary more than it liked Trump and its overall goal was to stir up racial tensions.

Originally Posted by TheFrenzy

Findings from the report:

1. Russia's two top goals were to shake Americans' faith in democracy and harm Hillary Clinton. Support for Trump was secondary to these goals.

Page 4 - "Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections," that "Russia's, goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency." However, where the Intelligence Community assessed that the Russian government "aspired to help President-elect Trump's election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him," the Committee found that IRA social media activity was overtly and almost invariably supportive of then-candidate Trump, and to the detriment of Secretary Clinton's campaign.

2. The 2016 election was not even Russia's primary target. They had (and have) been far busier sowing discord regarding US social issues.

Page 5 - The Committee found that Russia's targeting of the 2016 U.S. presidential election was part of a broader, sophisticated, and ongoing information warfare campaign designed to sow discord in American politics and society. Moreover, the IRA conducted a vastly more complex and strategic assault on the United States than was initially understood. The IRA's actions in 2016 represent only the latest installment in an increasingly brazen interference by the Kremlin on the citizens and democratic institutions of the United States.

Page 6 - Analysis of the behavior of the IRA-associated social media accounts makes dear that while the Russian information warfare campaign exploited the context of the election and election-related issues in 2016, the preponderance of the operational focus, as reflected repeatedly in content, account names, and audiences targeted, was on socially divisive issues-such as race, immigration, and Second Amendment rights-in an attempt to pit Americans against one another and against their government.

3. Once again, Russian "support" for Trump was typically the byproduct of their attacks on the forerunners. Their goal was to remove anti-Russia candidates early on and then to taint the eventual winner's presidency as much as possible. [Again, Trump was always the longshot and Kremlin activity focused on the likely winners]

Page 6 - The Committee found that the IRA targeted not only Hillary Clinton, but also Republican candidates during the presidential primaries. For example, Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio were targeted and denigrated, as was Jeb Bush. As Clint Watts, a former FBI Agent and expert in social media weaponization, testified to the Committee, "Russia's media outlets and covert trolls sought to sideline opponents on both sides of the political spectrum with adversarial views towards the Kremlin." IRA operators sought"to impact primaries for both major parties and "may have helped sink the hopes of candidates more hostile to Russian interests long before the field narrowed."

4. African Americans were by far exposed to more Russian propaganda than any other demographic. This propaganda was designed to stoke racial fears and animosities—specifically towards police.

Page 6-7 - The Committee found that no single group of Americans was targeted by IRA information operatives more than African-Americans. By far, race and related issues were the preferred target of the information warfare campaign designed to divide the country in 2016. Evidence of the IRA's overwhelming operational emphasis on race is evident in the IRA's Facebook advertisement content (over 66 percent contained a term related to) and targeting (locational targeting was principally aimed at African-Americans in key metropolitan areas with), its Facebook pages (one of the IRA's top- performing pages, "Blacktivist," generated 11.2 million engagements with Facebook users), its Instagram content (five of the top 10 Instagram accounts were focused on African-American issues and audiences), its Twitter content (heavily focused on hot- button issues with racial undertones, such as the NFL kneeling protests), and its YouTube activity (96 percent of the IRA's YouTube content was targeted at racial issues and police· brutality).

5. Russian propagandists were even able to manipulate African Americans into engaging in "offline activities" to further Russian goals. They also requested and received promotional materials for Trump rallies from the Trump campaign on occasion.

The Committee found that the IRA coopted unwitting Americans to engage in- .offline activities in furtherance of their objectives. The IRA's online influence operations were not constrained to the unilateral dissemination of content in the virtual realm,and its operatives were not just focused on inciting anger and provoking division on the internet. Instead, the IRA also persuaded Americans to deepen their engagement with IRA operatives. For example, the IRA targeted African-Americans over social media and attempted and succeeded in .some cases to influence their targets to sign petitions, share personal information, and teach self-defense training courses.18 In addition, posing as U.S. political activists, the IRA requested-and in some cases obtained-assistance from the Trump Campaign in procuring materials for rallies and in promoting and organizing the rallies.

6. Russian activities did not cease with the 2016 election BUT HAVE CONTINUED TO INCREASED.

The Committee found that IRA activity on social media did not cease, but rather increased after Election Day 2016. The data reveal increases in IRA activity across multiple social media platforms, post-Election Day 2016: Instagram activity increased 238 percent, Facebook increased 59 percent, Twitter increased 52 percent, and YouTube citations went up by 84 percent21 As John Kelly noted: "After election day, the Russian government stepped on the gas. Accounts operated by the IRA troll farm became more active after the election, confirming again that the assault on our democratic process is. much bigger than the attack on a single election.',

[gopherfan]

Originally Posted by Jgil316

Nah - this is too fun!

In this thread there are a majority of Trump supporters who can not accept any criticism of their guy - even presented with facts, those are spun into fake news and "whataboutisms"

I don't like Biden, overwhelmingly ....

But he and Obama got us out of the mess after another republican and he can help fix the mess we are in after this republican.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rexsinq.../#2f79ab85cb0e

The Obama recovery of the last seven years remains the worst in postwar American history. Average gross domestic product (GDP) growth since the bottom of the recession in 2009 was barely above 2.1% per year. The average since 1949 is well above 4% per year during the previous 10 expansions. This result is not just bad, it is catastrophic. The average American should not be wondering if his or her income is a bit above or below 2007 levels. Just by historical averages, the average American should be 20% better off than in 2007. And this slow growth is settling in as a permanent new-abnormal.

I believe the root cause of abysmal growth is the huge tax increases imposed by Obama and the Democrats in Congress since 2008. The most harmful were the increase in the capital gains tax from 15 to 20 percent, the increase in top bracket income from 35 to 39.6 percent, and the new tax of 3.8 percent on investment income in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The massive increase in regulatory burden through the ACA and Dodd-Frank bills are also crushing, but unfortunately are harder to measure.

The 13.4 percentage point tax increases mentioned above (plus higher state and local taxes) directly lower expected returns on all investments by the same amount. Our government grabs the fruits of investment, and then is puzzled that businesses do not invest. This causes billions of dollars of investment projects to come off the table That is precisely what happens.

Weak investment is the signature feature and cause of the abysmal Obama "recovery." The aggregate of all investments in the United States is Net Private Domestic Investment computed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Relative to GDP Net Private Domestic Investment (NPDI) was 7% per year from1960 to 2008. That average was 7 to 8 percent from 1960 to 1990, and 6.5 percent in the Clinton and Bush (W) years. But for the Obama years NPDI was an astoundingly low 2% of GDP!

Every single Obama year but 2015 was worse than any year from 1960 to his inauguration. This isn't bad luck. If nothing changed in the economy, the likelihood of having a period as bad as Obama’s just by chance was 1 out of 1000.

The numbers for GDP and NPDI are interesting but still just lifeless statistics. The human toll is terrible. This comes in the form of teary-eyed parents telling their children there may not be much of a vacation this year or next and there may not be many gifts under the Christmas tree this year.

Horribly low investment is the predictable result of taxing investment and income at high rates. This terrible economic performance will continue until income and investment taxes are slashed. The government can still raise needed revenue with a broad base approach, eliminating all the special deductions and credits and allowing very low rates.

On the other hand, the sharply higher rates, a veritable bonanza of complexity for tax lawyers, and thousands more special deals in the proposals of President Obama's anointed successor, Hillary Clinton, will predictably entrench lackluster investment and stagnant incomes.

[gopherfan]

Originally Posted by JeremyNick

To be fair, both sides refuse facts and deflect to whatabouts.

To be fair, the whole DNC Convention is a political stunt.

To be fair, Biden is a widely incompetent politician with a history of political missteps and mismanagement.

To be fair, there is not a good choice this cycle. Which is not fair to the American people.

Jo Jorgensen is a good choice.

[cnewby]

Originally Posted by gopherfan

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rexsinq.../#2f79ab85cb0e

The Obama recovery of the last seven years remains the worst in postwar American history. Average gross domestic product (GDP) growth since the bottom of the recession in 2009 was barely above 2.1% per year. The average since 1949 is well above 4% per year during the previous 10 expansions. This result is not just bad, it is catastrophic. The average American should not be wondering if his or her income is a bit above or below 2007 levels. Just by historical averages, the average American should be 20% better off than in 2007. And this slow growth is settling in as a permanent new-abnormal.

I believe the root cause of abysmal growth is the huge tax increases imposed by Obama and the Democrats in Congress since 2008. The most harmful were the increase in the capital gains tax from 15 to 20 percent, the increase in top bracket income from 35 to 39.6 percent, and the new tax of 3.8 percent on investment income in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The massive increase in regulatory burden through the ACA and Dodd-Frank bills are also crushing, but unfortunately are harder to measure.

The 13.4 percentage point tax increases mentioned above (plus higher state and local taxes) directly lower expected returns on all investments by the same amount. Our government grabs the fruits of investment, and then is puzzled that businesses do not invest. This causes billions of dollars of investment projects to come off the table That is precisely what happens.

Weak investment is the signature feature and cause of the abysmal Obama "recovery." The aggregate of all investments in the United States is Net Private Domestic Investment computed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Relative to GDP Net Private Domestic Investment (NPDI) was 7% per year from1960 to 2008. That average was 7 to 8 percent from 1960 to 1990, and 6.5 percent in the Clinton and Bush (W) years. But for the Obama years NPDI was an astoundingly low 2% of GDP!

Every single Obama year but 2015 was worse than any year from 1960 to his inauguration. This isn't bad luck. If nothing changed in the economy, the likelihood of having a period as bad as Obama’s just by chance was 1 out of 1000.

The numbers for GDP and NPDI are interesting but still just lifeless statistics. The human toll is terrible. This comes in the form of teary-eyed parents telling their children there may not be much of a vacation this year or next and there may not be many gifts under the Christmas tree this year.

Horribly low investment is the predictable result of taxing investment and income at high rates. This terrible economic performance will continue until income and investment taxes are slashed. The government can still raise needed revenue with a broad base approach, eliminating all the special deductions and credits and allowing very low rates.

On the other hand, the sharply higher rates, a veritable bonanza of complexity for tax lawyers, and thousands more special deals in the proposals of President Obama's anointed successor, Hillary Clinton, will predictably entrench lackluster investment and stagnant incomes.

...and the hits just keep coming for jg.