5 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Makes perfect sense.  Unfortunately, it would take a major re-education effort to get the public to buy-in.  With all the misinformation going on, that would be a herculean effort.  Trump and his minions have it much easier; all they need to do is convince the gullible that the "other side" wants to abolish the police and unleash lawlessness.  Nobody in their right mind wants that, but I suppose there are still people in America dumb enough to believe Trump.   

Certainly a tongue in cheek post.  No President in us history has had more enemies in the press trying to do him in.

10 minutes ago, tlandtday said:

Certainly a tongue in cheek post.  No President in us history has had more enemies in the press trying to do him in.

And rightly so

1 hour ago, tlandtday said:

Looks like they chose Kamala to try to make up for Biden's past racist words and actions against the black community.  However it is a strategic mistake.  Trump can easily chessmate the Dumbocrats by simply choosing a Latino running mate to replace Pence.  Should be interesting.  I hope Joe can crawl out of his basement to actually attend a debate.  He owes the American people at least that for decades of sucking the public tit. 

Come on man, everyone knows

 

"Unlike the African American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly diverse attitudes about different things"

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by Joe well ya know

A troll meme has been removed

6 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

That's not what defunding the police means. Let me explain.

Most cities police departments are called upon for pretty much everything; dealing with the homeless, the mentally ill, people on drugs, domestic problems, traffic crimes etc etc. In many cases the police are neither equiped or experienced enough to handle these situations which are better handled by other experts. By defunding the police, you are taking some of their vast budgets (and they are vast) and reappropriating these funds to other organistaions that are better suited to handling these issues. The benfits are two-fold; one, the problem is sorted out much better and without the need for an armed response (the police are trained to handle matters in a particular way that doesn't neccessarily involve de-escalation and therefore can make matters worse) and secondly, the police can then focus their attention on matters that they are best suited to (murders, armed robberies, looters, rape etc). It ensures the best people are doing the most appropriate jobs.

It also doesn't neccessarily mean a reduction in police numbers but it can in some cases. If it does, this is usually acheived through natural attrition and the scaling down of unneccessary units. The money can also be saved by the police not investing in military style equipment such as armored personnel carriers (APCs), assault rifles, submachine guns, flashbang grenades, grenade launchers, and sniper rifles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarization_of_police.

It does not mean scrapping the police. This is a different matter that is more to do with institutionalised racism and has only ever been done once in Camden, N.J., where the whole police force was disbanded and a new, better one built instead https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/police-reform-ideas-united-states-george-floyd-1.5601990

You know fully well that the Trump supporters who claim that defunding the police will mean more crime will neither be able to read this long intelligent post never mind comprehend it. You have to keep it in short twitter side sound bites for them.

Is Kamala Harris a political opportunist?

 

During the debates she trashed Biden for his anti-school busing stance, which she stressed she took very personally, and further dissed him on his support of and friendship with then-politicians who were pro-segregationists.  (Of course she began by emphatically pointing out that she didn't believe Biden was a "racist."  "Racist" is reserved only for Republicans and Trump.  It would be political suicide to call Biden a "racist" and she's fully aware of that.)

 

Also she stated that she believed Biden's sexual harassment accuser, Tara Reade.

 

But none of that matters now, does it?  So what happened to her principles?  Or perhaps she hasn't any?

 

Google "Kamala fought to preserve convictions against the innocent - to further her own political career."  As can be expected, you will not find any MSM media outlet touching that topic.  It's taboo.

 

Is Kamala Harris a political opportunist?  LOL.

 

BTW, I hear she's presently in the process of vetting her VP.

What happens if the next few months proves to be too much for joe? How will the dnc choose the candidate?

49 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

What happens if the next few months proves to be too much for joe? How will the dnc choose the candidate?

He is much healthier than the President and trump could get the virus the way he defies.

Pirro claims Biden won't make it to the ticket by election. Sounds like the attempt to claim Hillary was sick all over again. Desperate times for trump supporters. If the tables were turned I might try the same given the state of polling.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/511805-foxs-baier-pushes-back-after-pirro-says-biden-might-not-be-on-democratic

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by earlinclaifornia

15 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

He is much healthier than the President and trump could get the virus the way he defies. 

trump doesn't defy Covid. trump has possibly the world's best and most expensive health and security protection - the man is a complete hypocrite.

 

7 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

He is much healthier than the President and trump could get the virus the way he defies. 

I was asking a question, that's all. If you don't know the answer why bother writing nonsense.

 

2 minutes ago, simple1 said:

trump doesn't defy Covid. trump has possibly the world's best and most expensive health and security protection - the man is a complete hypocrite.

 

I believe Trump claimed he is taking hydroychloroquine and zinc as a preventative for covid. Two of the worlds cheapest medicines. You might remember the anger here on this very forum over his use of the two cheapest drugs in the world. Now you turn 180 degrees and bash him for having the world's most expensive health protection. Hypocrite you say?

8 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

I believe Trump claimed he is taking hydroychloroquine and zinc as a preventative for covid. Two of the worlds cheapest medicines. You might remember the anger here on this very forum over his use of the two cheapest drugs in the world. Now you turn 180 degrees and bash him for having the world's most expensive health protection. Hypocrite you say?

if Mod will permit: The drug you mention has not proven to be effective and is no longer used for the prevention of Covid-19; another furphy by trump. Yes, trump is a hypocrite when he claims to know better than medical experts, refused to wear a mask etc etc  at the same time, as I said, having a huge medical protection screening process everywhere he goes. Thankfully looks as though trump won't be President much longer, even though he is trying to use his power to shut down postal votes. Why? as trump admits because it disadvantages the Democrats by way of voter disenfranchisement. trump is unfit to represent the Office of the President of the USA.

53 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

He is much healthier than the President and trump could get the virus the way he defies.

Pirro claims Biden won't make it to the ticket by election. Sounds like the attempt to claim Hillary was sick all over again. Desperate times for trump supporters. If the tables were turned I might try the same given the state of polling.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/511805-foxs-baier-pushes-back-after-pirro-says-biden-might-not-be-on-democratic

"He is much healthier than the President", <assuming he is Biden>

 

on what do you base that conclusion?

funny how so many TVFers are familiar with Bidens and Trumps healths

 

 

21 minutes ago, simple1 said:

if Mod will permit: The drug you mention has not proven to be effective and is no longer used for the prevention of Covid-19; another furphy by trump. Yes, trump is a hypocrite when he claims to know better than medical experts, refused to wear a mask etc etc  at the same time, as I said, having a huge medical protection screening process everywhere he goes. Thankfully looks as though trump won't be President much longer, even though he is trying to use his power to shut down postal votes. Why? as trump admits because it disadvantages the Democrats by way of voter disenfranchisement. trump is unfit to represent the Office of the President of the USA.

Dr Birx declared - and I think it's absolutely true: "  "He has been so attentive to the details and the data, and his ability to analyze and integrate data has been a real benefit during these discussions about medical issues" -

Trump doesn't identify with the population the most at risk. With all the implications.   

Edited August 14, 20205 yr by Opl

Troll post removed.   Please stay on topic.  

 

16 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

*Deleted post edited out*

 

That's not what defunding the police means. Let me explain.

Most cities police departments are called upon for pretty much everything; dealing with the homeless, the mentally ill, people on drugs, domestic problems, traffic crimes etc etc. In many cases the police are neither equiped or experienced enough to handle these situations which are better handled by other experts. By defunding the police, you are taking some of their vast budgets (and they are vast) and reappropriating these funds to other organistaions that are better suited to handling these issues. The benfits are blem is sorted out much better and without the need for an armed response (the police are trained to handle matters in a particular way that doesn't neccessarily involve de-escalation and therefore can make matters worse) and secondly, the police can then focus their attention on matters that they are best suited to (murders, armed robberies, looters, rape etc). It ensures the best people are doing the most appropriate jobs.

It also doesn't neccessarily mean a reduction in police numbers but it can in some cases. If it does, this is usually acheived through natural attrition and the scaling down of unneccessary units. The money can also be saved by the police not investing in military style equipment such as armored personnel carriers (APCs), assault rifles, submachine guns, flashbang grenades, grenade launchers, and sniper rifles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militarization_of_police.

It does not mean scrapping the police. This is a different matter that is more to do with institutionalised racism and has only ever been done once in Camden, N.J., where the whole police force was disbanded and a new, better one built instead https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/police-reform-ideas-united-states-george-floyd-1.5601990

Defunding the police simply means giving them less money and resources to do their jobs. Sounds like disaster. All the other things you write about are about reorganizing responsibilities. It OK but the reorganization and reducing the load on the police must come first and the forces left must be well staffed and trained. 

In the current environment stronger tools are needed so that the anarchy mobs know the police mean business. 

20 minutes ago, checkered flag said:

Defunding the police simply means giving them less money and resources to do their jobs. Sounds like disaster. All the other things you write about are about reorganizing responsibilities. It OK but the reorganization and reducing the load on the police must come first and the forces left must be well staffed and trained. 

In the current environment stronger tools are needed so that the anarchy mobs know the police mean business. 

I always wonder why they don't just reassign funding and personnel from the army to the police.

Seems so obvious to me.

 

As for the current anarchy, snipers on rooftops with orders to shoot anyone breaking windows or entering illegally.

Edited August 14, 20205 yr by BritManToo

17 hours ago, tlandtday said:

Certainly a tongue in cheek post.  No President in us history has had more enemies in the press trying to do him in.

You know darn well Trump brings it on himself.  He can't even answer a simple question....

 

["After three and a half years, do you regret, at all, all the lying you've done to the American people on everything, all the dishonesties?" a reporter asked Trump.]

[Trump quickly called on a different reporter for another question.]

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/watch-trump-react-when-a-reporter-asks-if-he-regrets-all-the-lying-you-ve-done-to-the-american-people-over-the-past-3-1-2-years/ar-BB17W4I6

 

5 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

You know darn well Trump brings it on himself.  He can't even answer a simple question....

 

["After three and a half years, do you regret, at all, all the lying you've done to the American people on everything, all the dishonesties?" a reporter asked Trump.]

[Trump quickly called on a different reporter for another question.]

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/watch-trump-react-when-a-reporter-asks-if-he-regrets-all-the-lying-you-ve-done-to-the-american-people-over-the-past-3-1-2-years/ar-BB17W4I6

 

If I were Trump I'd have had him removed from the room and banned on ever returning. I know the left hates Trump, but have some respect for the position, if not the man.

8 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

You know darn well Trump brings it on himself.  He can't even answer a simple question....

 

["After three and a half years, do you regret, at all, all the lying you've done to the American people on everything, all the dishonesties?" a reporter asked Trump.]

[Trump quickly called on a different reporter for another question.]

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/watch-trump-react-when-a-reporter-asks-if-he-regrets-all-the-lying-you-ve-done-to-the-american-people-over-the-past-3-1-2-years/ar-BB17W4I6

It's a deliberately leading question presuming guilt.  The reporter knew it and Trump knew it.  Of course Trump is going to blow his question off.  Who wouldn't?  I'd say it's silly of you to use it as an example.

 

Edited August 14, 20205 yr by Tippaporn

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If I were Trump I'd have had him removed from the room and banned on ever returning. I know the left hates Trump, but have some respect for the position, if not the man.

Putting aside the cowardly Republicans breach of Oath, respect for the Office of the Presidency is IMO why trump has got away with so much during his term, well over for him personally to be held accountable. In any case the USA enshrines Freedom of Speech, why should trump be shielded from a legitimate question.

17 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

You know darn well Trump brings it on himself.  He can't even answer a simple question....

 

["After three and a half years, do you regret, at all, all the lying you've done to the American people on everything, all the dishonesties?" a reporter asked Trump.]

[Trump quickly called on a different reporter for another question.]

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/watch-trump-react-when-a-reporter-asks-if-he-regrets-all-the-lying-you-ve-done-to-the-american-people-over-the-past-3-1-2-years/ar-BB17W4I6

 

Trump should just reply that he is proud of his lies that earned him a reference in Wikipedia. Another feather in his dirty cap. 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veracity_of_statements_by_Donald_Trump

18 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If I were Trump I'd have had him removed from the room and banned on ever returning. I know the left hates Trump, but have some respect for the position, if not the man.

It could be argued that Mr Trump has so thoroughly, consistently and vigorously destroyed, over the entire span of his Presidency ( starting perhaps with the blatant lies about the crowds at his inauguration) any trust in his office that he has also dramatically diminished respect for the position. One inevitably follows the other. Mr Trump's behaviour, and his more than somewhat fragile relationship with the truth reveals his own lack of respect for the position. Put bluntly, after four years of lies, it has become the "new normal" for the Presidency.

13 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Putting aside the cowardly Republicans breach of Oath, respect for the Office of the Presidency is IMO why trump has got away with so much during his term, well over for him personally to be held accountable. In any case the USA enshrines Freedom of Speech, why should trump be shielded from a legitimate question.

It wasn't a legitimate question. It is a question that can never be answered without self harm.

Freedom of speech extends to not saying anything, as in a reply to a gottcha question.

 

Given as this is a thread about Biden and Harris, IMO he picked her because he knew she is controversial and will take the pressure off him as everyone talks about her instead of him.

IMO a calculated move for his benefit.

Just now, herfiehandbag said:

It could be argued that Mr Trump has so thoroughly, consistently and vigorously destroyed, over the entire span of his Presidency ( starting perhaps with the blatant lies about the crowds at his inauguration) any trust in his office that he has also dramatically diminished respect for the position. One inevitably follows the other. Mr Trump's behaviour, and his more than somewhat fragile relationship with the truth reveals his own lack of respect for the position. Put bluntly, after four years of lies, it has become the "new normal" for the Presidency.

In that case, expect the same treatment if Biden or any Dem becomes president. If one side breaks convention, no reason to expect it to be respected in future. IMO Harris can expect similar gottcha questions in future, and apparently she has a number of skeletons in her background.

10 hours ago, Throatwobbler said:

You know fully well that the Trump supporters who claim that defunding the police will mean more crime will neither be able to read this long intelligent post never mind comprehend it. You have to keep it in short twitter side sound bites for them.

I assume from your post that it is your contention, that defunding the police will Not mean any reduction in police numbers. 

The fact that police budgets are cut by whatever amount of millions of dollars and diverted to " community projects", the formation of new units, presumably using more " social workers". Will definitely not mean police officers losing their jobs, is that correct. 

Because we could all see that a lack of police presence in the cities of Chicago, Seattle, Portland, Minneappollis etc, etc, recently, resulted in a massive drop in the crime rate. 

It was incredible there were no murders, rapes, Arson, looting, or robberies. 

In this new crime free utopia of yours, what unit would be dispatched to an incident where a powerfully built man, showing signs of being high on drugs, attempting to pass counterfeit cash in a store.? 

You can use big words if you like, if there's anything I don't understand I can Google it, oh, and it doesn't have to be in short sound bites either  as I'm not on Twatter.! 

35 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's a deliberately leading question presuming guilt.  The reporter knew it and Trump knew it.  Of course Trump is going to blow his question off.  Who wouldn't?  I'd say it's silly of you to use it as an example.

 

It’s something far more damaging to Trump and something I pointed out after his disastrous performance in the Axios interview.

 

The ratings are now firmly attached to calling out Trump’s lies and BS.

9 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

In that case, expect the same treatment if Biden or any Dem becomes president. If one side breaks convention, no reason to expect it to be respected in future. IMO Harris can expect similar gottcha questions in future, and apparently she has a number of skeletons in her background.

Bring it on.

 

And these mysterious ‘skeletons’ to which you wistfully elude, why is it that , with several months to build a case against Harris, Trump and his equally mysterious campaign been unable to find anything other than racism, misogyny, lies and rehashed ‘Birther’ nonsense?!

 

 

18 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It wasn't a legitimate question. It is a question that can never be answered without self harm.

Freedom of speech extends to not saying anything, as in a reply to a gottcha question.

 

Given as this is a thread about Biden and Harris, IMO he picked her because he knew she is controversial and will take the pressure off him as everyone talks about her instead of him.

IMO a calculated move for his benefit.

Trump absolutely doesn't care. Why would you?  

On 8/12/2020 at 6:13 AM, melvinmelvin said:

 

why would living in and going to school in Canada be considered and asset?

 

Well, when you look at the average American, I would definitely say, it is an asset to have an Canadian education.