Election 2020 - Page 19 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By BigSteve
#15031725
Crantag wrote:It's cool dude, I'm pretty drunk right now.

Not that I'm kowtowing, but if you read my post carefully I actually rather accepted your scenario. My point that trying to be an internet tough guy is pretty stupid is still my point though.


Which is why I've not done that. If you think I have, perhaps you should put down the bottle and sober up so that you might comprehend things more clearly...
By Code Rood
#15031735
BigSteve wrote:There's not a single thing wrong with more immigration. I'm not entirely sure why you believe this is relevant...


But do you need it? How about taking care of the jobless Americans first?

BigSteve wrote:Early on Trump was despised by the right, as well, and they fought him. They've been coming around, though.


That's probably because they're 100% sure that Trump is a complete neo-con now. Trump has proven that the America-first nonsense is all empty talk. So of course they like him.
User avatar
By BigSteve
#15031741
Code Rood wrote:But do you need it? How about taking care of the jobless Americans first?


I've no problem with that, either.

But the reality is that there's no great shortage of available jobs, so it's not even really an issue. Immigrants are to be welcomed, but only if they come here legally...

That's probably because they're 100% sure that Trump is a complete neo-con now. Trump has proven that the America-first nonsense is all empty talk. So of course they like him.


No, it's because they're able to see how absolutely toxic the left will be to this country if given a chance...
User avatar
By Crantag
#15031745
BigSteve wrote:Which is why I've not done that. If you think I have, perhaps you should put down the bottle and sober up so that you might comprehend things more clearly...

I have to keep on drinking, because my girlfriend just closed her bar 1.5 hours away and just got into a Didi (Chinese Uber) and I have to open the door for her when she arrives.

It's about 3am and I'd assume go to bed, but duty calls. Hopefully she arrives before fucking daylight.

We probably disagree on most things but you ain't a bad hombre, cabron.
By Code Rood
#15031748
BigSteve wrote:No, it's because they're able to see how absolutely toxic the left will be to this country if given a chance...


You really believe that? The moment Trump went full neocon, neocons (former Trotskyites) suddenly realized how insane the ''other side'' was?
User avatar
By BigSteve
#15031751
Code Rood wrote:You really believe that? The moment Trump went full neocon, neocons (former Trotskyites) suddenly realized how insane the ''other side'' was?


No, the right has known all along how toxic the left would be...
By Code Rood
#15031756
BigSteve wrote:No, the right has known all along how toxic the left would be...


But they just forgot about it when the House was still Republican and when Trump didn't go full neocon?
User avatar
By Drlee
#15031897
@BigSteve

You know that one line responses are not allowed, right?

And you know I would never wish to break the rules especially when I am faced with a paper tiger.

But my response to this quote of yours is just this:

Obama never faced the level of resistance to doing the right thing that Trump has had to weather...


:lol: :lol:
By Hindsite
#15031898
BigSteve wrote:I've no problem with that, either.

But the reality is that there's no great shortage of available jobs, so it's not even really an issue. Immigrants are to be welcomed, but only if they come here legally...

It seems that the Democrats do not recognize any immigrant as illegal. They just say that some immigrants are undocumented. How crazy is that?

BigSteve wrote:No, it's because they're able to see how absolutely toxic the left will be to this country if given a chance...

If the left got full control of our country, they would destroy it within a few decades.
User avatar
By blackjack21
#15031900
Code Rood wrote:Seriously.. what has this guy done to make you, as a Republican, want to vote for him again?

I'm not a Republican (since 2006), but keeping Hillary Clinton out of the White House is worth noting. Control of Supreme Court picks, cutting the corporate tax rate, tariffs on China, and just generally pissing off the mainstream media and the establishment makes me happy with his performance. I'm not saying we couldn't do better, but nobody running is better from my perspective. For Democrats, I give passes to Tulsi Gabbard and Steve Bullock. Most of the rest of them just seem utterly crazy to me.

Code Rood wrote:Simply because he's the lesser of two evils?

That's how a lot of elections go. I didn't even vote for president in 2008, because I could figure out which one was the lesser of two evils. That was the nadir of presidential politics, not Donald Trump.

Code Rood wrote:The guy talks about red flag laws, he has deported less immigrants than Barack Obama, the wall thing is a huge failure and so on.

He's using military funds on the wall now. So it will develop visibly during election season next year.

Code Rood wrote:If Trump didn't have that luck, he would be annihilated in 2020.

If the establishment weren't utterly corrupt, he would have been annihilated in 2016 early in the primaries. As it stands, the public kind of already sensed that the Republicans would betray the base on ObamaCare. Now it's crystal clear. So is all the Russiagate treachery.

Crantag wrote:That doesn't mean she'll beat Trump, but I do think Trump is very beatable. I don't think he's ever broken 50% approval, and has often been below 40%.

Bill Clinton never got close to a majority either. He won 42% in 1992--less than Hitler's Nazis. Clinton was beatable too, but George H.W. Bush broke his pledge on taxes, signed on to ADA, another big environmental bill, and then whined when the base wouldn't rally to him. Bush also had a completely non-independent, politically-motivated independent counsel drop a report just before the election too. Then, the Republicans--in their infinite wisdom--decided to nominate Bob Dull, I mean Dole. This is a guy who talked about himself in the third person. It was weird.

What Trump is doing to the deep state alone--although not nearly enough--is a great thing.

Crantag wrote:My prediction is that Warren will be the nominee for the Democrats, and that she'll also beat Trump.

Pocahontas? My prediction is minorities will sit it out and white voters will flock to Trump. Warren is shrill, like Hillary Clinton, and her proposals are stone cold crazy.

Code Rood wrote:And also, Trump did nothing when the House was still Republican. So the problem isn't just Democrats.

He passed his tax cuts. He also tried to repeal ObamaCare. Trump is far too liberal for me on healthcare, but the destruction he has rendered to the establishment Republicans is wonderful. So many, like Jeff Flake and Paul Ryan, have just quit. They can't take it anymore.

Code Rood wrote:That's probably because they're 100% sure that Trump is a complete neo-con now. Trump has proven that the America-first nonsense is all empty talk. So of course they like him.

The neocons want war with Iran. Trump has done things like have meetings involving national security, but excluded John Bolton. Trump also didn't retaliate against Iran for the drone shoot down. The neocons are apoplectic about tariffs for China as well.

Code Rood wrote:You really believe that? The moment Trump went full neocon, neocons (former Trotskyites) suddenly realized how insane the ''other side'' was?

The neocons are scared. The squad types are very anti-Jewish, which is generally anti-neocon too. So they are going to undermine the people agreeing with the squad. Trump is their best bet right now, which is why they are scared. It's desperate times for the globalists.

Code Rood wrote:But they just forgot about it when the House was still Republican and when Trump didn't go full neocon?

Think of how many Republicans voted for a full repeal of ObamaCare when it stood no chance of passage, and then wouldn't pass it when they had a slam dunk. Those Republicans who voted no--the very dead John McCain among them--were not telling voters the truth about where they really stood politically. Now, they are leaving office voluntarily in complete disillusionment.
User avatar
By BigSteve
#15031903
Drlee wrote:@BigSteve

You know that one line responses are not allowed, right?

And you know I would never wish to break the rules especially when I am faced with a paper tiger.

But my response to this quote of yours is just this:

:lol: :lol:


Unlike you, I've not fooled myself into believing that the more say the more important I appear. I say only what needs to be said. If it's only one line, so be it. Brevity is a wonderful thing.

If you have a problem with that, report whatever post your delicate sensibilities find so offensive...
By Code Rood
#15031985
blackjack21 wrote:I'm not a Republican (since 2006), but keeping Hillary Clinton out of the White House is worth noting.


Wasn't Trump supposed to lock her up? Whatever happened to that?

blackjack21 wrote:and just generally pissing off the mainstream media and the establishment makes me happy with his performance.


That was funny at first, but it's getting pretty lame now. Probably because it's now clear that Trump is part of the swamp anyway. It's just theatre. Anyone with a working brain already knew that much of the mainstream media was laughable and outrageous long before Trump even decided to run.

blackjack21 wrote:He's using military funds on the wall now. So it will develop visibly during election season next year.


Is it going to be an Israeli-style wall or just a pathetic fence for a couple of miles?

blackjack21 wrote:He passed his tax cuts.


Oh right. Tax cuts that only really benefit the rich.

blackjack21 wrote:but the destruction he has rendered to the establishment Republicans is wonderful. So many, like Jeff Flake and Paul Ryan, have just quit. They can't take it anymore.


Yes, it's so wonderful that Trump has surrounded himself with neocons.

blackjack21 wrote:The neocons want war with Iran. Trump has done things like have meetings involving national security, but excluded John Bolton.


Why even appoint Bolton and people like him to begin with?

blackjack21 wrote:The neocons are scared.


They seem in full control if you ask me.
User avatar
By Crantag
#15032001
blackjack21 wrote:Bill Clinton never got close to a majority either. He won 42% in 1992--less than Hitler's Nazis. Clinton was beatable too, but George H.W. Bush broke his pledge on taxes, signed on to ADA, another big environmental bill, and then whined when the base wouldn't rally to him. Bush also had a completely non-independent, politically-motivated independent counsel drop a report just before the election too. Then, the Republicans--in their infinite wisdom--decided to nominate Bob Dull, I mean Dole. This is a guy who talked about himself in the third person. It was weird.

Where did you get this information? This is just how you like to remember things?

For context to the reader, the topic was how Trump has such low approval rating, and has never even cracked 50% (I don't know that he's got close to it).

Let's try a Google search for "Bill Clinton approval rating".

The following is not even the first result, it's the Google epithet at the top of the page.

Clinton's 65% Gallup Poll approval rating was also the highest Gallup approval rating of any postwar President leaving office, one point ahead of Reagan.


I would call you a liar, but let me give you the benefit of the doubt, and just say that you like to make shit up when it suits you.

On the edit:
Image
Image
Last edited by Crantag on 05 Sep 2019 21:14, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Crantag
#15032002
I can see what BJ was driving at, he was making a very disingenuous, and off topic point about the 1992 election. He says Bill Clinton got 42%, I'll take him at his word instead of doing more legwork. He probably did the legwork. The reason of course is because Ross Perot was a candidate, so it wasn't a 50/50 preposition.

But he either disingenuously (probably) distorted the point about approval ratings to talk about the election result, or misunderstood my talk about approval ratings (improbably).

As these posts of mine point out, I think, he completely did not successfully counter my arguments.

And American politics are strange. You never get anyone to vote for that you actually want to support.

I was genuinely happy when Obama won, but he turned out to be a flop.

What's more, it was Bush who begot Obama, who begot Trump. The reactionary pendulum did its swings.

American democracy died the day Kennedy was shot.

Any illusions of it died on 9/11/2001.
By Hindsite
#15032090
Code Rood wrote:Wasn't Trump supposed to lock her up? Whatever happened to that?

You have to be an idiot to not know that the deep state in the FBI stopped any action to lock her up and tried to frame Trump as a Russian spy. Obviously, FBI Director Comey was part of that scheme.
User avatar
By blackjack21
#15032095
Code Rood wrote:Wasn't Trump supposed to lock her up? Whatever happened to that?

Oh, no doubt he pussed out on that. However, he hired a bunch of insiders and found out the hard way what that entails.

Code Rood wrote:That was funny at first, but it's getting pretty lame now.

After Russiagate? Hell, he could shoot 'em and it wouldn't bother me.

Code Rood wrote:Is it going to be an Israeli-style wall or just a pathetic fence for a couple of miles?

Thick steel tubes embedded in concrete.

Code Rood wrote:Oh right. Tax cuts that only really benefit the rich.

Only rich people really pay taxes anyway. I'm not a communist, so I don't automatically hate the rich per se.

Code Rood wrote:Yes, it's so wonderful that Trump has surrounded himself with neocons.

And they haven't been able to start a single war yet.

Code Rood wrote:Why even appoint Bolton and people like him to begin with?

I don't know. He wouldn't be my first choice. However, keep your enemies closer is always good advice.

Code Rood wrote:They seem in full control if you ask me.

They would have us in a war with Iran by now.

Crantag wrote:Where did you get this information? This is just how you like to remember things?

Actual votes Crantag. Push polling isn't an actual election. You may choose to believe them if it pleases you.

Crantag wrote:For context to the reader, the topic was how Trump has such low approval rating, and has never even cracked 50% (I don't know that he's got close to it).

He's cracked 50% in Rasmussen a number of times. It matters very little. He won in 2016 with high negatives. Hillary Clinton's were higher.

Crantag wrote:I would call you a liar, but let me give you the benefit of the doubt, and just say that you like to make shit up when it suits you.

Why don't we just say I got it wrong by 1 point. He got 43% of the vote in 1992. In 1996, he got 49.2%. He never got over 50%.
1992 United States presidential election

Approval polls mean next to nothing.

Crantag wrote:I can see what BJ was driving at, he was making a very disingenuous, and off topic point about the 1992 election.

It's neither off topic nor disingenuous. The topic is Election 2020. Trump has very strong core support. Media bias may try to create the impression that Trump is unpopular, but his rallies are jam packed. The disconnect between what was happening on the ground in 2016 and what was happening in the media was striking. Hillary Clinton couldn't fill a high school gymnasium, but was consistently out polling Trump. What did it matter?
User avatar
By Crantag
#15032104
blackjack21 wrote:Actual votes Crantag. Push polling isn't an actual election. You may choose to believe them if it pleases you.


He's cracked 50% in Rasmussen a number of times. It matters very little. He won in 2016 with high negatives. Hillary Clinton's were higher.


Why don't we just say I got it wrong by 1 point. He got 43% of the vote in 1992. In 1996, he got 49.2%. He never got over 50%.
1992 United States presidential election

Approval polls mean next to nothing.


It's neither off topic nor disingenuous. The topic is Election 2020. Trump has very strong core support. Media bias may try to create the impression that Trump is unpopular, but his rallies are jam packed. The disconnect between what was happening on the ground in 2016 and what was happening in the media was striking. Hillary Clinton couldn't fill a high school gymnasium, but was consistently out polling Trump. What did it matter?


Having qualms about approval polls is one thing, and you could have just said that. You preferred to be dishonest, because my point was exactly about approval polls.

And approval polls were very relevant to my point, because my point involved predicting the result of the 2020 election.

Approval polls are quite relevant to this topic. Maybe there are some gamblers out there who would like to consider such predictions.

I'm a huge fan of boxing and MMA, and I like to predict fights, and used to bet on some fights, until I figured out I couldn't even cash out on my winnings easily. Predicting the presidency is sort of the same thing.

I'll tell you that my current prediction of Warren winning is a surprise to me, but that's where I stand.

By the way, I also predicted that Trump would win the presidency, and I did so fairly early in the primaries, if I remember correctly. The night before the election, my dad said to me "I guess you were right, Trump is going to win." I'd been telling him it for months.

Doesn't mean I'll get this one right, but Warren is where I'm leaning, as a prediction. Approval ratings are a part of my judgement.

So, they are relevant to my point, which you chose to respond to.
By Code Rood
#15032136
blackjack21 wrote:Oh, no doubt he pussed out on that.


I don't think that's the reason, but ok.

blackjack21 wrote:After Russiagate? Hell, he could shoot 'em and it wouldn't bother me.


I wonder why the media went with the Russia nonsense instead of the obvious Israeli collusion. You know, something that can actually be easily proven?

blackjack21 wrote:Thick steel tubes embedded in concrete.


That's garbage and it's not what was promised. Funny how Trump doesn't face much (if any) trouble and doesn't make compromises when it comes to what Netanyahu needs. Only then everyone seems aboard.

blackjack21 wrote:Only rich people really pay taxes anyway. I'm not a communist, so I don't automatically hate the rich per se.


So we agree it only really benefits the rich. Sure, you can call it an accomplishment, but it's not a huge accomplishment that will affect and/or benefit society at large.

blackjack21 wrote:And they haven't been able to start a single war yet.


Last time I checked there are still troops in the mid-east.

blackjack21 wrote:I don't know. He wouldn't be my first choice. However, keep your enemies closer is always good advice.


Keeping an eye on your enemies is one thing, bringing them on your team is something else.

blackjack21 wrote:They would have us in a war with Iran by now.


That's mainly because of public opinion, not because of Trump. 9/11 didn't happen last week and Iran isn't a ''walk in the park'' like Iraq or Afghanistan. Also, people are simply tired of war. No one in his or her right mind wants an all out war with Iran. People of all sides are in agreement on this. It's possibly the only issue people aren't divided over.

The neocons can still do many other things with Iran in the meantime though. They hope to trigger something out of it. And Trump isn't really stopping it. He wants to play king of Israel (reality says he's just the butt buddy of Netanyahu though), not president of the USA.
  • 1
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 122
Donald in the Bunker

Both Trump and SJWs would be an expression of sla[…]

https://www.reddit.com/r/2020PoliceBrutality/comme[…]

Am I racist in your opinion?

It's possible I'm just disinterested in debating […]

Imagine believing that the secret to not being a […]