|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On January 28 2016 05:36 RenSC2 wrote:
Hey GH, I'll take your sigbet on Trump if you'd like and nobody more prominent steps up. If Trump does not get the Republican nomination, you'll have "Greedo shot first." as your signature from the moment he drops out or loses at the convention until Nov 9th. If he does win, name my signature for when Trump mathematically wins until Nov 9th.
As disappointed as I've been with the Republicans over the last 15 years, I still have enough faith that they'll dump Trump. His boycott is a great time to characterize him as a blowhard wimp. He's afraid of a debate with a hostile moderator. He's going to hide behind veterans, yet he wasn't willing to serve. Get the wimp characterization to stick to someone who tries to project power and he'll be done. This boycott opens up the attack and the Republicans need to latch on like a pit bull.
Also, Trump just did the super villain "I am invincible" speech which is usually followed by a major loss.
This will be as great a lesson as any, then, that the movies are not real life.
|
will people care without trump? It's less about the debate itself and more about the dip in viewership that'll get the most coverage
|
I always thought the viewers of those debates cared about politics. But looks like it is more about drama, comedy and entertainment.
|
On January 28 2016 06:29 mahrgell wrote:
I always thought the viewers of those debates cared about politics. But looks like it is more about drama, comedy and entertainment.
Trump added a lot of viewers over the usual numbers. Those people were just watching for the entertainment.
|
On January 28 2016 06:23 LemOn wrote:
will people care without trump? It's less about the debate itself and more about the dip in viewership that'll get the most coverage
I suspect we'll see a significant drop, but I'm prepared to be wrong. I'm guessing there'll still be at least 8 million viewers. If it's higher than that I'll suspect Fox counted everyone who tuned in, saw Trump wasn't there, and then tuned out.
|
On January 28 2016 06:32 Seuss wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2016 06:23 LemOn wrote:
will people care without trump? It's less about the debate itself and more about the dip in viewership that'll get the most coverage I suspect we'll see a significant drop, but I'm prepared to be wrong. I'm guessing there'll still be at least 8 million viewers. If it's higher than that I'll suspect Fox counted everyone who tuned in, saw Trump wasn't there, and then tuned out.
Those will be counted for sure. Viewer numbers tend to be unique hits not people who watched atleast x minutes
|
When is the debate? Might be better with no Trump.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the gop debate is literally unwatchable without trump. it will give you cancer.
|
Not even considering watching with trump gone. Hilary sucks . Obama sucks. Repeal the ACA "on day 1", sure, go on.
|
On January 28 2016 06:35 Slaughter wrote:
When is the debate? Might be better with no Trump.
It won't be much of a debate at all. The Republican nominees all agree on pure, down the line Republican talking points. They are all doctrinaire Republicans whose only differences are on style points and several minor heresies against orthodoxy committed during the Bush2 years.. Trump at least had some maverick views on domestic spending, taxation, and the scope of America's foreign commitments.
|
On January 28 2016 06:03 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2016 05:44 cLutZ wrote:On January 28 2016 04:54 Mohdoo wrote:On January 28 2016 04:38 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:The remaining members of the armed militia occupying a wildlife refuge in rural Oregon were deciding whether to surrender or stand their ground on Wednesday after officials killed one of their spokesmen and arrested the main leaders of the protest on a remote highway.
Hours after news broke on Tuesday night that law enforcement officials had fatally shot militiaman LaVoy Finicum, an Arizona rancher, and arrested leader Ammon Bundy and seven others, police began setting up blockades around the Malheur national wildlife refuge.
By early Wednesday morning, heavily armed law enforcement officials were blocking access to the refuge, preventing reporters and some Harney County residents from passing through.
Within the wildlife sanctuary, protesters were debating what to do next, according to militia members and supporters in direct communication with the holdouts.
“They arrested all of the leadership,” occupier Corey Lequieu said on Wednesday. “It’s all up in the air.” Lequieu, a Nevada resident who has been at the occupation for weeks, said the protesters who are still at the refuge became increasingly angry and sad as news spread Tuesday that Finicum was killed and that the main militia leaders were behind bars.
“There are some pretty pissed off people,” said Lequieu, who said he was at the refuge Tuesday night but was driving away Wednesday morning. He declined to say where he was headed or if he planned to return.
Lequieu said the militiamen have not yet decided if they plan to turn themselves in but noted that many are devastated by Finicum’s death, which might motivate their next steps. “It was a setup,” he said of the arrests and fatal shooting. “They were waiting to murder him.” Source Delicious. God I love this so much. This has been such an excellent example of the futility of militia. The federal government will always win. Have as many guns as you want. At the end of the day, you are powerless to the federal government. Dumb rednecks can't do shit. Aren't they kind of not trying? Like, they are splitting up and carrying out formal business. If they actually were trying they would either A) Occupy a meaningful building and bring months of supplies; or B) Be completely anonymous and commit to a guerrilla strategy seamlessly melding in and out of the population (gathering support if people support the cause and getting exposed if they do not). It wasn't exactly the full force of the federal government either. A lot of the people there were quoted saying they brought guns for a reason and intended to go down fighting. Over time, that changed. It became obvious that they really had no late game. There was no way they would actually get that land.
On January 28 2016 06:04 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2016 05:44 cLutZ wrote:On January 28 2016 04:54 Mohdoo wrote:On January 28 2016 04:38 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:The remaining members of the armed militia occupying a wildlife refuge in rural Oregon were deciding whether to surrender or stand their ground on Wednesday after officials killed one of their spokesmen and arrested the main leaders of the protest on a remote highway.
Hours after news broke on Tuesday night that law enforcement officials had fatally shot militiaman LaVoy Finicum, an Arizona rancher, and arrested leader Ammon Bundy and seven others, police began setting up blockades around the Malheur national wildlife refuge.
By early Wednesday morning, heavily armed law enforcement officials were blocking access to the refuge, preventing reporters and some Harney County residents from passing through.
Within the wildlife sanctuary, protesters were debating what to do next, according to militia members and supporters in direct communication with the holdouts.
“They arrested all of the leadership,” occupier Corey Lequieu said on Wednesday. “It’s all up in the air.” Lequieu, a Nevada resident who has been at the occupation for weeks, said the protesters who are still at the refuge became increasingly angry and sad as news spread Tuesday that Finicum was killed and that the main militia leaders were behind bars.
“There are some pretty pissed off people,” said Lequieu, who said he was at the refuge Tuesday night but was driving away Wednesday morning. He declined to say where he was headed or if he planned to return.
Lequieu said the militiamen have not yet decided if they plan to turn themselves in but noted that many are devastated by Finicum’s death, which might motivate their next steps. “It was a setup,” he said of the arrests and fatal shooting. “They were waiting to murder him.” Source Delicious. God I love this so much. This has been such an excellent example of the futility of militia. The federal government will always win. Have as many guns as you want. At the end of the day, you are powerless to the federal government. Dumb rednecks can't do shit. Aren't they kind of not trying? Like, they are splitting up and carrying out formal business. If they actually were trying they would either A) Occupy a meaningful building and bring months of supplies; or B) Be completely anonymous and commit to a guerrilla strategy seamlessly melding in and out of the population (gathering support if people support the cause and getting exposed if they do not). Apart from them being idiots as you pointed out, there's not enough support. It's meaningless. So why try? The only way to get the attention that they need and want would be via martyrdom, and that can backfire relentlessly.
Well, yes, the most important part of a successful militia effort would be them having a cause that people actually support. The BLM is a very mediocre cause, even if it does everything the Bundy's claim. If, for instance, Costa Rica continues to be treated as a vassal state, or if its people were wealthy compared to Americans (or at least comparable) where the federal assistance money was disposable, I could see a successful militia movement for independence.
|
Here's what you'll hear at the debate:
Cruz: "I love America. And Rubio is a scumbag immigrant-lover."
Rubio: "I love America. And Cruz is a scumbag immigrant-lover AND a flip-flopper."
Christie: "I love America because I was a federal prosecutor. Also, this isn't the goddamn Senate, and I'm a federal prosecutor."
Jeb: "I love America. Can I go now?"
Kasich: "I love America and am desperate to appeal to liberals."
Carson: "I love...zzz...zzz...zzz."
I mean if Trump was there you'd get to hear someone say they loved America and would "make things happen" but it's not really that different to be honest.
|
It looks like it's really happening: Republican frontrunner Donald Trump announced a Thursday night event at Drake University as counter-programming for the Fox News presidential debate, which he has said he would not attend.
The event is scheduled to begin at 8 p.m. local time, the same time Fox's primetime debate is scheduled to start.
Source
As the war between Fox News and Donald Trump ratchets up, Roger Ailes is fighting off criticism from his senior executives over his handling of the crisis. According to one highly placed source, last night, Ailes sent out the now-famous statement mocking Trump as being scared to meet with the “Ayatollah” and “Putin” if he became president. “That was Roger 100 percent,” the source explained. “A lot of people on the second floor” — where top Fox executives work — “didn’t think it was a good idea.”
Fox executives are also troubled that Ailes’s principal adviser right now is his longtime personal lawyer and Fox & Friends contributor Peter Johnson Jr. “He wrote the statement with Peter,” the source explained. “Peter is running the war room,” another Ailes friend told me. Fox executives are worried that Ailes is relying on an attorney with scant communications experience as the network is reeling from the biggest PR crisis in recent memory. Historically, during a crisis like this Ailes would have huddled with his veteran communications guru Brian Lewis. But Ailes fired Lewis in 2013 over his concerns that Lewis had been a source for my 2014 Ailes biography. Since Lewis’s ouster, Johnson has taken on the role of media counselor.
Fox spokesperson Irena Briganti did not return a call. When asked about his role advising Ailes, Johnson responded to me with an ad hominem statement. "If you were ever actually fair, any semblance of integrity was swamped by your reaction to the failure of your critically panned hit job on Fox and Ailes," he said. "Just like your latest tweets and articles, your questions today are based on your own malicious fabrication."
New signs emerged today at just how frantic Ailes has become to get Trump back to the table. The two men have not spoken since yesterday, sources told me. This morning, Joe Scarborough reported that Ailes called Trump's daughter Ivanka and wife, Melania, to get through to the GOP front-runner. But Trump is saying he'll only talk to Rupert Murdoch directly. In a further challenge to Ailes's power, Bill O'Reilly is scheduled to host Trump. Last night, Ailes directed Sean Hannity to cancel Trump's interview. O'Reilly's refusal to abide by a ban adds a new dynamic to the clash of egos. For O'Reilly, this is an opportunity to take back star power from Kelly. Sources say O'Reilly feels he made Kelly's career by promoting her on his show, and he's been furious that Kelly surpassed him in the ratings.
Meanwhile, Fox producers are scrambling with the practical matter of how to program the debate without Trump. "Right now, it is about how the moderators handle Trump," one producer said. "They do not want to be seen either directly criticizing him since he's not there, and they don't want to seem like they are drumming up criticism by letting the candidates attack Trump rather than stake out their own positions and debate one another. For all the talk of the optics right now, the bigger issue is how to program a debate without the front-runner. Remember, Fox may be a political machine, but it is still a damn good television programmer."
For Ailes, the internal dissent over his handling of the crisis would seem to only weaken his grasp on the helm of Fox News. Rupert Murdoch has become more hands-on at Fox since questions about Ailes’s faltering health have been raised. Now Murdoch has to wonder why Ailes, who runs the most valuable asset at parent company 21st Century Fox, is getting PR advice from a lawyer Ailes personally pays.
Source
|
I love how they indirectly compared Megyn Kelly to the Ayatollah and Putin.
|
Some Republicans are in denial. Others are mad, or clinging to hope that voters will defy the polls. Still others are gloomy over the race.
For the rest, there’s acceptance.
Collectively, the Senate Republican Conference is undergoing the five stages of grief as it grapples with the growing possibility of Donald Trump or Ted Cruz at the top of the GOP ticket — a predicament many members believe would result in sweeping losses for their party in November. Not a single senator has endorsed either candidate, and the universe of potential Cruz or Trump supporters in the chamber can be counted, at this point, on one hand.
Yet the criticism of Trump is muted. Even Cruz, the most loathed man in the chamber, is drawing far less fire than usual as he concentrates more on the campaign and less on tweaking his Senate colleagues.
As painful as it is for many of them, Republicans are coming around to the idea that Trump or Cruz may well be their nominee.
“I think that’s a possibility,” Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.) said when asked whether Republicans were finally accepting that Trump could be their standard-bearer. “Everybody is waiting to see whether or not the polls coincide with the voters.”
The few senators who have endorsed are still in denial about the rise of Trump and Cruz. Jeb Bush can still win, his supporters insist. Never mind that the former Florida governor is barely cracking the top five in national and early-state polls.
Source
|
United States22883 Posts
|
Of course missing the crucial context. They had their amnesty. And what was the result? Three decades later we have millions more (several times what it was in then) in the same situation. We saw what happened in the 80s. We aren't going to repeat history.
Edit: that's not the only difference, but it's an important one. Also, 3 decades now. Jeez.
|
On January 28 2016 14:41 Jibba wrote:https://www.facebook.com/newsyvideos/videos/10153398271383775/Not normally one to post Facebook videos but I hadn't seen this before. Reagan was awfully liberal compared to today's party. I wonder if people realize Reagan granted amnesty to something like 3 million illegal immigrant workers.
The Reagan amnesty is largely seen as a teaching moment on the issue. Things promised in exchange never materialized, namely most of the demands that more anti-immigrant politicians espouse such as a border fence, improvements to INS procedures (now ICE) identifying VISA overstays, and restricting family migration procedures.
|
Breaking: 3 more Militants arrested in Oregon standoff.
|
On January 28 2016 15:12 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Breaking: 3 more Militants arrested in Oregon standoff.
Without violence?
Update on the Democratic debate situation. I like that they called her out on why she was making a play for a debate now and basically totally exposed the DNC as working for Clinton for anyone still in denial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
