|
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 June 28 2017 00:09 Azuzu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. What does that say about the field of Republicans that he crushed? Are they all more politically, morally, intellectually bankrupt than Trump and that's why they lost? I could easily argue (and have argued) that every republican that Trump crushed was bankrupt in at least one of those areas.
|
On June 28 2017 00:16 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:07 NewSunshine wrote:On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. Oh yes, end of discussion, that automatically makes Hillary worse than Trump no matter what, because the American voting populace is infallible. American voting populace voted for Hillary. Electoral college voted for Trump. But I heard he won by a landslide. /s
|
I'm still amazed anyone still believes that qualification had any factor into the Presidential election.
Or how election obsessed people seem to be in general, when you're not even close to election season.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On June 28 2017 00:07 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. Oh yes, end of discussion, that automatically makes Hillary worse than Trump no matter what, because the American voting populace is infallible. I'm also noticing how the discussion in this thread is being turned strangely towards the Democrats and Hillary. Why focus on Trump and how corrupt/incompetent this administration is, when you can just bitch about liberals who aren't in power right now. That makes sense. We know how bad Trump is. None of his badness escapes our attention. But it's best to focus on his enablers that made it all acceptable - the Democrats who helped get Trump elected by deciding that if only they are just a wee bit marginally less bad, then everything they do can be forgiven. Hell, there's credible evidence that Hillary's campaign helped build him up through media attention to make her own win easier. Fat lot of good that did in the end.
|
On June 28 2017 00:18 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:09 Azuzu wrote:On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. What does that say about the field of Republicans that he crushed? Are they all more politically, morally, intellectually bankrupt than Trump and that's why they lost? I could easily argue (and have argued) that every republican that Trump crushed was bankrupt in at least one of those areas. Fair enough, but do you think that's the reason they actually lost?
|
On June 28 2017 00:24 WolfintheSheep wrote: I'm still amazed anyone still believes that qualification had any factor into the Presidential election.
Or how election obsessed people seem to be in general, when you're not even close to election season. You would have think Andrew Jackson would have cured us of that problem. Or Nixon. Or Woodrow Wilson.
|
On June 28 2017 00:25 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:07 NewSunshine wrote:On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. Oh yes, end of discussion, that automatically makes Hillary worse than Trump no matter what, because the American voting populace is infallible. I'm also noticing how the discussion in this thread is being turned strangely towards the Democrats and Hillary. Why focus on Trump and how corrupt/incompetent this administration is, when you can just bitch about liberals who aren't in power right now. That makes sense. We know how bad Trump is. None of his badness escapes our attention. But it's best to focus on his enablers that made it all acceptable - the Democrats who helped get Trump elected by deciding that if only they are just a wee bit marginally less bad, then everything they do can be forgiven. Hell, there's credible evidence that Hillary's campaign helped build him up through media attention to make her own win easier. Fat lot of good that did in the end. the biggest enabler though was the republican party; well, that and talk radio pushing their nonsense as they have been for so long. those are the ones that made such things acceptable. so it really doens't look like an attempt to go after all the enablers, so mcuh as just another excuse to blame the dems and trash hillary, rather than put the blame where it most belongs.
|
On June 28 2017 00:28 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:24 WolfintheSheep wrote: I'm still amazed anyone still believes that qualification had any factor into the Presidential election.
Or how election obsessed people seem to be in general, when you're not even close to election season. You would have think Andrew Jackson would have cured us of that problem. Or Nixon. Or Woodrow Wilson. Nixon may've been bad as a person; but he was competent.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On June 28 2017 00:25 Azuzu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:18 xDaunt wrote:On June 28 2017 00:09 Azuzu wrote:On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. What does that say about the field of Republicans that he crushed? Are they all more politically, morally, intellectually bankrupt than Trump and that's why they lost? I could easily argue (and have argued) that every republican that Trump crushed was bankrupt in at least one of those areas. Fair enough, but do you think that's the reason they actually lost? The Republicans put their lot behind Jeb Bush, not realizing how much of a strategic mistake that was. In that void of power, Trump found a home.
|
On June 28 2017 00:32 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:28 Plansix wrote:On June 28 2017 00:24 WolfintheSheep wrote: I'm still amazed anyone still believes that qualification had any factor into the Presidential election.
Or how election obsessed people seem to be in general, when you're not even close to election season. You would have think Andrew Jackson would have cured us of that problem. Or Nixon. Or Woodrow Wilson. Nixon may've been bad as a person; but he was competent. My neighbor was an engineer in MA after the 1972 election and he remembers all the federal money suddenly leaving the state after the election. Or fears of it happening on future projects. The Nixon tapes afterword proved what everyone suspected, that Nixon wanted revenge for MA being the only state he didn’t win. Not sure competence is a selling point, tbh.
|
Wilson had some solid progressive bonafides. Was still a giant racist though.
|
On June 28 2017 00:24 WolfintheSheep wrote: I'm still amazed anyone still believes that qualification had any factor into the Presidential election.
Or how election obsessed people seem to be in general, when you're not even close to election season.
That's in part due to the election people now knowing how to report actual news or wanting ask legitimate questions because they don't want to upset the guests they rely on to appear. Prime example, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow and so on.
|
On June 28 2017 00:25 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:07 NewSunshine wrote:On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. Oh yes, end of discussion, that automatically makes Hillary worse than Trump no matter what, because the American voting populace is infallible. I'm also noticing how the discussion in this thread is being turned strangely towards the Democrats and Hillary. Why focus on Trump and how corrupt/incompetent this administration is, when you can just bitch about liberals who aren't in power right now. That makes sense. We know how bad Trump is. None of his badness escapes our attention. But it's best to focus on his enablers that made it all acceptable - the Democrats who helped get Trump elected by deciding that if only they are just a wee bit marginally less bad, then everything they do can be forgiven. Hell, there's credible evidence that Hillary's campaign helped build him up through media attention to make her own win easier. Fat lot of good that did in the end. You're going to have to explain this one thoroughly if you want me to buy it, because it sounds like you're ignoring the party that's in power because the other party was "marginally less scummy". I'm looking at the reality that is before me, not pontificating why that is, and if only these other things were different. The Democrats aren't doing anything right now, the Republicans' sheer incompetence is what's making the news. I'm focusing on that, and rightly so.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On June 28 2017 00:51 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:25 LegalLord wrote:On June 28 2017 00:07 NewSunshine wrote:On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. Oh yes, end of discussion, that automatically makes Hillary worse than Trump no matter what, because the American voting populace is infallible. I'm also noticing how the discussion in this thread is being turned strangely towards the Democrats and Hillary. Why focus on Trump and how corrupt/incompetent this administration is, when you can just bitch about liberals who aren't in power right now. That makes sense. We know how bad Trump is. None of his badness escapes our attention. But it's best to focus on his enablers that made it all acceptable - the Democrats who helped get Trump elected by deciding that if only they are just a wee bit marginally less bad, then everything they do can be forgiven. Hell, there's credible evidence that Hillary's campaign helped build him up through media attention to make her own win easier. Fat lot of good that did in the end. You're going to have to explain this one thoroughly if you want me to buy it, because it sounds like you're ignoring the party that's in power because the other party was "marginally less scummy". Want to stop those in power? Give an alternative to them that's better.
|
|
On June 28 2017 00:53 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:51 NewSunshine wrote:On June 28 2017 00:25 LegalLord wrote:On June 28 2017 00:07 NewSunshine wrote:On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. Oh yes, end of discussion, that automatically makes Hillary worse than Trump no matter what, because the American voting populace is infallible. I'm also noticing how the discussion in this thread is being turned strangely towards the Democrats and Hillary. Why focus on Trump and how corrupt/incompetent this administration is, when you can just bitch about liberals who aren't in power right now. That makes sense. We know how bad Trump is. None of his badness escapes our attention. But it's best to focus on his enablers that made it all acceptable - the Democrats who helped get Trump elected by deciding that if only they are just a wee bit marginally less bad, then everything they do can be forgiven. Hell, there's credible evidence that Hillary's campaign helped build him up through media attention to make her own win easier. Fat lot of good that did in the end. You're going to have to explain this one thoroughly if you want me to buy it, because it sounds like you're ignoring the party that's in power because the other party was "marginally less scummy". Want to stop those in power? Give an alternative to them that's better. Holding the people currently in power accountable is also needed. Pointing to the other side does nothing to this end but make excuses.
|
On June 28 2017 00:25 Azuzu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:18 xDaunt wrote:On June 28 2017 00:09 Azuzu wrote:On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. What does that say about the field of Republicans that he crushed? Are they all more politically, morally, intellectually bankrupt than Trump and that's why they lost? I could easily argue (and have argued) that every republican that Trump crushed was bankrupt in at least one of those areas. Fair enough, but do you think that's the reason they actually lost? Absolutely, yes. Like I pointed out during the campaign, Trump is the product of an intellectually and politically bankrupt GOP. Conservatism failed, hence Trump.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On June 28 2017 00:54 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2017 00:53 LegalLord wrote:On June 28 2017 00:51 NewSunshine wrote:On June 28 2017 00:25 LegalLord wrote:On June 28 2017 00:07 NewSunshine wrote:On June 27 2017 23:56 xDaunt wrote: I really don't understand the continued defense of Hillary. Let me remind y'all that Hillary lost to Trump. She lost to the guy whom y'all consider to be politically, intellectually, and morally bankrupt. That says all you need to know about her quality as a person and a politician. Oh yes, end of discussion, that automatically makes Hillary worse than Trump no matter what, because the American voting populace is infallible. I'm also noticing how the discussion in this thread is being turned strangely towards the Democrats and Hillary. Why focus on Trump and how corrupt/incompetent this administration is, when you can just bitch about liberals who aren't in power right now. That makes sense. We know how bad Trump is. None of his badness escapes our attention. But it's best to focus on his enablers that made it all acceptable - the Democrats who helped get Trump elected by deciding that if only they are just a wee bit marginally less bad, then everything they do can be forgiven. Hell, there's credible evidence that Hillary's campaign helped build him up through media attention to make her own win easier. Fat lot of good that did in the end. You're going to have to explain this one thoroughly if you want me to buy it, because it sounds like you're ignoring the party that's in power because the other party was "marginally less scummy". Want to stop those in power? Give an alternative to them that's better. Holding the people currently in power accountable is also needed. Pointing to the other side does nothing to this end but make excuses. They are held accountable in large part by the voting process, considering that they are kept in power by the voters. Want to sue them? Go for it, courts are an important balancing feature. But the electoral process is ongoing and is the surest way to achieve results, a process undermined by the badness of Democrats who think that the badness of Republicans and Trump entitles them to jack shit.
|
Trump's efforts to control the briefings are going very well. They don't look petty and silly at all.
|
|
|
|
|