Biden leads Trump by 12 points nationally among likely voters - Reuters/Ipsos poll

[polpott]

3 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

Give it some thought. No further translation is required.

Is that your way of saying you don't understand what you wrote? You have my sympathy.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

It means Putin helped "elect" 45 in 2016 and he's up to the same dirty tricks again. Plus 45 is welcoming the help.  The cheeseburger reference was an attempt at humor reflecting 45's plebian culinary preferences. 

 

OK, It might mean I've got some issues, but my first reading was "erect". Thought it was pretty bold of you there. Also, I like a cheeseburger every now and then. 

Edited September 11, 2020 by Morch

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

Because it's nothing more then politics. As in our side is better blah blah blah. How many elections have you lived through sir? It simply happens that on occasion the popular vote and Electoral college differ. This may trend reflecting population shift. I would have to go into a deep dive on that. Not going to. Never the less this is how the American system works. Perhaps you could write a letter to legislators of the USA and request that they look into a constitutional Amendment to please you, or try writing state Governors and perhaps you can get 3/4 of them to agree with you, and then the system can be changed to suit you and your distaste for the American system.

 

I wasn't expressing criticism about the USA's system. There are arguments for and against it, and anyway it is what it is. Merely pointed out the almost obsessive way Trump supporters reference a desire for a majority which Trump failed to get, twice, and is unlikely to get this time around.

 

Doesn't alter the fact he won the elections in 2016. Just seems a bit on the pathetic side insisting on it, while on the other hand explaining it away.

[Damual Travesty]

1 hour ago, Nout said:

'Cheeseburger helpers in Moscow'. What does that even mean?

I dunno but there are a hell of a lot of McDonald's in Moscow. Perhaps Democrats are going after them now for their obvious Russian contacts. They are doing business with Russians pretty certain of that. Maybe even have spoke with Russian officials.

[J Town]

36 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Putin's efforts in 2016 did not affect the results of the election and there was no coordination from the Trump campaign in that effort.

 

Trump is up to his old tricks of being an oustanding president in his effort to win reelection.

You haven't been keeping up. A bipartisan Senate committee recently proved Russia interfered and the 45 campaign eagerly welcomed their meddling.

[Damual Travesty]

5 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I wasn't expressing criticism about the USA's system. There are arguments for and against it, and anyway it is what it is. Merely pointed out the almost obsessive way Trump supporters reference a desire for a majority which Trump failed to get, twice, and is unlikely to get this time around.

 

Doesn't alter the fact he won the elections in 2016. Just seems a bit on the pathetic side insisting on it, while on the other hand explaining it away.

Quite sure that if it were the other way around Democrats would do the same thing. What do you think? As for this time around - we will talk about this on Nov 4th.

[Damual Travesty]

2 minutes ago, J Town said:

You haven't been keeping up. A bipartisan Senate committee recently proved Russia interfered and the 45 campaign eagerly welcomed their meddling.

Give the direct source report including page number and paragraph and exact sentence. Primary source only please for your claim.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, Damual Travesty said:

Give the direct source report including page number and paragraph and exact sentence. Primary source only please for your claim.

 

This was discussed on past topics, with (as far as I can recall) your own participation.

[J Town]

2 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

Give the direct source report including page number and paragraph and exact sentence. Primary source only please for your claim.

So you haven't kept up either, or as usual like to ignore truth? YOU look up the exact info, I'm done doing 45 supporters' homework.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/russia-meddled-on-trumps-behalf-in-2016-bipartisan-senate-intelligence-report-concludes-2020-08-18

[Berkshire]

1 minute ago, Damual Travesty said:

5 minutes ago, J Town said:

You haven't been keeping up. A bipartisan Senate committee recently proved Russia interfered and the 45 campaign eagerly welcomed their meddling.

Give the direct source report including page number and paragraph and exact sentence. Primary source only please for your claim.

What's the point?  Many times I've seen Trump supporters demand proof and when provided, completely ignore it.  And I get it.  To be a Trump supporter, you pretty much have to ignore truth and reality. 

[J Town]

Just now, Berkshire said:

3 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

7 minutes ago, J Town said:

You haven't been keeping up. A bipartisan Senate committee recently proved Russia interfered and the 45 campaign eagerly welcomed their meddling.

Give the direct source report including page number and paragraph and exact sentence. Primary source only please for your claim.

What's the point?  Many times I've seen Trump supporters demand proof and when provided, completely ignore it.  And I get it.  To be a Trump supporter, you pretty much have to ignore truth and reality. 

I'm bored so I can accommodate a little, but your point is spot on.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

Quite sure that if it were the other way around Democrats would do the same thing. What do you think? As for this time around - we will talk about this on Nov 4th.

 

To a degree, yes, some Democrats would probably act like that. But, IMO, to a lesser degree than what can be observed from Trump supporters. I don't know if that was the case on similar, but reversed, instances in the past, though.

 

As for talking about this on Nov 4th, not holding my breath. Given how either side reacted to results on 2016 and 2018, it's unlikely any meaningful dialogue would arise. People seem way too invested in "supporting" their side, sometimes to a degree where even simple facts and figures are rejected. For example, some Trump supporters still claim the 2016 popular vote results are due to illegal immigrants voting and such. Doubt this time will be different, think it will be worse.

 

[Damual Travesty]

2 minutes ago, J Town said:

So you haven't kept up either, or as usual like to ignore truth? YOU look up the exact info, I'm done doing 45 supporters' homework.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/russia-meddled-on-trumps-behalf-in-2016-bipartisan-senate-intelligence-report-concludes-2020-08-18

I will be very clear to you. Market watch is not a source that is a direct source. Again, you make a claim but do not cite directly -but even in the market watch news item quoting another source AP, you neglect to note that GOP disagreed with the findings that Democrats wanted placed in report. This is getting old now by the way. Incidentally, I do not view Russia as a direct threat to the USA. Do you? I further believe that China is a direct threat. I feel that it is quite dangerous to constantly attempt to push hard on American policy in Europe to further confront Russia as this could lead to war. None of this stuff is just empty words there are consequences to Democrat actions. I for one do not believe in American troops fighting in Europe over Eastern European border disputes do you?

[Eric Loh]

16 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

Because it's nothing more then politics. As in our side is better blah blah blah. How many elections have you lived through sir? It simply happens that on occasion the popular vote and Electoral college differ. This may trend reflecting population shift. I would have to go into a deep dive on that. Not going to. Never the less this is how the American system works. Perhaps you could write a letter to legislators of the USA and request that they look into a constitutional Amendment to please you, or try writing state Governors and perhaps you can get 3/4 of them to agree with you, and then the system can be changed to suit you and your distaste for the American system.

Can't argue that the electoral college, relic from the Civil War, is the incumbent political system in US. Just boggles my mind thinking that 10 countries besides US have electoral colleges and are mostly third world countries like Burundi, Myanmar, Madagascar etc. Most developing and developed countries like Finland, Brazil and Argentina have abandoned electoral colleges and amended their constitution with direct election by popular vote. Just my thoughts. 

[Damual Travesty]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

To a degree, yes, some Democrats would probably act like that. But, IMO, to a lesser degree than what can be observed from Trump supporters. I don't know if that was the case on similar, but reversed, instances in the past, though.

 

As for talking about this on Nov 4th, not holding my breath. Given how either side reacted to results on 2016 and 2018, it's unlikely any meaningful dialogue would arise. People seem way too invested in "supporting" their side, sometimes to a degree where even simple facts and figures are rejected. For example, some Trump supporters still claim the 2016 popular vote results are due to illegal immigrants voting and such. Doubt this time will be different, think it will be worse.

 

Well at some point - the election will be settled. A clear winner and loser. We can revisit then.

[J Town]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

People seem way too invested in "supporting" their side, sometimes to a degree where even simple facts and figures are rejected.

 

There are multiple videos of 45 supporters threatening to take up arms if Biden wins.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

I will be very clear to you. Market watch is not a source that is a direct source. Again, you make a claim but do not cite directly -but even in the market watch news item quoting another source AP, you neglect to note that GOP disagreed with the findings that Democrats wanted placed in report. This is getting old now by the way. Incidentally, I do not view Russia as a direct threat to the USA. Do you? I further believe that China is a direct threat. I feel that it is quite dangerous to constantly attempt to push hard on American policy in Europe to further confront Russia as this could lead to war. None of this stuff is just empty words there are consequences to Democrat actions. I for one do not believe in American troops fighting in Europe over Eastern European border disputes do you?

 

That you, personally, do not view Russia as a direct threat to the USA is cute, but at odds with the views of several agencies and bodies tasked with assessing such things. It's not a choice between Russia or China, both are considered threats.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, J Town said:

There are multiple videos of 45 supporters threatening to take up arms if Biden wins.

 

I was referring to the possibility of discussing things, not acting on them. You're jumping the gun.

[J Town]

2 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

I will be very clear to you. Market watch is not a source that is a direct source. Again, you make a claim but do not cite directly -but even in the market watch news item quoting another source AP, you neglect to note that GOP disagreed with the findings that Democrats wanted placed in report. This is getting old now by the way. Incidentally, I do not view Russia as a direct threat to the USA. Do you? I further believe that China is a direct threat. I feel that it is quite dangerous to constantly attempt to push hard on American policy in Europe to further confront Russia as this could lead to war. None of this stuff is just empty words there are consequences to Democrat actions. I for one do not believe in American troops fighting in Europe over Eastern European border disputes do you?

Frankly, 45 supporters have been shown again and again to refute any and all evidence. It's the mantra of their personal "Jim Jones" - fake news, fake news. 45 is even calling it a hoax that his very own recorded words are being used against him.

Time will tell what a corrupt, insane traitor 45 is. At that time will his followers finally admit they were wrong or continue to live in denial? Time will tell.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

Well at some point - the election will be settled. A clear winner and loser. We can revisit then.

 

The 2016 elections are behind us, how does "revisiting" them work out on these "discussions"? See my point now? There's not nearly enough middle ground for meaningful discussion that doesn't quickly devolve into spurious claims, wild allegations and animosity along partisan lines.

 

And I'm not saying this is solely coming from the right, even if I think that Trump's style gave it much back-wind.

[Damual Travesty]

2 minutes ago, J Town said:

There are multiple videos of 45 supporters threatening to take up arms if Biden wins.

As violence already spreads across the USA its very obvious what side is taking up arms. This Trump supporter - this Republican - this retired American Navy Veteran - speaking for myself - and as my conversations with all who are on the same side as me reveal - would expect any incumbent President who has lost an election to step down. Further, I would have no reason to believe that Donald J Trump would not do so if he lost. Further, I believe that all of this talk is nothing more the Democrats claiming in advance that it is impossible for them to lose. So much so that they are already planning to take it to the streets if they do not win, so much so that Hillary Clinton has advised on no basis whatsoever that Biden should not concede under "ANY CIRCUMSTANCE" on election night. I have never seen anything like this - ever. Now I hope and pray for an uncontested election- regardless of what side wins. I say that honestly. I think most Americans would all agree with me. Words like - calling on US military intervention - are frightening - as they are posed in terms of removing a President who has lost - but the reality is they are trying to set the stage for the removal of a President who has won. I pray for a clear victory. Uncontested.

[Damual Travesty]

7 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

That you, personally, do not view Russia as a direct threat to the USA is cute, but at odds with the views of several agencies and bodies tasked with assessing such things. It's not a choice between Russia or China, both are considered threats.

It is a matter of magnitude, and Russia poses no military threat to the United States when compared to China and the DOD agrees. It is a choice of how to deal with these nations. If Trump had his way the USA would be out of NATO - the treaty dissolved - a new treaty in it's place by players who are our allies in reality and not name only.

 

Europeans, namely French and Germans  can handle the Russians - they have superior strength in force and economy. The USA should vacate all but the most necessary of bases that perhaps facilitate logistics and nothing else.

 

Back stabbing allies are not allies. Allies that want to sell to Iran and Russia while claiming the need of US Defense are not allies. NATO has outlived its purpose. The constant paint of Russia as an immediate threat (not that they are not an adversary) is war mongering of the most dangerous kind.

 

Why is it you don't like Trump again? For wanting the USA to withdrawal from Europe? From Germany? From Afghanistan? From Syria? These things bother you? What do you advocate other then hate of a personality? You have US policy you support? That differs from the above? You want the USA to add military supplies to Europe? To Eastern Europe? To add force strength? To do what exactly? To be more confrontational then the administration already has with Russia - already far more then Obama. What do you want?

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

As violence already spreads across the USA its very obvious what side is taking up arms. This Trump supporter - this Republican - this retired American Navy Veteran - speaking for myself - and as my conversations with all who are on the same side as me reveal - would expect any incumbent President who has lost an election to step down. Further, I would have no reason to believe that Donald J Trump would not do so if he lost. Further, I believe that all of this talk is nothing more the Democrats claiming in advance that it is impossible for them to lose. So much so that they are already planning to take it to the streets if they do not win, so much so that Hillary Clinton has advised on no basis whatsoever that Biden should not concede under "ANY CIRCUMSTANCE" on election night. I have never seen anything like this - ever. Now I hope and pray for an uncontested election- regardless of what side wins. I say that honestly. I think most Americans would all agree with me. Words like - calling on US military intervention - are frightening - as they are posed in terms of removing a President who has lost - but the reality is they are trying to set the stage for the removal of a President who has won. I pray for a clear victory. Uncontested.

 

I identify with your wishes for uncontested elections, and a smooth transit of power, if such is required. Where we draw apart are the issue of Trump stepping down in case he loses, the issue of who made the notion of elections being "rigged" (and thus, not binding) a thing, and who actually might take up arms and for what reason.

 

Trump refused to commit on whether he'll accept elections results, more than once. Trump made various claims about elections being "rigged", rivals intending to cheat, etc., more than once. The protests, riots and associated violence currently on show in the USA are not, for all Trump supporters' efforts to paint them as such, all that aligned with the Democratic Party or invested in Biden's victory. On the other hand, Trump supporters' comments regarding this issue were clearly politically aligned in such a manner. 

[JIMHILL]

Who believes the media anyways, sponsored by the Democrats and supporters.

 

President Trump has been subject to disparaging remarks and unfounded allegations throughout his term to the point of impeachment and has still done his job.

 

There is no rationale to the hateful remarks I see on this forum, more likely sheepish indoctrination and or sponsorship.

[xylophone]

10 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

What's the point?  Many times I've seen Trump supporters demand proof and when provided, completely ignore it.  And I get it.  To be a Trump supporter, you pretty much have to ignore truth and reality. 

You are so right-on with that post, and that's the reason I have pressed the ignore button on the majority of the trumpies on here.

 

There is no discussion, there is no rationality there is no acceptance of reality or truth, and even when they are presented with the evidence, including words spoken by trump, they flatly deny it.

 

I've had the same with his supporters here, where one particular US guy refuted the fact that trump lies!! And said that the fact he had been ordered to repay $2 million to charities for misusing charitable funds for his own political gain, was nonsense. 

https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2019/donald-j-trump-pays-court-ordered-2-million-illegally-using-trump-foundation      

 

This same guy reckons that racism does not exist in the US.....and so on. 

 

I'm not saying that I am a Biden supporter in particular, but with his running mate Kamala Harris, they would have to present as a far better option to the rubbish already there.

[JIMHILL]

23 minutes ago, J Town said:

There are multiple videos of 45 supporters threatening to take up arms if Biden wins.

YouTube is entertainment and should be treated as such

[J Town]

5 minutes ago, JIMHILL said:

Who believes the media anyways, sponsored by the Democrats and supporters.

 

President Trump has been subject to disparaging remarks and unfounded allegations throughout his term to the point of impeachment and has still done his job.

 

There is no rationale to the hateful remarks I see on this forum, more likely sheepish indoctrination and or sponsorship.

Just today he told his cable news viewing schedule to reporters. It amounted to 8 hours of Fox in one night. Is THAT doing his job?

[J Town]

1 minute ago, JIMHILL said:

YouTube is entertainment and should be treated as such

Did I say youtube? Your words, not mine.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, Damual Travesty said:

It is a matter of magnitude, and Russia poses no military threat to the United States when compared to China and the DOD agrees. It is a choice of how to deal with these nations. If Trump had his way the USA would be out of NATO - the treaty dissolved - a new treaty in it's place by players who are our allies in reality and not name only.

 

Europeans, namely French and Germans  can handle the Russians - they have superior strength in force and economy. The USA should vacate all but the most necessary of bases that perhaps facilitate logistics and nothing else.

 

Back stabbing allies are not allies. Allies that want to sell to Iran and Russia while claiming the need of US Defense are not allies. NATO has outlived its purpose. The constant paint of Russia as an immediate threat (not that they are not an adversary) is war mongering of the most dangerous kind.

 

Why is it you don't like Trump again? For wanting the USA to withdrawal from Europe? From Germany? From Afghanistan? From Syria? These things bother you? What do you advocate other then hate of a personality? You have US policy you support? That differs from the above? You want the USA to add military supplies to Europe? To Eastern Europe? To add force strength? To do what exactly? To be more confrontational then the administration already has with Russia - already far more then Obama. What do you want?

 

I'm not familiar with any DOD assessment labeling Russia as anything approaching the non-issue you seem to make of it. Nor was it ever said that the threat is necessarily only military in nature. Other ways to hurt a nation or mess with it.

 

Trump haven't shown much capacity or capability for international negotiations, but given that his fans are at home with cancelling stuff before having a workable backup plan in place (re Repeal and Replace), the notion presented is not surprising, if nonsensical. That you "assess" Europeans could deal with Russia on their own is again, cute - but also not widely and directly supported by official takes on such things.

 

NATO's existence does not imply members are compelled or required to assume a subservient position with regard to all USA interests. That might be Trump's take, but otherwise, it's not a thing.

 

I think I've expressed, not too vehemently as others, why I dislike Trump, and did so on multiple topics. You have participated in relevant topics and exchanges. To raise this "question" again, and "support" it with the sort of bogus commentary you offer is dishonest.

[CorpusChristie]

4 minutes ago, xylophone said:

You are so right-on with that post, and that's the reason I have pressed the ignore button on the majority of the trumpies on here.

Its OK, you are pretty much safe in here , mainly just anti Trumpers all agreeing with each other and slapping each other on the back and agreeing with how correct they all are , and not much disagreement (due to lack of will power)