2020 Election
Quote: SteverinosThis must be another attempt at humor you keep talking about.
I admit, I lulz.
More satire.
Quote: terapined
I saw this on Twitter yesterday but couldn’t find it on YouTube.
They’re hypocrites. They know they’re hypocrites. They just don’t care.
Quote: ams288
They just don’t care.
As usual, you miss the point. Obama
wanted to talk and not make them
give up nukes. Fox even says that.
Trump is making them give up nukes
or no deal.
Quote: ams288Quote: terapined
I saw this on Twitter yesterday but couldn’t find it on YouTube.
They’re hypocrites. They know they’re hypocrites. They just don’t care.
Amazing, a total 180
Quote: EvenBobAs usual, you miss the point. Obama
wanted to talk and not make them
give up nukes. Fox even says that.
Trump is making them give up nukes
or no deal.
He is?
FAKE NEWS ALERT:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/01/politics/north-korea-nuclear-freeze-trump-administration/index.html
Let us know what Rush says to say.
One thing is clear, the biggest group of hypocrites ever assembled is the current version of the GOP.
Quote: EvenBobTrump is making them give up nukes
or no deal.
That is incredibly false.
This is what watching Fox News and listening to Rush does to your brain.
Quote: ams288That is incredibly false.
John Bolton just tweeted, “I read this [New York Times] story with curiosity. Neither the NSC“—that’s the National Security Council—”staff nor I have discussed or heard of any desire to 'settle for a nuclear freeze by North Korea.'”
And there you go, fake news by the NYT. Again
Quote: EvenBobJohn Bolton just tweeted, “I read this [New York Times] story with curiosity. Neither the NSC“—that’s the National Security Council—”staff nor I have discussed or heard of any desire to 'settle for a nuclear freeze by North Korea.'”
And there you go, fake news by the NYT. Again
I'm shocked that the Trump admin would have the gall to deny such a thing!
It's amazing that the NYT has been around for 168 years! Crazy!
You keep up the good fight!
Quote: SteverinosAnd there you go, fake news by the NYT. Again
......It's amazing that the NYT has been around for 168 years! Crazy!
Yeah again. What's crazy is, they've been owning total idiots for the past 168 years.
This is the same paper that once praised Stalin, Hitler and Castro.
"Hitler's anti-Semitism was not so violent or genuine as it sounded."
The same paper that published a glowing article entitled "Hitler at Home in the Clouds", days before he invaded Poland and started WW2.
The same paper that while it was in progress, denied the famine caused by Stalin, that starved 6 million Ukrainians to death, while other newspapers reported the truth.
The same paper that falsely called the innocent Dr. Hatfill ‘the likely culprit’ in the anthrax attacks in 2001.
The same paper that in 2003 was forced to fire a reporter and two editors when it was discovered that reporter committed journalistic fraud over several years.
The same paper that falsely reported Saddam Hussein already had or was acquiring an arsenal of WMD’s. That lie got us into the second Iraq war.
The same paper that recently apologized for publishing an anti-semitic cartoon.
Quote: TankoYeah again. What's crazy is, they've been owning total idiots for the past 168 years.
Either you read the NYT a lot or you don't
If you do, why
If you don't, why do you care
Breibart can declare Trump the greatest thing since sliced bread. I could care less
Right wing media can print anything they want and I just yawn
yet
Tanko goes nuts over the NYT. Too funny
Do some bong hits and ignore media you don't like. That's what I do
168 years. The market has spoken :-)
Quote: terapinedEither you read the NYT a lot or you don't
If you do, why
If you don't, why do you care
Breibart can declare Trump the greatest thing since sliced bread. I could care less
Right wing media can print anything they want and I just yawn
yet
Tanko goes nuts over the NYT. Too funny
Do some bong hits and ignore media you don't like. That's what I do
168 years. The market has spoken :-)
If CNN, NYT, MSNPC, etc. were satire (like the onion) then that’d be — meh, whatever. But they’re not satire, even though they should probably say they are. The problem is it ****s with people’s brains and they’re voting with BS information.
If you have no problem with the media spewing fake news which changes people’s opinions and thus the way they vote, then you should have no problem with the Russians (allegedly) interfering with our elections — because it’s the same damn thing.
If you don’t like drunk drivers, just ignore them! 🤣🤣🤣
Quote: TankoYeah again. What's crazy is, they've been owning total idiots for the past 168 years.
NYTimes.com publishes roughly 150 articles a day (Monday-Saturday), 250 articles on Sunday and 65 blog posts per day. It also publishes 330 basic graphics a month and about 120 items a month in the interactive template.
So you posted a dozen major gaffs or bad news. What is that in 168 years? You do the math.
Quote: rxwineNYTimes.com publishes roughly 150 articles a day (Monday-Saturday), 250 articles on Sunday and 65 blog posts per day. It also publishes 330 basic graphics a month and about 120 items a month in the interactive template.
So you posted a dozen major gaffs or bad news. What is that in 168 years? You do the math.
Fake news is fake news.
Quote: RSFake news is fake news.
Begging for the crumbs that fall from their masters table.
Comey denounces NYT story. 'Not True'
76 Media 'Mistakes' in the Trump era.
Most egregious Fake News stories of 2018
Definitive list of fake 'Russiagate' stories.
Quote: RS
If you have no problem with the media spewing fake news which changes people’s opinions and thus the way they vote,
I have no problem
I actually support the freedom of foxnews and Breibart to spread fake news
I don't watch fox or read breibart. Its fake news. Why watch or read fake news.
regardless
I absolutely support the freedom of the press regardless if it leans left or right
You actually support censorship?????? That's scary. Who decides what's fake????????????
You support right wing media and are against left wing media due to politics
I support left and right wing media due to the 1st amendment in the Constitution
This country has had an aggressive press criticizing the President for over 200 years
Just because some thin skinned chump becomes president and cant deal with the criticism every President has received, conservatives now against the constitution regarding FREE PRESS
Really sad
I know some will ignore this right away because it’s Breitbart, but I encourage liberals to read this and explain why they disagree.
The points are valid and while the election is wide open, this will be a good piece to look back on if Trump wins.
I still believe most Dems are good people just like most Republicans, but the crazies seem to be the only voice left on the left. Can’t see any of these views being a winning decision, but I am all in favor of them continuing to push them.
Quote: Bozhttps://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/06/democrats-had-worst-week-47-years/
I know some will ignore this right away because it’s Breitbart, but I encourage liberals to read this and explain why they disagree.
The points are valid and while the election is wide open, this will be a good piece to look back on if Trump wins.
I still believe most Dems are good people just like most Republicans, but the crazies seem to be the only voice left on the left. Can’t see any of these views being a winning decision, but I am all in favor of them continuing to push them.
I read it.
I disagree with it because its a bunch bull sh---!
Quote: terapinedThis country has had an aggressive press criticizing the President for over 200 years
Just because some thin skinned chump becomes president and cant deal with the criticism every President has received, conservatives now against the constitution regarding FREE PRESS
Really sad
Any politician who believes the press and their constitutional rights are the enemy of the people is not a conservative. Anyone who supports those politicians are not conservatives. Belief that these constitutional freedoms to be our enemy is pure authoritarianism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism
for reference: https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1114221533461790721?lang=en and https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/832708293516632065?lang=en and I'm sure many others. While I'm sure there will be at least 50 million Americans voting for this ideology and against our constitution next year, they won't be conservatives
Quote: TomGAny politician who believes the press and their constitutional rights are the enemy of the people is not a conservative. Anyone who supports those politicians are not conservatives. Belief that these constitutional freedoms to be our enemy is pure authoritarianism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism
for reference: https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1114221533461790721?lang=en and https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/832708293516632065?lang=en and I'm sure many others. While I'm sure there will be at least 50 million Americans voting for this ideology and against our constitution next year, they won't be conservatives
Really, the people currently holding the Republican party name hostage are a throwback to the Know-Nothing party of 1855. Xenophobic, Nationalist, Isolationist, Authoritarian.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing
Nothing Conservative about the current Republicans. Not fiscally responsible, not observant of the Rule of Law or Constitutional checks and balances, ignoring multiple First Amendment rights.
Things went an important step downward this week, but it's not yet getting the attention it deserves. SCOTUS said No, the census question is unconstitutional. Trump is ignoring that ultimate check, and working to find a way around it including an EO to override it, though his own people say they don't have a clue how to do it.
This is blatantly unconstitutional, for him to ignore that ruling. Put it on top of all the denials and stonewalling Congress on their inquiry rights and Constitutional oversight duties, and we are dangerously close to losing it all.
How long are the good citizens of this country going to support the undermining of our democracy? Trump doesn't learn, doesn't do his sworn duty in so many areas. It seems to stem from ego, greed, and pride, and it's completely unchecked.
You who are still Republicans and conservatives need to repudiate this man and this Administration, on behalf of your claimed value set and true patriotism (and I believe there are several of you here, along with some Trumpers). He has to go, and greedy malicious McConnell has to go out the same door. Do YOUR duty, since Trump is incapable of doing his.
Quote: TomGAny politician who believes the press and their constitutional rights are the enemy of the people is not a conservative. Anyone who supports those politicians are not conservatives. Belief that these constitutional freedoms to be our enemy is pure authoritarianism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism
for reference: https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1114221533461790721?lang=en and https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/832708293516632065?lang=en and I'm sure many others. While I'm sure there will be at least 50 million Americans voting for this ideology and against our constitution next year, they won't be conservatives
You are just jealous. Your unworthy eyes simply don't have the class needed to truly appreciate the noble leaders fine clothes.
Free your mind.
Quote: beachbumbabsReally, the people currently holding the Republican party name hostage are a throwback to the Know-Nothing party of 1855. Xenophobic, Nationalist, Isolationist, Authoritarian.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing
Nothing Conservative about the current Republicans. Not fiscally responsible, not observant of the Rule of Law or Constitutional checks and balances.
Things went an important step downward this week, but it's not yet getting the attention it deserves. SCOTUS said No, the census question is unconstitutional. Trump is ignoring that ultimate check, and working to find a way around it including an EO to override it, though his own people say they don't have a clue how to do it.
This is blatantly unconstitutional, for him to ignore that ruling. Put it on top of all the denials and stonewalling Congress on their inquiry rights and Constitutional oversight duties, and we are dangerously close to losing it all.
How long are the good citizens of this country going to support the undermining of our democracy? Trump doesn't learn, doesn't do his sworn duty in so many areas. It seems to stem from ego, greed, and pride, and it's completely unchecked.
You who are still Republicans and conservatives need to repudiate this man and this Administration, on behalf of your claimed value set and true patriotism (and I believe there are several of you here, along with some Trumpers). He has to go, and greedy malicious McConnell has to go out the same door. Do YOUR duty, since Trump is incapable of doing his.
But he is putting money in people's pockets. Eventually, some of it might even trickle.down to his voters. Isn't that a good reason to sell your soul and trample on everything our ancestors fought for?
Quote: Bozhttps://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/06/democrats-had-worst-week-47-years/
I know some will ignore this right away because it’s Breitbart, but I encourage liberals to read this and explain why they disagree.
The points are valid and while the election is wide open, this will be a good piece to look back on if Trump wins.
I still believe most Dems are good people just like most Republicans, but the crazies seem to be the only voice left on the left. Can’t see any of these views being a winning decision, but I am all in favor of them continuing to push them.
I don't have to read this (and I won't go to that site) to know they made some legitimate points. The Democrats in both nights' debates made some serious policy and advocacy errors, along with some style and rhetoric blunders. They also need to work AS A TEAM OF RIVALS, not tear each other down and undermine the eventual candidate, much better than they started. (There was some cross-credit given, but too much back-biting. More acknowledgement of common goals and good ideas needed, which is more than 80% of the situation, rather than picking apart mostly minor differences for personal gain within the 20%).
"A house divided unto itself cannot stand." We all know who said that. More important than ever before.
Sadly, while the best option for good governance would he a consensus builder and moderate who could appeal to independents and some republicans, the stupid ultra-left talking points are pushing the polls so far.
And if a 3rd party moderate person emerges in the wake of a too-left nomination, that will simply leave Trump in power under most scenarios. He would win a plurality in most conceivable paths.
So, GET IT TOGETHER, DEMS! Good grief. How obvious does it have to be that you can't fractionalize the non-Trump vote?
There needs to be a unified voice for 2020. Worry about competing within the party for 2024. Or even look for a better and real Republican candidate in 2024, but let's get back on track and get rid of this guy.
Quote: rxwineI’ll be surprised if any candidate left of Harris gets the nomination.
Yeah, I would agree. Has anyone seen the sort of master graph they sometimes do that places the various candidates on a scale from ultra-left to ultra-right through researching and rating their positions and public appearances?
I haven't seen one yet. Maybe 538 has it.
Quote: darkozI read it.
I disagree with it because its a bunch bull sh---!
Thanks for taking the time to read it and consider it. Seriously.
Quote: BozThanks for taking the time to read it and consider it. Seriously.
You're welcome.
Quote: darkozI read it.
I disagree with it because its a bunch bull sh---!
Probably because you live in the Trump-hate social media and watch CNN. The rest of us saw exactly what the article stated.
Quote: darkozI read it.
I disagree with it because its a bunch bull sh---!
I imagined you stamping your foot
and making a pouty face and saying
"Liars! Liars!" lol It's a good article,
he really nails it.
Quote: EvenBobI imagined you stamping your foot
and making a pouty face and saying
"Liars! Liars!" lol It's a good article,
he really nails it.
Nails it like nobody's business. Trump's 4th speech was just awesome, made people who love their country proud. The same week the lefties call the US Flag "racist." The Democrats keep coming out against anything that is good for the USA. After he looked like the total Alpha Male crossing into N. Korea.
Have you seen all the claims that we are at the beginnings of a recession? Then the June jobs numbers came in.
Meanwhile the Democrat Party candidates clearly show they care more for illegal aliens than working people.
Quote: AZDuffmanMeanwhile the Democrat Party candidates clearly show they care more for illegal aliens than working people.
Dick Morris predicted this last fall.
He said the Dems would go bananas
this year in who can lean furthest to
the Left and promise the most freebies
that they can't deliver. Man was he right.
Quote: AZDuffmanTrump's 4th speech was just awesome, made people who love their country proud.
Made people who are dumb enough to think there were airports around in the 1770s even prouder.
Quote: ams288Made people who are dumb enough to think there were airports around in the 1770s even prouder.
You forgot to mention his orange face
and wide butt. You're slipping..
Quote: EvenBobYou forgot to mention his orange face
and wide butt. You're slipping..
There will be plenty of time for jokes about his weird appearance and his love of drinking piss in the weeks and months to come.
Quote: EvenBobDick Morris predicted this last fall.
He said the Dems would go bananas
this year in who can lean furthest to
the Left and promise the most freebies
that they can't deliver. Man was he right.
I don't think even he thought that Democrats would cheer for a candidate of theirs calling for men to be provided the right to abortions.
On that note, listen to the cheering and tell me Democrats do not love abortion. They went goo-goo.
Quote: AZDuffmanOn that note, listen to the cheering and tell me Democrats do not love abortion. They went goo-goo.
Look at the reaction of the MAGA crowd to the dead immigrant children at the concentration camps on the border and tell me they don’t love dead babies.
Quote: EvenBobDick Morris predicted this last fall.
He said the Dems would go bananas
this year in who can lean furthest to
the Left and promise the most freebies
that they can't deliver. Man was he right.
I read about Kamala Harris's $100billion plan to give black people money for homes. You really can't make this stuff up anymore. Yet conservatives are supposedly racist.....lol
Quote: beachbumbabsThings went an important step downward this week, but it's not yet getting the attention it deserves. SCOTUS said No, the census question is unconstitutional. Trump is ignoring that ultimate check, and working to find a way around it including an EO to override it, though his own people say they don't have a clue how to do it.
Actually, the question itself is quite constitutional:
"The Enumeration Clause permits Congress, and by extension the Secretary, to inquire about citizenship on the census questionnaire." - Department of Commerce v. New York
It was ordered withheld because the decision to include it is reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Court determined that, in light of new evidence, the stated reason for including it didn't pass the smell test.
If you want to get pedantic, asking about a person's race, age, or even gender, in the census is unconstitutional; the only thing it should be able to ask is, "Are you an Indian not subject to federal taxation?", since they are not counted. ("Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed." - 14th Amendment, Section 2)
Quote: AZDuffmanProbably because you live in the Trump-hate social media and watch CNN. The rest of us saw exactly what the article stated.
Preaching to the choir and drinking your Kool-Aid does not make an inciteful article.
Doesn't even get past the starting line.
The title: Democrats Just Had Their Worst Week in 47 years.
Even you know that's not remotely true. Democrats had the worst week the day Trump was elected.
Quote: ThatDonGuyActually, the question itself is quite constitutional:
"The Enumeration Clause permits Congress, and by extension the Secretary, to inquire about citizenship on the census questionnaire." - Department of Commerce v. New York
It was ordered withheld because the decision to include it is reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Court determined that, in light of new evidence, the stated reason for including it didn't pass the smell test.
If you want to get pedantic, asking about a person's race, age, or even gender, in the census is unconstitutional; the only thing it should be able to ask is, "Are you an Indian not subject to federal taxation?", since they are not counted. ("Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed." - 14th Amendment, Section 2)
I still do not see what they are afraid of asking citizenship. What’s the big deal? An accurate count is so bad?
Quote: ThatDonGuyActually, the question itself is quite constitutional:
"The Enumeration Clause permits Congress, and by extension the Secretary, to inquire about citizenship on the census questionnaire." - Department of Commerce v. New York
It was ordered withheld because the decision to include it is reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Court determined that, in light of new evidence, the stated reason for including it didn't pass the smell test.
If you want to get pedantic, asking about a person's race, age, or even gender, in the census is unconstitutional; the only thing it should be able to ask is, "Are you an Indian not subject to federal taxation?", since they are not counted. ("Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed." - 14th Amendment, Section 2)
Thank you.
It nice when someone provides actual facts.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quote: rxwineFlorida Republicans pass measure to insure voting polls have adequate parking. Sounds innocent enough right?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Colleges have gotten voting booths on campus for easy access. As many who are familiar with campuses know, one thing most college/universities lack is adequate parking. More attempts at discourage voting from lawful voters who might be more Democrat on average than Republican.
I don’t follow. Are you saying it’s bad to have voting booths on campus because of the inadequate parking? Or is Florida one of those states where you have to vote at a specific booth? In NV we can vote at like pretty much any booth.
Quote: RS
I don’t follow. Are you saying it’s bad to have voting booths on campus because of the inadequate parking? Or is Florida one of those states where you have to vote at a specific booth? In NV we can vote at like pretty much any booth.
It's like every bad idea to stymie legitimate activity. Think excluding Dollies for not having enough hotel rooms.
Quote: ThatDonGuyActually, the question itself is quite constitutional:
"The Enumeration Clause permits Congress, and by extension the Secretary, to inquire about citizenship on the census questionnaire." - Department of Commerce v. New York
It was ordered withheld because the decision to include it is reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Court determined that, in light of new evidence, the stated reason for including it didn't pass the smell test.
If you want to get pedantic, asking about a person's race, age, or even gender, in the census is unconstitutional; the only thing it should be able to ask is, "Are you an Indian not subject to federal taxation?", since they are not counted. ("Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed." - 14th Amendment, Section 2)
On the bare facts, it's my best understanding you're entirely correct.
The problem, and the ruling, comes in context. The intent of that question appearing now, is to disenfranchise voting citizens who have a relative in the country illegally or undocumented, or any other concerns about the status of their citizenship and the way things are going right now. It has been advocated and pushed for years by white supremacists and their sympathizers who hope to lessen the immigration of brown people.
They are calculating that population will be severely undercounted as a result of dodging or lying to the census, and apportionment of federal funds, Congressional districts, and other Census-based calculations will be skewed favorably to the right for the next 10 years (post-Census: think it takes about 2 years to tabulate and apply the updated info).
They have proof that that is the true intent of this Administration, studies that prove that will be the practical consequence (which is how the pushers got buy-in; they showed how it would work against the Dems and immigrants), and the government lawyers lied to the Court about why they want the question and how they want to apply the data from it, withholding the study and the internal documents from Discovery.
The government also testified numerous times that the absolute deadline for a finalized form was June 30. It's well past that, so were they lying to the Court about that, too? The Court wants an answer.
The Court now has the info, and is unlikely to accept any distracting justifications, when they have proof of the damaging distortions that question will cause.
The language leaving any option beyond the timely ruling of Unconstitutional is an ambiguous reading of the Court language at best. I don't think it's over, but I don't think there's a winning (legal) path for the Administration to proceed. If nothing else, they will open themselves to perjury and misrepresentation if they claim they can extend the time and still complete the Census within its Constitutional time frame. They're already in that territory with the misleading testimony, and that would add to the severity and repercussions from the Court in response.
Quote: beachbumbabsThe problem, and the ruling, comes in context. The intent of that question appearing now, is to disenfranchise voting citizens who have a relative in the country illegally or undocumented, or any other concerns about the status of their citizenship and the way things are going right now. It has been advocated and pushed for years by white supremacists and their sympathizers who hope to lessen the immigration of brown people.
I am under the impression that it is to keep the undocumented persons from answering the form (like you said, to undercount them, since they tend to be from "blue states") - not to "disenfranchise voting citizens."
