US midterm elections: What's happened to economy under Biden?

[ozimoron]

You'd need to be pretty feeble minded to believe that young people of one political persuasion considered abortion to be birth control but similar people of another political persuasion did not. That's really pushing a message of hate.

Edited November 13, 2022 by ozimoron

[billd766]

On 11/3/2022 at 3:17 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Which would help bring prices down. The greater the supply the lower the price.

How would Canadian oil for export bring down oil prices in the USA?

[billd766]

On 11/3/2022 at 3:56 PM, vandeventer said:

Wait a week than you will see words put into actions. How high was inflation under Trump? Joe said the price on gas was at 5 dollars a gallon when he took over from Trump. Maybe one day  the lies will stop, Joe really tells so many I think he has lost touch with reality

Do you really believe that the lies will stop? In 4 years under Trump, he spewed over 30k lies and he hasn't stopped yet.

 

 

There are many posters on this forum that only want the real truth to come out, and only then if it is the 'truth' that suits them.

[KanchanaburiGuy]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

Do you really believe that the lies will stop? In 4 years under Trump, he spewed over 30k lies and he hasn't stopped yet.

 

 

There are many posters on this forum that only want the real truth to come out, and only then if it is the 'truth' that suits them.

Come now, does either side really give a damn about truth and reality any longer? Honestly, I've seen little evidence of it.

 

Nah, from what I've seen over the last couple of decades, people cling so tightly to their false narratives and deceptions.......... they no longer even have a suitable framework for recognizing the truth, even when it's placed right before them!

 

(My favorite Trump lie, by the way, is when he said........ and repeated on several occasions......... "I have a particular fondness for Germany because my father was born there." [paraphrased]

 

Except his father was born in Brooklyn!

 

Even after getting castigated soundly for saying and repeating this obvious lie, he ALMOST said it again during one of the debates. He started to repeat the story........ stopped...... then changed direction to something that was actually true! LOL Yeah, I heard it myself. Pretty funny stuff, that; to come back to the same lie, even after getting raked over the coals for it!)

[billd766]

34 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Come now, does either side really give a damn about truth and reality any longer? Honestly, I've seen little evidence of it.

 

Nah, from what I've seen over the last couple of decades, people cling so tightly to their false narratives and deceptions.......... they no longer even have a suitable framework for recognizing the truth, even when it's placed right before them!

 

(My favorite Trump lie, by the way, is when he said........ and repeated on several occasions......... "I have a particular fondness for Germany because my father was born there." [paraphrased]

 

Except his father was born in Brooklyn!

 

Even after getting castigated soundly for saying and repeating this obvious lie, he ALMOST said it again during one of the debates. He started to repeat the story........ stopped...... then changed direction to something that was actually true! LOL Yeah, I heard it myself. Pretty funny stuff, that; to come back to the same lie, even after getting raked over the coals for it!)

I don't think that anybody even knows what the truth really IS any more. What seems to happen is that one side makes a comment and the other side tries to tear it to pieces

 

It works pretty much the same both ways, and the supporters of either side only seem to accept what 'their side' says is the truth, no matter what the truth really is, or how it is proven as true or not.

[KanchanaburiGuy]

38 minutes ago, billd766 said:

I don't think that anybody even knows what the truth really IS any more. What seems to happen is that one side makes a comment and the other side tries to tear it to pieces

 

It works pretty much the same both ways, and the supporters of either side only seem to accept what 'their side' says is the truth, no matter what the truth really is, or how it is proven as true or not.

Yeah, and you think I'm supposed to take your word for that?

 

["hee hee"]

[billd766]

1 hour ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Yeah, and you think I'm supposed to take your word for that?

 

["hee hee"]

I don't care if you or don't. I depends on your version of the 'truth'.

[KanchanaburiGuy]

40 minutes ago, billd766 said:

I don't care if you or don't. I depends on your version of the 'truth'.

To most people, I think, the ["hee hee"] at the bottom of my previous post would indicate the joking nature intended. 

 

For others, though, "joking" is what happens when you get a piece of meat stuck in your throat, or when someone throttles you. It's the wrong word, of course, but when someone doesn't seem to know what joking IS ...... it's probably close enough!

 

Cheers!

 

 

Edited November 13, 2022 by KanchanaburiGuy

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

"My understanding is that mail voting convinced young voters to vote in large numbers and apparently they consider abortion to be birth control, rather than a last resort, so single issue voters."

 

Where do you get your understanding on this? Just because young voters came out to vote does not mean they are there voting to use abortion as birth control does it? Can you provide any evidence that this is the reason they voted?

I got it from Al Jazeera.

 

Are you aware of what "my understanding" means?

Unlike some posters on "your" side, if I state something as fact, I try to give a link.

Edited November 13, 2022 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, billd766 said:

I don't think that anybody even knows what the truth really IS any more. What seems to happen is that one side makes a comment and the other side tries to tear it to pieces

 

It works pretty much the same both ways, and the supporters of either side only seem to accept what 'their side' says is the truth, no matter what the truth really is, or how it is proven as true or not.

IMO it's that people on one side hate the other side so much they don't care what the truth is. America is divided, perhaps irreparably. Look at the electoral map, and see that the middle of America is red, only the populous coastal areas blue.

[Bkk Brian]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I got it from Al Jazeera.

 

Are you aware of what "my understanding" means?

Unlike some posters on "your" side, if I state something as fact, I try to give a link.

Ok we're getting there. So your claiming you got this understanding from Al Jazeera. Interesting, so now all we need is a link to this article and see if the interpretation is the same for everyone or was it just you?

 

"My understanding is that mail voting convinced young voters to vote in large numbers and apparently they consider abortion to be birth control, rather than a last resort, so single issue voters."

[placeholder]

13 hours ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Come now, does either side really give a damn about truth and reality any longer? Honestly, I've seen little evidence of it.

 

Nah, from what I've seen over the last couple of decades, people cling so tightly to their false narratives and deceptions.......... they no longer even have a suitable framework for recognizing the truth, even when it's placed right before them!

 

(My favorite Trump lie, by the way, is when he said........ and repeated on several occasions......... "I have a particular fondness for Germany because my father was born there." [paraphrased]

 

Except his father was born in Brooklyn!

 

Even after getting castigated soundly for saying and repeating this obvious lie, he ALMOST said it again during one of the debates. He started to repeat the story........ stopped...... then changed direction to something that was actually true! LOL Yeah, I heard it myself. Pretty funny stuff, that; to come back to the same lie, even after getting raked over the coals for it!)

Another case of both-sideism. Republicans have built their campaign on the huge lie that the 2020 elections were fraudulent. A substantial percentage of them subscribe to QAnon beliefs. And remember Birtherism?

[KanchanaburiGuy]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

Another case of both-sideism. Republicans have built their campaign on the huge lie that the 2020 elections were fraudulent. A substantial percentage of them subscribe to QAnon beliefs. And remember Birtherism?

When both sides are guilty, "both-sideism" is the objective position.

 

---------------

 

(A lesson from my father from when I was a teenager: "If you don't know both sides of an argument well enough to effectively argue either side......... you probably shouldn't be in the conversation, at all.")

 

And my own observation about "both sides" from about the same time, fifty years ago, or so..........

 

"Do you see this glass as half empty or half full?" ***

 

The correct answer is.........

 

It is both. It is both half empty AND half full. If you only see it as one way or the other, you are ignoring half the pertinent information!

 

---------------

 

*** (A question that entered the American psyche as a result of TV commercials for the Peace Corp, in the 60s. "If you see this glass as half full, you may be the kind of person we want in the Peace Corp!"  [The Peace Corp apparently only wanted half-thinkers, not full-thinkers! Hahaha!] )

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

When both sides are guilty, "both-sideism" is the objective position.

 

---------------

 

(A lesson from my father from when I was a teenager: "If you don't know both sides of an argument well enough to effectively argue either side......... you probably shouldn't be in the conversation, at all.")

 

And my own observation about "both sides" from about the same time, fifty years ago, or so..........

 

"Do you see this glass as half empty or half full?" ***

 

The correct answer is.........

 

It is both. It is both half empty AND half full. If you only see it as one way or the other, you are ignoring half the pertinent information!

 

---------------

 

*** (A question that entered the American psyche as a result of TV commercials for the Peace Corp, in the 60s. "If you see this glass as half full, you may be the kind of person we want in the Peace Corp!"  [The Peace Corp apparently only wanted half-thinkers, not full-thinkers! Hahaha!] )

What conspiracy theories are the Dems guilty of?

[placeholder]

9 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

When both sides are guilty, "both-sideism" is the objective position.

 

---------------

 

(A lesson from my father from when I was a teenager: "If you don't know both sides of an argument well enough to effectively argue either side......... you probably shouldn't be in the conversation, at all.")

 

And my own observation about "both sides" from about the same time, fifty years ago, or so..........

 

"Do you see this glass as half empty or half full?" ***

 

The correct answer is.........

 

It is both. It is both half empty AND half full. If you only see it as one way or the other, you are ignoring half the pertinent information!

 

---------------

 

*** (A question that entered the American psyche as a result of TV commercials for the Peace Corp, in the 60s. "If you see this glass as half full, you may be the kind of person we want in the Peace Corp!"  [The Peace Corp apparently only wanted half-thinkers, not full-thinkers! Hahaha!] )

Here's a generalization for you: When somebody doesn't address the facts raised, they are just bloviating.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Ok we're getting there. So your claiming you got this understanding from Al Jazeera. Interesting, so now all we need is a link to this article and see if the interpretation is the same for everyone or was it just you?

 

"My understanding is that mail voting convinced young voters to vote in large numbers and apparently they consider abortion to be birth control, rather than a last resort, so single issue voters."

Comprehension problem?

Understanding and apparently makes it clear that it was opinion.

 

Given your obvious baiting, welcome to the ignore list.

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Comprehension problem?

Understanding and apparently makes it clear that it was opinion.

 

Given your obvious baiting, welcome to the ignore list.

Bangkok Brian is playing so unfair by using your own words against you. 

[Bkk Brian]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Comprehension problem?

Understanding and apparently makes it clear that it was opinion.

 

Given your obvious baiting, welcome to the ignore list.

You said you got it from Al Jazeera, so I asked for the link. Thats not baiting its asking you to substantiate your claim.

[billd766]

16 hours ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

To most people, I think, the ["hee hee"] at the bottom of my previous post would indicate the joking nature intended. 

 

For others, though, "joking" is what happens when you get a piece of meat stuck in your throat, or when someone throttles you. It's the wrong word, of course, but when someone doesn't seem to know what joking IS ...... it's probably close enough!

 

Cheers!

 

 

Sorry.

 

Yesterday was not one of my better days. My pc has been playing up and my bruised right arm came out in sympathy with it.

 

My bad.  

[KanchanaburiGuy]

2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

What conspiracy theories are the Dems guilty of?

Well, since this is an elections thread, let's just start with.......

 

*  The whole modern era of claiming widespread election fraud and manipulation STARTED with the Democrats, with the Bush's victories in 2000 & 2004. There were myriad accusations......... of Republicans....... disenfranchising voters, "fixing" elections, and rigging voting machines. The fact that the Republicans picked up on this and became more vociferous and strident about it......... doesn't change the fact that it was the Democrats who started it!

 

*  In the two years since the "contested" 2020 election, Republicans in many States have tried to craft laws designed to minimize the possibility of election fraud. These efforts almost universally require that everyone operate by the same rules. Dems, in response......... loudly and frequently...... have been shouting "Racist! Racist! Racist!" because these efforts have the audacity to require "minorities" follow the same standards that apply to the majority! (To a large number of Democrats, treating everyone equally......... is apparently "Racist!")

 

*  The second Impeachment of Donald Trump only 2 weeks before he was to leave office anyway, qualifies, I think. This was pure vindictiveness, not ethical governance.  (The Jan 6th Committee and its investigation was the CORRECT thing to do, although it should have started a year earlier. The 2nd Impeachment was nothing but vindictive theater!)

 

*  As much as I loathe Donald Trump, I cannot disagree with him when he says he was persecuted mercilessly throughout his Presidency, starting even before he took office. Except the majority of the things he was criticized for or accused of......... had almost no substantiated facts to back them up.

 

For example, successes by the TRUMP ORGANIZATION that turned out to be profitable........ like the Washington DC Hotel.........were "blamed" on Trump personally! How many times did we see Trump get blamed personally......... get accused of enriching himself personally......... because people stayed at his properties in Florida and Washington, New Jersey and Scotland? Except these "rewards" would have gone to THE BUSINESS, not to Trump personally. As an owner/stockholder, he would have actually seen very little of it, overall!

 

(Interestingly, almost everyone agrees a President should not use his position and influence to enrich himself personally. Heck, it essentially says that in the Constitution! But no one seems able to explain why, if the government is going to spend that money anyway with someone........ why the President and his business enterprises should be denied  that business opportunity......... just because he happens to be the President! If the companies can win the contract fair and square, why shouldn't  the President's companies be allowed to do just that?)

 

[Flash back now to conspiracy-minded Dems screaming loudly about Cheney, Halliburton, and No-bid Contracts! So they canceled the No-bid Contracts and put it out to bid. Halliburton won! Turns out there was almost no one in the world who could do what Halliburton could do, anyway!]

 

And on and on.......

 

-----------------

 

I dunno, ozimoron. You even asking the question makes it seem like you don't  think the Dems get their hands dirty. But the fact is, the Dems may not get their hands dirty by wallowing in the SAME muck the Republicans do. But that doesn't mean they don't get their hands just as dirty........ in their own special brand of mucK!

 

------------

------------

 

So, there the Dems are, really, REALLY tweaked about Bill Clinton getting Impeached. So they want....... oh, they want so badly........ to get payback!

 

But dammit! Y'can't impeach Bush while we've got troops in the field! He sent them there. That would be a morale crusher! ("Whaddya mean? We got sent here by a guy who got IMPEACHED????")

 

And then there was eight years of Obama. 

 

So, then a Republican gets elected once again. And it's TRUMP!

 

The conman! The shyster! The bigot! The sexist! The Islamophobe! [Please see Hillary's list of "deplorable" categories!] The Xenophobe! The buffoon! The LIAR!..........

 

"Hey, not only can we probably IMPEACH this guy........... maybe we can impeach him TWICE!!!"

 

You want "Conspiracy Theories?" How about THAT ONE!

 

LOL

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by KanchanaburiGuy

[KanchanaburiGuy]

12 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Sorry.

 

Yesterday was not one of my better days. My pc has been playing up and my bruised right arm came out in sympathy with it.

 

My bad.  

Apology both accepted and appreciated.

 

(It did send my twisted sense-of-humour into a higher gear, though. "Joking/choking?" It may not be GOOD humour........ but there's no doubt it's twisted  humour! ????)

 

(Old-time Saturday Night Live fans might look to Gilda Radner's "Rosanne Rosannadana" to mutter "nevermind " right about now! ????)

[KanchanaburiGuy]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

Here's a generalization for you: When somebody doesn't address the facts raised, they are just bloviating.

There really wasn't anything to address. The points you made are generally  true. But the fact that you criticized from only one side of a two-sided spectrum, while effectively pretending that the other side doesn't exist.......... kind of proves my point about "half-empty/half-full" thinking. 

 

Those of us who are sometimes labeled with the shallow cheapshot "both-sideism"............. recognise that "critical thinking" is a tool one uses to understand a topic from a variety of directions. "Critical thinking" is NOT the tool one uses just for dispensing criticism, regardless of similarity in spelling!

 

Cheers!

Edited November 14, 2022 by KanchanaburiGuy

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

There really wasn't anything to address. The points you made are generally  true. But the fact that you criticized from only one side of a two-sided spectrum, while effectively pretending that the other side doesn't exist.......... kind of proves my point about "half-empty/half-full" thinking. 

 

Those of us who are sometimes labeled with the shallow cheapshot "both-sideism"............. recognise that "critical thinking" is a tool one uses to understand a topic from a variety of directions. "Critical thinking" is NOT a tool one uses just to dispense criticism!

 

Cheers!

Frequency and magnitude count. The 2 sides are not the same.

So when you write something like this: 

Come now, does either side really give a damn about truth and reality any longer? Honestly, I've seen little evidence of it." 

That shows you disagree.

 

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Well, since this is an elections thread, let's just start with.......

 

*  The whole modern era of claiming widespread election fraud and manipulation STARTED with the Democrats, with the Bush's victories in 2000 & 2004. There were myriad accusations......... of Republicans....... disenfranchising voters, "fixing" elections, and rigging voting machines. The fact that the Republicans picked up on this and became more vociferous and strident about it......... doesn't change the fact that it was the Democrats who started it!

 

*  In the two years since the "contested" 2020 election, Republicans in many States have tried to craft laws designed to minimize the possibility of election fraud. These efforts almost universally require that everyone operate by the same rules. Dems, in response......... loudly and frequently...... have been shouting "Racist! Racist! Racist!" because these efforts have the audacity to require "minorities" follow the same standards that apply to the majority! (To a large number of Democrats, treating everyone equally......... is apparently "Racist!")

 

*  The second Impeachment of Donald Trump only 2 weeks before he was to leave office anyway, qualifies, I think. This was pure vindictiveness, not ethical governance.  (The Jan 6th Committee and its investigation was the CORRECT thing to do, although it should have started a year earlier. The 2nd Impeachment was nothing but vindictive theater!)

 

*  As much as I loathe Donald Trump, I cannot disagree with him when he says he was persecuted mercilessly throughout his Presidency, starting even before he took office. Except the majority of the things he was criticized for or accused of......... had almost no substantiated facts to back them up.

 

For example, successes by the TRUMP ORGANIZATION that turned out to be profitable........ like the Washington DC Hotel.........were "blamed" on Trump personally! How many times did we see Trump get blamed personally......... get accused of enriching himself personally......... because people stayed at his properties in Florida and Washington, New Jersey and Scotland? Except these "rewards" would have gone to THE BUSINESS, not to Trump personally. As an owner/stockholder, he would have actually seen very little of it, overall!

 

(Interestingly, almost everyone agrees a President should not use his position and influence to enrich himself personally. Heck, it essentially says that in the Constitution! But no one seems able to explain why, if the government is going to spend that money anyway with someone........ why the President and his business enterprises should be denied  that business opportunity......... just because he happens to be the President! If the companies can win the contract fair and square, why shouldn't  the President's companies be allowed to do just that?)

 

[Flash back now to conspiracy-minded Dems screaming loudly about Cheney, Halliburton, and No-bid Contracts! So they canceled the No-bid Contracts and put it out to bid. Halliburton won! Turns out there was almost no one in the world who could do what Halliburton could do, anyway!]

 

And on and on.......

 

-----------------

 

I dunno, ozimoron. You even asking the question makes it seem like you don't  think the Dems get their hands dirty. But the fact is, the Dems may not get their hands dirty by wallowing in the SAME muck the Republicans do. But that doesn't mean they don't get their hands just as dirty........ in their own special brand of mucK!

 

------------

------------

 

So, there the Dems are, really, REALLY tweaked about Bill Clinton getting Impeached. So they want....... oh, they want so badly........ to get payback!

 

But dammit! Y'can't impeach Bush while we've got troops in the field! He sent them there. That would be a morale crusher! ("Whaddya mean? We got sent here by a guy who got IMPEACHED????")

 

And then there was eight years of Obama. 

 

So, then a Republican gets elected once again. And it's TRUMP!

 

The conman! The shyster! The bigot! The sexist! The Islamophobe! [Please see Hillary's list of "deplorable" categories!] The Xenophobe! The buffoon! The LIAR!..........

 

"Hey, not only can we probably IMPEACH this guy........... maybe we can impeach him TWICE!!!"

 

You want "Conspiracy Theories?" How about THAT ONE!

 

LOL

 

"As much as I loathe Donald Trump, I cannot disagree with him when he says he was persecuted mercilessly throughout his Presidency, starting even before he took office. Except the majority of the things he was criticized for or accused of......... had almost no substantiated facts to back them up. "

 

Could you identify those things he was accused of that "had almost not substantiated facts to back them up."?

 

"How many times did we see Trump get blamed personally......... get accused of enriching himself personally......... because people stayed at his properties in Florida and Washington, New Jersey and Scotland? Except these "rewards" would have gone to THE BUSINESS, not to Trump personally. As an owner/stockholder, he would have actually seen very little of it, overall!"

 

Had Trump put those businesses and properties in a blind trust, as all Presidents should be required to do, he wouldn't be criticized for their profitability.  As it is, when lobbyists and foreign dignitaries make it obvious they are staying at overpriced Trump properties while lobbying for their respective companies and countries, it creates an obvious conflict of interest:  Will the President do what's right for the country or for his businesses?

 

Did you really not know this?

 

 

[placeholder]

7 hours ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Well, since this is an elections thread, let's just start with.......

 

*  The whole modern era of claiming widespread election fraud and manipulation STARTED with the Democrats, with the Bush's victories in 2000 & 2004. There were myriad accusations......... of Republicans....... disenfranchising voters, "fixing" elections, and rigging voting machines. The fact that the Republicans picked up on this and became more vociferous and strident about it......... doesn't change the fact that it was the Democrats who started it!

 

*  In the two years since the "contested" 2020 election, Republicans in many States have tried to craft laws designed to minimize the possibility of election fraud. These efforts almost universally require that everyone operate by the same rules. Dems, in response......... loudly and frequently...... have been shouting "Racist! Racist! Racist!" because these efforts have the audacity to require "minorities" follow the same standards that apply to the majority! (To a large number of Democrats, treating everyone equally......... is apparently "Racist!")

 

*  The second Impeachment of Donald Trump only 2 weeks before he was to leave office anyway, qualifies, I think. This was pure vindictiveness, not ethical governance.  (The Jan 6th Committee and its investigation was the CORRECT thing to do, although it should have started a year earlier. The 2nd Impeachment was nothing but vindictive theater!)

 

*  As much as I loathe Donald Trump, I cannot disagree with him when he says he was persecuted mercilessly throughout his Presidency, starting even before he took office. Except the majority of the things he was criticized for or accused of......... had almost no substantiated facts to back them up.

 

For example, successes by the TRUMP ORGANIZATION that turned out to be profitable........ like the Washington DC Hotel.........were "blamed" on Trump personally! How many times did we see Trump get blamed personally......... get accused of enriching himself personally......... because people stayed at his properties in Florida and Washington, New Jersey and Scotland? Except these "rewards" would have gone to THE BUSINESS, not to Trump personally. As an owner/stockholder, he would have actually seen very little of it, overall!

 

(Interestingly, almost everyone agrees a President should not use his position and influence to enrich himself personally. Heck, it essentially says that in the Constitution! But no one seems able to explain why, if the government is going to spend that money anyway with someone........ why the President and his business enterprises should be denied  that business opportunity......... just because he happens to be the President! If the companies can win the contract fair and square, why shouldn't  the President's companies be allowed to do just that?)

 

[Flash back now to conspiracy-minded Dems screaming loudly about Cheney, Halliburton, and No-bid Contracts! So they canceled the No-bid Contracts and put it out to bid. Halliburton won! Turns out there was almost no one in the world who could do what Halliburton could do, anyway!]

 

And on and on.......

 

-----------------

 

I dunno, ozimoron. You even asking the question makes it seem like you don't  think the Dems get their hands dirty. But the fact is, the Dems may not get their hands dirty by wallowing in the SAME muck the Republicans do. But that doesn't mean they don't get their hands just as dirty........ in their own special brand of mucK!

 

------------

------------

 

So, there the Dems are, really, REALLY tweaked about Bill Clinton getting Impeached. So they want....... oh, they want so badly........ to get payback!

 

But dammit! Y'can't impeach Bush while we've got troops in the field! He sent them there. That would be a morale crusher! ("Whaddya mean? We got sent here by a guy who got IMPEACHED????")

 

And then there was eight years of Obama. 

 

So, then a Republican gets elected once again. And it's TRUMP!

 

The conman! The shyster! The bigot! The sexist! The Islamophobe! [Please see Hillary's list of "deplorable" categories!] The Xenophobe! The buffoon! The LIAR!..........

 

"Hey, not only can we probably IMPEACH this guy........... maybe we can impeach him TWICE!!!"

 

You want "Conspiracy Theories?" How about THAT ONE!

 

LOL

 

It's so easy to be you. You can just throw stuff out there without providing evidence, and leave it for the scrupulous to debunk your claims. And when we've done that, you'll just spew out some more.

In 2000 there as an issue with hanging chad ballots. The Supreme Court ruled by 5-4 against the Democrats. 

In 2004 as I recall there was an issue in Ohio where the Republican Secretary of State, demanded that voter registration requests be submitted on a very specific kind of paper as the law stipulated. Requests not written on that paper were disqualified. The courts overruled him.

Bush also fired 9 federal attorneys in charge of various regions because they refused to go after alleged voter fraud when there was no evidence to support that.

As for the rest of your voter fraud nonsense..  five states with Republican governors and legislatures investigated possible voter fraud. They came up with virtually nothing. There is virtually no problem with voter fraud. In a state like Texas, where a driver's license counts as ID, some people have to travel very far to get one. However, Texas refuses to extend the hours of their departments meaning a person with not a lot of money would have to forego pay to get a license. Just one example.

As for the rest of your stuff. It just gives you away completely. Your rationalization for Trump's veniality is nuts. And given that at one point Trump actually proposed that a G7 (or was it G20) conference be held at Mar A Lago, shows just how foolishyour rationaization are. .Obviously, your goal here is to minimize the transgressions of the people you support by claiming both sides do it.

 

 

 

[placeholder]

7 hours ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

 

 

For example, successes by the TRUMP ORGANIZATION that turned out to be profitable........ like the Washington DC Hotel.........were "blamed" on Trump personally! How many times did we see Trump get blamed personally......... get accused of enriching himself personally......... because people stayed at his properties in Florida and Washington, New Jersey and Scotland? Except these "rewards" would have gone to THE BUSINESS, not to Trump personally. As an owner/stockholder, he would have actually seen very little of it, overall!

You clearly don't have a clue about how most of Trump's business are constructed. They're called pass-through corporations. Chapter S  And they're designed to give someone, or a few someones the benefits of being a corporation while also enjoying the benefits of ownership. The funds that are passed through benefit just a few people. So stop with the nonsense about Trump "would have actually seen very little of it, overall!"

Do some homework for a change.

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

"As much as I loathe Donald Trump, I cannot disagree with him when he says he was persecuted mercilessly throughout his Presidency, starting even before he took office. Except the majority of the things he was criticized for or accused of......... had almost no substantiated facts to back them up. "

 

Could you identify those things he was accused of that "had almost not substantiated facts to back them up."?

 

"How many times did we see Trump get blamed personally......... get accused of enriching himself personally......... because people stayed at his properties in Florida and Washington, New Jersey and Scotland? Except these "rewards" would have gone to THE BUSINESS, not to Trump personally. As an owner/stockholder, he would have actually seen very little of it, overall!"

 

Had Trump put those businesses and properties in a blind trust, as all Presidents should be required to do, he wouldn't be criticized for their profitability.  As it is, when lobbyists and foreign dignitaries make it obvious they are staying at overpriced Trump properties while lobbying for their respective companies and countries, it creates an obvious conflict of interest:  Will the President do what's right for the country or for his businesses?

 

Did you really not know this?

 

 

It is the case that all the officials under Trump are required to put their business operations and investments into a blind trust. But no one ever figured that a President could be so venial as to not do the same.

And as reported, the Saudis and the UAE booked large numbers of vacant suites at Trump properties while he was President.

(On a related note, Qatar bailed out the Kushner family from Jared's disastrous investment in a building in NYC that threatened to bankrupt his family. The terms of the investment guaranteed that Qatar would lose money. Real estate people called it a real head scratcher. As you'll recall, Kushner was the guy Trump put in charge of Mideast affairs.)

[Scott]

Trolling post removed.

 

[KanchanaburiGuy]

On 11/14/2022 at 1:22 PM, placeholder said:

Frequency and magnitude count. The 2 sides are not the same.

So when you write something like this: 

Come now, does either side really give a damn about truth and reality any longer? Honestly, I've seen little evidence of it." 

That shows you disagree.

 

Donald Trump, Jim Jones, and Bernie Madoff may be/have been big-time conmen........ and "Nigerian Princes," Alex Jones, "male-enhancement" sellers, and Herschel Walker may be comparatively small-time conmen.......... so no, they aren't "the same."

 

But at the heart of things, "frequency and magnitute" are really only important for determining what kind of legal........ (or extra-legal?)......... actions should be taken against them. But that's almost beside the point.

 

Regardless of the comparative "frequency and magnitude" of their cons......... the only thing that REALLY matters........ is knowing that they are conmen!

 

If you know they are conmen, thats all you really need to know!

 

Same goes for both Republican and Democratic Politicians, these days. They may not be up to the level of "conmen," per se, but that doesn't mean that concepts like honesty and integrity........ and an actual and sincere interest in pursuing and governing based on truth......... actual truth!............ have much of a place in their makeup! 

 

No, in today's political landscape, being believed........ is exponentially more important.......... than being honest!

 

So in today's political landscape........ time and time again.......... easy, believable lies......... keep proving their worth ........... over honest truths!

 

So that, naturally, then becomes the modus operandi of the modern politician! Saying something believable........ is more important........ than saying something truthful!

 

And honestly, do you really need to know the "frequency and magnitude" of a person's lies........ before you decide not to trust them? Isn't knowing  they are a liar........ good enough?

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by KanchanaburiGuy

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Donald Trump, Jim Jones, and Bernie Madoff may be/have been big-time conmen........ and "Nigerian Princes," Alex Jones, "male-enhancement" sellers, and Herschel Walker may be comparatively small-time conmen.......... so no, they aren't "the same."

 

But at the heart of things, "frequency and magnitute" are really only important for determining what kind of legal........ (or extra-legal?)......... actions should be taken against them. But that's almost beside the point.

 

Regardless of the comparative "frequency and magnitude" of their cons......... the only thing that REALLY matters........ is knowing that they are conmen!

 

If you know they are conmen, thats all you really need to know!

 

Same goes for both Republican and Democratic Politicians, these days. They may not be up to the level of "conmen," per se, but that doesn't mean that concepts like honesty and integrity........ and an actual and sincere interest in pursuing and governing based on truth......... actual truth!............ have much of a place in their makeup! 

 

No, in today's political landscape, being believed........ is exponentially more important.......... than being honest!

 

So in today's political landscape........ time and time again.......... easy, believable lies......... keep proving their worth ........... over honest truths!

 

So that, naturally, then becomes the modus operandi of the modern politician! Saying something believable........ is more important........ than saying something truthful!

 

And honestly, do you really need to know the "frequency and magnitude" of a person's lies........ before you decide to distrust him? Isn't knowing he's a liar........ good enough?

 

Well, you demonstrated in your previous frantic outburst that you don't really have even a basic grasp of facts just like the former President you clearly support. Like saying that Trump wouldn't benefit much from his dealings with the government because most of the money would flow to the shareholders in his company.

Or claiming that voter fraud was a problem that deserves to be addressed and is being obstructed by Democrats even though in states where all the levers of government were controlled by Republicans, no evidence of significant voter fraud was found.

The thing is, those of us who take the trouble to acquaint ourselves with the facts can judge a politician's statements by how well they comport with reality. And we can judge each statement on its worth. And what's more important, we can judge if the laws they propose are based on sound premises or not.

But if you're not acquainted with the facts, then I guess the way to try and sound knowledgeable is to say they're all liars and conmen and you don't trust any of them. And of course, if you support one in particular, whose statement only  bear an arbitrary relationship to reality, and who supports laws built on lies, then it's in your interest to make it seem as though politicians are all fundamentally the same. And to further obfuscate by posting empty generalizations because such generalizations don't require you to actually have any acquaintance with the facts.