|
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 December 23 2016 02:29 LegalLord wrote:
Trump had his own fair share of bad luck though. The Hollywood Access tape is one particularly good example. Was it deserved criticism? Yes. Was it unlucky that it happened? Yes.
Circumstances that are less than desirable always occur. But Hillary isn't alone in being unlucky at times. She just played it badly and lost bigly.
I am almost 100% certain that Hillary and her team knew about the pussy-tape. The fact that it didn't hurt trump as much as it would have hurt literally any other politician is simply dumbfounding to me.
Its one thing for emails that say nothing to be leaked and be used as evidence by a spin machine.
Its another thing for the running candidate saying that he doesn't ask, that he just goes for it, that women just let him do it because he's famous. If Huckabee, or Rubio, or Bernie was caught saying that on record their political careers would be over. But Trump just kept on trucking. Its insane how many things happened to him without hurting him too badly.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Pussygate hurt Trump pretty bad. It didn't kill him and that was frankly surprising even to his most ardent supporters. It's just a testament to how bad his opponent was. I am still shocked by how he managed to survive that.
|
On December 23 2016 02:39 LegalLord wrote:
Pussygate hurt Trump pretty bad. It didn't kill him and that was frankly surprising even to his most ardent supporters. It's just a testament to how bad his opponent was. I am still shocked by how he managed to survive that.
Or a statement about his supporters
or a statement on how entrenched party politics is
|
Personally I'm surprised nobody seemed to care more about his twitter attack on the pope.
also I don't know much about our nuke arsenal but I don't see why we need more than 7k nukes. could it be updated? maybe but don't really see it as needing to be bigger
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
For all you folk here who gush over fact checks, do you see this as good fact checking? http://www.snopes.com/fake-trump-groping-plot/
It reminds me of "acid wash emails" in that it seems to use diversion as a means to "debunk" someone. I know that fact checkers have in the past been commonly accused of left leaning bias.
|
On December 23 2016 02:29 LegalLord wrote:
Trump had his own fair share of bad luck though. The Hollywood Access tape is one particularly good example. Was it deserved criticism? Yes. Was it unlucky that it happened? Yes.
Circumstances that are less than desirable always occur. But Hillary isn't alone in being unlucky at times. She just played it badly and lost bigly.
In the final two weeks the tables turned in favor of Trump. By the way Trump didn't play the rape tape well, at all. Personally I would say luck was in favor of Donny.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On December 23 2016 02:43 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
also I don't know much about our nuke arsenal but I don't see why we need more than 7k nukes. could it be updated? maybe but don't really see it as needing to be bigger
Not really the "number of nukes" that is what matters as much as effective delivery. How well can you counter a first strike, how good is your second strike, how well can you use nukes to deter significant conventional threats.
The US spends a lot of money on stupid shit like trying to build a missile shield or trying to be able to first strike against Russia which is both expensive and based on a pipe dream, which it should do less of.
|
On December 23 2016 01:45 LegalLord wrote:
The underblamers start with Hillary Clinton herself, and as the saying goes, shit rolls downhill. I would not be hard-pressed to find presidential losers more honest about the reasons they lost than her. It's interesting that everyone but the candidate herself is to blame for a loss that frankly should not have happened.
I did not feel the need to respond to kwizach's comment. I suppose you felt the need to mention it, but whatever floats your boat. I think I'm done responding to your "whole lot of vacuous empty statements" posts for that matter.
I dislike people strawmanning, if you choose to do it and ignore being called out on your own mistakes, why should others heed you when you call them out on their mistakes?
It merely goes to prove my point: most people don't like admitting to their own mistakes, and when they know about them, they often don't talk about it publicly, even though in private they know it's correctness.
if a loss shoudl not have happened, why put all the blame on one party, rather htan many? it seems if something simply should not have occured, then usually multiple parties are at fault for it occurring.
feel free to stop responding of course. we all have our patience and limits.
|
All of these fake racial attacks regarding Muslims and black churches is really, really bad.
Now that the "VOTE TRUMP" thing on a black church has been proven fake, no one is gonna give a shit when something real happens. And then this Muslim guy trying to frame Delta as racist. ugh. These people are destroying their own movements. Makes me very sad.
|
On December 23 2016 02:49 LegalLord wrote:For all you folk here who gush over fact checks, do you see this as good fact checking? http://www.snopes.com/fake-trump-groping-plot/It reminds me of "acid wash emails" in that it seems to use diversion as a means to "debunk" someone. I know that fact checkers have in the past been commonly accused of left leaning bias.
I'm unsure what you mean by diversion.
The analysis is made by snopes is that it reads like joking banter and was passed around only after people showed up accusing Trump.
Unless you believe this email was actually made before the accusations were made and someone manipulated it so that the dates would be wrong? Is that what you're suggesting? Please clarify.
|
On December 23 2016 02:39 LegalLord wrote:
Pussygate hurt Trump pretty bad. It didn't kill him and that was frankly surprising even to his most ardent supporters. It's just a testament to how bad his opponent was. I am still shocked by how he managed to survive that.
If he suffered an electoral defeat and exit polls showed voters didn't like Hillary but just couldn't bring themselves to vote for the pussy-grabber, I'd be the first to say it was Trump that did in Trump. Clinton's missteps and vocal, media-supported denials of wrongdoing were her downfall (along with blatant identity pandering, but setting that aside for the moment). I would have expected more Hillary supporters to own up to the reasons for her campaigns' loss because the future depends on it. We're a month and a half after, the Clinton's power and influence are history, but you wouldn't know it based on how little fault gets laid at her & her campaign's feet.
Take exit polls with a grain of salt this election, but the one I thought most revealing were people that rated Trump's temperament as unpresidential and thought his alpha playboy comments were bad yet still voted for him
|
If you want to hear about hillary's mistakes, it's easy, just ask her supporters what her mistakes were in a non-judgmental way, and without bringing up your own list of complaints about it (which her supporters are likely to consider in-apt or unsound or going too far).
It's true some still won't list much, but quite a few will, especially here on tl.
the problem is most of those questions come from haters pushing an agenda of their own, so they don't get what one might consider a neutral and thorough response, because their questions themselves were loaded.
the dynamics of disagreement also often lead to situations where you're yelling at each other, though you probably agree on many underlying factors existing, you just disagree on the extent of them. and of course, people tend to argue with the crazies on the other side rather than the reasonable ones, and they remember their arguments with the crazy ones and paint the whole other side with that.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On December 23 2016 02:58 Mohdoo wrote:
All of these fake racial attacks regarding Muslims and black churches is really, really bad.
Now that the "VOTE TRUMP" thing on a black church has been proven fake, no one is gonna give a shit when something real happens. And then this Muslim guy trying to frame Delta as racist. ugh. These people are destroying their own movements. Makes me very sad.
If people want to talk about fake news and credibility, the right place to start is right here.
|
On December 23 2016 02:49 LegalLord wrote:For all you folk here who gush over fact checks, do you see this as good fact checking? http://www.snopes.com/fake-trump-groping-plot/It reminds me of "acid wash emails" in that it seems to use diversion as a means to "debunk" someone. I know that fact checkers have in the past been commonly accused of left leaning bias.
The email doesn't show evidence that the Trump grope accusers were lying or planted. This fact check shows the email is more simply explained by the fact that it followed the NYT story by two days and seems joking in nature.
Clearly the fake news outlets referenced needed their claims fact checked in that instance.
|
On December 23 2016 02:59 Danglars wrote:
Take exit polls with a grain of salt this election, but the one I thought most revealing were people that rated Trump's temperament as unpresidential and thought his alpha playboy comments were bad yet still voted for him
They voted for him because of it. Trump being unqualified was, from the perspective of the rabidly anti-establishment electorate, a qualification. They purposely turned the election and the office into a joke. There's literally nothing you can do to compete with it if you're a politician, because this alone is enough to disqualify you in that atmosphere.
|
On December 23 2016 02:59 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2016 02:39 LegalLord wrote:
Pussygate hurt Trump pretty bad. It didn't kill him and that was frankly surprising even to his most ardent supporters. It's just a testament to how bad his opponent was. I am still shocked by how he managed to survive that. If he suffered an electoral defeat and exit polls showed voters didn't like Hillary but just couldn't bring themselves to vote for the pussy-grabber, I'd be the first to say it was Trump that did in Trump. Clinton's missteps and vocal, media-supported denials of wrongdoing were her downfall (along with blatant identity pandering, but setting that aside for the moment). I would have expected more Hillary supporters to own up to the reasons for her campaigns' loss because the future depends on it. We're a month and a half after, the Clinton's power and influence are history, but you wouldn't know it based on how little fault gets laid at her & her campaign's feet. Take exit polls with a grain of salt this election, but the one I thought most revealing were people that rated Trump's temperament as unpresidential and thought his alpha playboy comments were bad yet still voted for him
I'm unsure what you mean by this.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-aides-loss-blame-231215
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/11/13/losers-clinton-campaign-ignored-bills-advice-and-felt-white-working-class-voters-werent-worth-the-time-n2245095
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bill-clintons-lonely-one-man-effort-to-win-white-working-class-voters/article/2607228
There's been plenty of criticism to the Clinton strategy both from outside and inside the Clinton camp. Even her own husband has not been in full agreement of their strategy.
I think the main thing you mean is that neither Podesta nor Hillary has made big deal speeches about how they lost. And with how big the popular vote lead is, neither would I. I am fairly certain Hillary feels robbed by archaic rules while I'm certain Podesta knows he'll never get work as a campaign strategist ever again. Neither have incentive to talk about it. Hillary feels she's won and Podesta will never be hired--so its resolved in their eyes.
|
When he was in prison, Lorenzo Palma strongly suspected he was an American citizen. He had spent his whole life in the United States, and he knew his grandfather was born in El Paso, Texas, in 1914.
Palma had served five years on an assault conviction and was about to be released on parole, but immigration officials had stopped his release because they wanted to deport him. They said he wasn't a U.S. citizen.
So in the summer of 2014, Palma found himself among dozens of inmates about to face an immigration judge in Huntsville, Texas. "They would sit us by groups of 10 and they would start deporting left and right," he said.
Getting the paperwork to prove his citizenship was hard: He didn't have money to call his mother in El Paso, Texas, so he was forced to send letters asking her to find the documents.
When it was Palma's turn in court, Judge Richard Walton was short. Palma tried to explain that he was an American. But Walton simply asked Palma if he wanted time to get a lawyer; Palma said yes. Court recordings obtained by NPR show that Palma then softly asked Walton what his chances were of staying in the country.
"Are you a gambling man?" Walton asked. "If I told you [that] you had a 91 percent chance to stay, do you think that would be good? Because you still might fall into that 9 percent chance."
***
It's illegal for U.S. immigration authorities to hold Americans in detention.
However, an NPR analysis of data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act Request shows that hundreds of American citizens each year find themselves in a situation similar to Palma's. That data show that from 2007 through July of last year, 693 U.S. citizens were held in local jails on federal detainers — in other words, at the request of immigration officials. And 818 more Americans were held in immigration detention centers during that same time frame, according to data obtained through a separate FOIA request by Northwestern University professor Jacqueline Stevens and analyzed by NPR.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/12/22/504031635/you-say-you-re-an-american-but-what-if-you-had-to-prove-it-or-be-deported
|
On December 23 2016 03:06 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2016 02:58 Mohdoo wrote:
All of these fake racial attacks regarding Muslims and black churches is really, really bad.
Now that the "VOTE TRUMP" thing on a black church has been proven fake, no one is gonna give a shit when something real happens. And then this Muslim guy trying to frame Delta as racist. ugh. These people are destroying their own movements. Makes me very sad. If people want to talk about fake news and credibility, the right place to start is right here.
I am unsure what you are implying with this post. The link shows an article that suggests fake news sites possibly sowed lack of trust amongst voters.
|
On December 23 2016 02:59 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2016 02:39 LegalLord wrote:
Pussygate hurt Trump pretty bad. It didn't kill him and that was frankly surprising even to his most ardent supporters. It's just a testament to how bad his opponent was. I am still shocked by how he managed to survive that. If he suffered an electoral defeat and exit polls showed voters didn't like Hillary but just couldn't bring themselves to vote for the pussy-grabber, I'd be the first to say it was Trump that did in Trump. Clinton's missteps and vocal, media-supported denials of wrongdoing were her downfall (along with blatant identity pandering, but setting that aside for the moment). I would have expected more Hillary supporters to own up to the reasons for her campaigns' loss because the future depends on it. We're a month and a half after, the Clinton's power and influence are history, but you wouldn't know it based on how little fault gets laid at her & her campaign's feet. Take exit polls with a grain of salt this election, but the one I thought most revealing were people that rated Trump's temperament as unpresidential and thought his alpha playboy comments were bad yet still voted for him
Calling the tape "alpha playboy comments" is an understatement rooted in bias.
|
On December 23 2016 03:10 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:Show nested quote +When he was in prison, Lorenzo Palma strongly suspected he was an American citizen. He had spent his whole life in the United States, and he knew his grandfather was born in El Paso, Texas, in 1914.
Palma had served five years on an assault conviction and was about to be released on parole, but immigration officials had stopped his release because they wanted to deport him. They said he wasn't a U.S. citizen.
So in the summer of 2014, Palma found himself among dozens of inmates about to face an immigration judge in Huntsville, Texas. "They would sit us by groups of 10 and they would start deporting left and right," he said.
Getting the paperwork to prove his citizenship was hard: He didn't have money to call his mother in El Paso, Texas, so he was forced to send letters asking her to find the documents.
When it was Palma's turn in court, Judge Richard Walton was short. Palma tried to explain that he was an American. But Walton simply asked Palma if he wanted time to get a lawyer; Palma said yes. Court recordings obtained by NPR show that Palma then softly asked Walton what his chances were of staying in the country.
"Are you a gambling man?" Walton asked. "If I told you [that] you had a 91 percent chance to stay, do you think that would be good? Because you still might fall into that 9 percent chance."
***
It's illegal for U.S. immigration authorities to hold Americans in detention.
However, an NPR analysis of data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act Request shows that hundreds of American citizens each year find themselves in a situation similar to Palma's. That data show that from 2007 through July of last year, 693 U.S. citizens were held in local jails on federal detainers — in other words, at the request of immigration officials. And 818 more Americans were held in immigration detention centers during that same time frame, according to data obtained through a separate FOIA request by Northwestern University professor Jacqueline Stevens and analyzed by NPR.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/12/22/504031635/you-say-you-re-an-american-but-what-if-you-had-to-prove-it-or-be-deported
Gee, wouldn't it be handy for the government to have a list of all citizens with basic things like nationality and current residence?
Nah, that would make to much sense
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
