[late]

And I'm sure no one has ever said that over the last 20 years.

Nobody wins this game all the time. Unless they become a dictator, of course.

You haven't seen her negatives...

[Big Steve-3]

Nobody wins this game all the time. Unless they become a dictator, of course.

You haven't seen her negatives...

Well, then show them to me. Make your case.

Do you believe, because she's been in office for so long, that she's a dictator?

My point is that she's been in office for the past 23 years and, as such, many will vote for her just because of name recognition. People are lazy and often won't take the time to educate themselves about other candidates. They'll simply say "Collins? Yeah, that sounds familiar. I'll vote for her."

[Finfinder]

:eek:



This is all hypothetically speaking:

It's easy to conceive a scenario where Bolton goes against Republicans, and it not be "on behalf" of Democrats. It is certainly possible that Bolton's loyalties are with the United States of American, and not the Republican part or Democrat Party. He doesn't HAVE to always side with any particular party you know....

Ultimately, everyone involved here should be thinking about America as a whole, and not their political party. Of course, this is not how it works in practice. Hell, you can't even conceive the Bolton could be acting out of personal motivations that are not necessarily to please either party.

Look all I know is for three years the Democrats have tried to reverse the election result, nothing they promised has occurred. I know your stuck on Dem verses Repub but come on the Democrats have cried wolf for 3 three years why should anybody conceive Boltons intentions. There is nothing that Bolton could reveal that would ultimately end in the removal of Trump and in the end it just really doesn't matter because the executive branch has a duty to follow the privilege the constitution outlines. The Dems have played this game so badly that no one cares anymore, elections are not going to be determined by Boltons testimony nor can the media and the Democrats can scare anybody with their hollow threats. Sorry but that is the reality here.

[Rancid]

I know your stuck on Dem verses Repub

It is you that is stuck on this. Clearly, you didn't understand my post. If you did, you wouldn't say this.

[late]

Well, then show them to me. Make your case.

I don't have them handy, they were in a local paper. They spiked after the Kavanaugh vote, and the impeachment isn't going to help.

This could be the year.

[Finfinder]

It is you that is stuck on this.

How so because generally I point out inaccuracies and hypocrisy on a forum that is 99.95% anti Trump?

Again why should this anonymous source from the NYT, about a book that is not even released yet affect an impeachment? Why do you have issues with people that would question the veracity of it? Seriously in the eleventh hour the republic hangs on a cliff because of John Bolton , not buying that week old bread. Didn't buy it on Kavanaugh not buying it now.

John Bolton is the Dems hero

[Big Steve-3]

I don't have them handy, they were in a local paper. They spiked after the Kavanaugh vote, and the impeachment isn't going to help.

Does this "local newspaper" have a website? If so, I bet we could find them there.

Go ahead. Give it a try.

This could be the year.

I see you're backing down already. Not long ago you were adamant; "Not this time" you said.

You suddenly don't seem sop sure.

[Rancid]

How so

Because you didn't understand my post.

[Finfinder]

Because you didn't understand my post.

you said that twice now are you going to explain it or not

[Rancid]

you said that twice now are you going to explain it or not

I think it's pretty obviously if you go back and read my post. There's no other way it can be spoon feed to you.

What I can do is give you some tips. When you read that post, really try to use your brain and think critically about what you are reading. Further, try your best to not assume that my post is an argument against anything you personally believe in (because it's not). Try to read it with an objective mind. Try your best.

Most of all, read it, and spend a few minutes to think about it, don't just jump to trying to prove a point that has nothing to do with the post.

[Big Steve-3]

I think it's pretty obviously if you go back and read my post. There's no other way it can be spoon feed to you.

What I can do is give you some tips. When you read that post, really try to use your brain and think critically about what you are reading. Further, try your best to not assume that my post is an argument against anything you personally believe in (because it's not). Try to read it with an objective mind. Try your best.

Most of all, read it, and spend a few minutes to think about it, don't just jump to trying to prove a point that has nothing to do with the post.

You probably could've just explained it and not used that many words.

[Big Steve-3]

DELETE - double post

[Finfinder]

I think it's pretty obviously if you go back and read my post. There's no other way it can be spoon feed to you.

What I can do is give you some tips. When you read that post, really try to use your brain and think critically about what you are reading. Further, try your best to not assume that my post is an argument against anything you personally believe in (because it's not). Try to read it with an objective mind. Try your best.

Most of all, read it, and spend a few minutes to think about it, don't just jump to trying to prove a point that has nothing to do with the post.

I have to assume you don't have any rebuttal or argument for what I posted. I obviously understood your post and it's ridiculous you have now spent at least 3 additional posts making claims and not clarify (despite my requests) or making counter arguments to my replies.

Who knows cares what Bolton thinks or may or may not say who cares what party he is associated with or will benefit, its not significant nor needed for this process. Nor does it matter what Bolton opinion is or feeling of duty to the USA the, constitution protects the separation of powers period. Hey but this good for book sales good for him. .

[late]

I see you're backing down already. Not long ago you were adamant; "Not this time" you said.

You suddenly don't seem so sure.

Hardly, just a recognition that life is uncertain.

When you see a comment like 'not this time' the person is saying they will oppose it to the best of their ability.

[Rancid]

You probably could've just explained it and not used that many words.

I disagree.

This is the reason pofo's quality has suffered massively over the last few years. People aren't actually thinking and discussing anymore. Some of the discussions here are looking more and more like facebook 'debates'.

Pofo is best when people are sharing ideas back and forth in order to refine their thoughts. It is not best when people are (figuratively) shouting passed each other to try 'win' a 'debate'.

Asking you guys to think a little harder is a better path towards restoring quality. Once I see a response to my post that actually addresses it in some way (either agree, disagree, but most importantly why), then I would go further to explain. That is not what I saw in his "response".

Until then, I know that any explaining simply wouldn't get through to finfinder and thus be a waste of time.

[Rancid]

I have to assume you don't have any rebuttal or argument for what I posted.

What you posted was irrelevant to what I posted. Instead it was an attempt to divert the conversation towards something that would make you feel like you right or proving some point which had nothing to do with what I said.

[Big Steve-3]

Asking you guys to think a little harder is a better path towards restoring quality. Once I see a response to my post that actually addresses it in some way (either agree, disagree, but most importantly why), then I would go further to explain. That is not what I saw in his "response".

Frankly, I think using terms like "you guys", especially when you're talking to someone with whom you've had very limited dialog, would be far more likely to impede quality discussion.

Try to learn something about the person you're talking to before you fool yourself into believing that lumping them in with a larger group is the intelligent thing to do.

Because, most often, it's not.

[Big Steve-3]

Hardly, just a recognition that life is uncertain.

Then you would've said that the first time.

When you see a comment like 'not this time' the person is saying they will oppose it to the best of their ability.

So you agree that it's entirely likely that you fail to bring her down again this time around, too, yes?

[Rancid]

Frankly, I think using terms like "you guys", especially when you're talking to someone with whom you've had very limited dialog, would be far more likely to impede quality discussion.

Try to learn something about the person you're talking to before you fool yourself into believing that lumping them in with a larger group is the intelligent thing to do.

Because, most often, it's not.

In this case, "you guys" was mostly directed at finfinder (though he's not hte only person on here the exhibits poor thinking skills). Further, my posts were directed towards finfinder. You just decided to butt in and include yourself in the conversation. I did not include you, so don't even go there. I suggest you butt out if you're going to get offended then.

If you don't want to be included in "you guys", then don't include yourself.

[expletives deleted - Prosthetic Conscience]

[Finfinder]

Frankly, I think using terms like "you guys", especially when you're talking to someone with whom you've had very limited dialog, would be far more likely to impede quality discussion.

Try to learn something about the person you're talking to before you fool yourself into believing that lumping them in with a larger group is the intelligent thing to do.

Because, most often, it's not.

You have come to wrong place for that, 95% of the posts are anti Trump propaganda so if you dare push back with facts you are immediately gas lighted and attempted to be branded. It's telling that someone makes 5 posts explaining why they won't clarify or explain what the meaning of a post is, and then accuse everyone else for the a low quality of posting here. That is simply what happens when you make a good point and you know this especially when ad hominems are thrown at you when you never made it personal.