EPTOn February 27 2017 04:29 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
This will put Trump in a meltdown.
<snipped commercials>
This will put Trump in a meltdown.
<snipped commercials>
Please don't throw marketing in my face like that, it is very upsetting to me.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6978
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
Please don't throw marketing in my face like that, it is very upsetting to me. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18846 Posts
| ||
|
RealityIsKing
613 Posts
On February 27 2017 04:47 farvacola wrote: Then stop reading the thread or whine about it in website feedback. Aggressive much. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On February 26 2017 12:17 LegalLord wrote: Curious what the people who actually care about the DNC chair election think about this op-ed. Source wondered who it could be, opened article, saw it was dershowitz and everything clicked. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On February 27 2017 04:27 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Another plot to mask the big election defeat foiled by Donald Seriously though what does he even mean with 'mask the big election defeat'. Is there a movement that's saying the Dems didn't lose? there was a movement of small size (though of course somewhat loud) saying the election was illegal due to russian interference. some of this is because of people not reading sources is carefully, so they hear about "russia hacking the election" but don't look into details and think it means russia hacked the voting machines directly or some such, rather than russia hacking politicians and releasing what they find to hurt a candidate. some of it is for other generally stupid reasons i'm not that familiar with. there's a larger portion which feels the election was technically legal, but has some concerns about legitimacy of outcome, and feels that if the outcome would've different if not for a foreign power meddling with the election. as you'd expect there'es also a lot of overlap between that group and the ones who lost. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23622 Posts
On February 27 2017 04:53 zlefin wrote: there was a movement of small size (though of course somewhat loud) saying the election was illegal due to russian interference. some of this is because of people not reading sources is carefully, so they hear about "russia hacking the election" but don't look into details and think it means russia hacked the voting machines directly or some such, rather than russia hacking politicians and releasing what they find to hurt a candidate. some of it is for other generally stupid reasons i'm not that familiar with. there's a larger portion which feels the election was technically legal, but has some concerns about legitimacy of outcome, and feels that if the outcome would've different if not for a foreign power meddling with the election. as you'd expect there'es also a lot of overlap between that group and the ones who lost. Not sure it was that small, yougov poll said 50% of Democrats thought Russia hacked vote totals to help Trump back in December. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On February 27 2017 04:27 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Another plot to mask the big election defeat foiled by Donald https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/835916511944523777 Seriously though what does he even mean with 'mask the big election defeat'. Is there a movement that's saying the Dems didn't lose? Russian has been centered among a great many Hillary supporters as making his election illegitimate, though thankfully less now #notmypresident #protests. And then of course Trump lies and exaggerates just how massive the win was so nobody is innocent here. EDIT: And now I'm hearing Obama made personal phone calls to DNC members to encourage them to support Perez (in addition to having his staff Jarrett Simas Aniskoff also do them). Apparently the difference between ending job titles and the two candidates was big enough to make him take action. | ||
KwarK
United States43545 Posts
On February 27 2017 05:51 Danglars wrote: Russian has been centered among a great many Hillary supporters as making his election illegitimate, though thankfully less now #notmypresident #protests. And then of course Trump lies and exaggerates just how massive the win was so nobody is innocent here. The objection isn't so much to the system being that whoever gets the most electoral college votes gets to be President, I'm not sure anyone is arguing that he didn't legitimately win the election. The objection is that he won the election by selling the country out to Russian interests. You can acknowledge both that he won and also that there are problems with the way that he won. And the more people demand that he stop treating Russian interests as more important than American interests the more difficult it is for him to sell out the American public. It is a matter of public record at this point that there was an attempt within the Trump administration to recognize Crimea and normalize relations, including the ending of sanctions. The investigation into ties between Russia and the administration is making it more difficult for them to trade favors in such a flagrant manner. What is being done is both justified and provably working. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7966 Posts
On February 27 2017 05:51 Danglars wrote: Russian has been centered among a great many Hillary supporters as making his election illegitimate, though thankfully less now #notmypresident #protests. And then of course Trump lies and exaggerates just how massive the win was so nobody is innocent here. EDIT: And now I'm hearing Obama made personal phone calls to DNC members to encourage them to support Perez (in addition to having his staff Jarrett Simas Aniskoff also do them). Apparently the difference between ending job titles and the two candidates was big enough to make him take action. Mate, the CIA and basically all intelligence agents have said that it was almost completely certain that Russia was responsible for the leaks and hacking of the demicratic campaign and actors. Russia therefore did temper with the electoral process, and Putin has been actively trying (successfully it seems) to have Trump elected, for multiple obvious reasons (he would weaken America's position in the world, compromise alliances with key allies, be less regarding towards Russia's ambition in Europe and in the middle east etc etc etc). It doesn't make Trump illegitimate, but stop living in denial, it's not some democratic plot. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7966 Posts
On February 27 2017 04:27 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Another plot to mask the big election defeat foiled by Donald https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/835916511944523777 Seriously though what does he even mean with 'mask the big election defeat'. Is there a movement that's saying the Dems didn't lose? Anyone saying Trump has tiny hands is FAKE NEWS Ladies and gents, the President of the United States. Seriously, he has to stop tweeting, it's a fucking disgrace. All the capital of respect and sympathy that Obama built in the world for America in 8 years is evaporating. Question for my conservative friends here. Would you have trusted Donal Trump to deal with the Cuba missile crisis? I mean, seriously, you are ask to replay the scenario and change JFK for Trump. Would you trust the result? I'm genuinely curious. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
On February 27 2017 06:12 Biff The Understudy wrote: Anyone saying Trump has tiny hands is FAKE NEWS Ladies and gents, the President of the United States. Seriously, he has to stop tweeting, it's a fucking disgrace. All the capital of respect and sympathy that Obama built in the world for America in 8 years is evaporating. Question for my conservative friends here. Would you have trusted Donal Trump to deal with the Cuba missile crisis? I mean, seriously, you are ask to replay the scenario and change JFK for Trump. Would you trust the result? I'm genuinely curious. I believe the outcome would depend not on Trump but on Bannon and Mattis.(not conservative) | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On February 27 2017 06:06 Biff The Understudy wrote: Mate, the CIA and basically all intelligence agents have said that it was almost completely certain that Russia was responsible for the leaks and hacking of the demicratic campaign and actors. Russia therefore did temper with the electoral process, and Putin has been actively trying (successfully it seems) to have Trump elected, for multiple obvious reasons (he would weaken America's position in the world, compromise alliances with key allies, be less regarding towards Russia's ambition in Europe and in the middle east etc etc etc). It doesn't make Trump illegitimate, but stop living in denial, it's not some democratic plot. Very clearly something to work on cyber security for the next election. For this election, don't be engaged in unethical behavior that leaks. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7966 Posts
On February 27 2017 07:14 Danglars wrote: Very clearly something to work on cyber security for the next election. For this election, don't be engaged in unethical behavior that leaks. You don't need unethical behaviour to make those leak impact the election. Just a lot of fake news and conspiracy theories website and supporters stupid enough to believe that the Clinton rape children in pizzerias. Great to see that you take the interference of a foreign power in your country democratic process seriously. "Oh Putin got his guy elected via cyber attacks, theft of personnal data, hacking and manipulation. Maybe we should hire an IT guy next time. Seriousfuckingly. I mean do you REALLY not see the problem? Cuz it's mind boggling at that point. | ||
|
Nemireck
Canada1875 Posts
On February 27 2017 06:06 Biff The Understudy wrote: Mate, the CIA and basically all intelligence agents have said that it was almost completely certain that Russia was responsible for the leaks and hacking of the demicratic campaign and actors. Russia therefore did temper with the electoral process, and Putin has been actively trying (successfully it seems) to have Trump elected, for multiple obvious reasons (he would weaken America's position in the world, compromise alliances with key allies, be less regarding towards Russia's ambition in Europe and in the middle east etc etc etc). It doesn't make Trump illegitimate, but stop living in denial, it's not some democratic plot. I'm just stating the obvious here, but if the DNC had been acting ethically in the first place, the hacks wouldn't have dealt the damage that they did. Make no mistake, a comparable hack would expose the same types of behaviours in the GOP. But their emails were left alone (LOL at their spin that THEY just happened to have better anti-hacking software) because of the preference to get Trump elected. It's just a classic example of "nothing is private online" coming to bite people in the ass. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23622 Posts
On February 27 2017 07:45 LegalLord wrote: The reason that the DNC hacks had the effect that they did was that the DNC and Hillary responded to them in the least effective way possible. Running away from the issue and putting DWS right on Clinton's campaign? Russia didn't hack the DNC's mindset to make them completely and utterly oblivious to the consequences of that. Pretty sure Hillary never actually addressed any of the things in the leaks, even after DWS resigning and Donna getting booted from CNN for cheating. She basically acts like there was were no DNC emails. Mysteriously she managed never to be asked very direct questions about them or she quickly deflected when she did. Seriously, go look for her quotes about being fed a debate question ahead of time, or on *why* DWS resigned, or Donna being made interim chair despite having cheated, or any of the content from the email. You won't find much if anything at all. | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
On February 27 2017 06:12 Biff The Understudy wrote: Seriously, he has to stop tweeting, it's a fucking disgrace. All the capital of respect and sympathy that Obama built in the world for America in 8 years is evaporating. We're way past that point. It's more like 100 years worth of respect that's evaporating. I don't think that's exaggerating. There's always been plenty of anti-American sentiment in our allied nation's populaces. Iraq helped steam that up recently. But Trump not only fuels the sentiment among the populaces, he's giving our allies' leaders plenty of excuses and opportunities to follow suit. The way things are going, it's only a matter of time before we start hearing European politicians and future candidates openly question the merit of America and its allegiances. I mean, we have a guy who insults the mayor of Paris... but has nothing but nice things to say about the KGB man who invaded multiple neighbors and whose political opponents just get shot in the street. I wish to hell we'd all stop selling this short. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On February 27 2017 08:13 GreenHorizons wrote: Pretty sure Hillary never actually addressed any of the things in the leaks, even after DWS resigning and Donna getting booted from CNN for cheating. She basically acts like there was were no DNC emails. Mysteriously she managed never to be asked very direct questions about them or she quickly deflected when she did. Seriously, go look for her quotes about being fed a debate question ahead of time, or on *why* DWS resigned, or Donna being made interim chair despite having cheated, or any of the content from the email. You won't find much if anything at all. I make a stink about "seventeen intelligence agencies said it was Russia" because that was literally her defense whenever it was asked during debates and such. If that's not the most obvious deflection ever I don't know what is. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On February 27 2017 07:40 Nemireck wrote: I'm just stating the obvious here, but if the DNC had been acting ethically in the first place, the hacks wouldn't have dealt the damage that they did. Make no mistake, a comparable hack would expose the same types of behaviours in the GOP. But their emails were left alone (LOL at their spin that THEY just happened to have better anti-hacking software) because of the preference to get Trump elected. It's just a classic example of "nothing is private online" coming to bite people in the ass. We need people to state and restate the obvious these days. Otherwise, it's deflection and changing the goalposts for days. | ||
| ||
