Political Roundtable Part XXIII

[daoneandonly]

Dude wtf does Hillary have to do with Trump excusing the Saudi execution of a WaPo journalist?

You’re not remotely bothered by the current event yet you ARE worked up about Hillary who is not and never did anything like that.

When and how did he excuse it? I'm not a Trump apologist, but last I heard he said there will be hell to pay if Saudis are found guilty

Whereas Hilalry, the champion for women, had no issue with her named foundation taking money from them, who just released a propaganda video patting themselves on the back for letting women drive, yeah wow, they come a long way, they just let women drive now.

Trump just yesterday was giving the Saudis cover by claiming it was a “rogue” faction that killed the journalist. Anyone that knows anything about Saudi Arabia knows this is bull. You are absolutely a Trump apologist when you keep bringing up Clinton when she’s not relevant to the conversation.

Not really, I brought up Clinton because the same poster above had a little hissy fit about people voting Trump when he is morally bankrupt (I still have yet to see anyone here claim he isn't, as conservatives generally don't see everything along absolute party lines). Clinton come sin because unfortunately there are only 2 realistic options come general election times, and Hillary is just as corrupt as Trump, so I went the way of the guy who will hopefully tip the balance of the SCOTUS in favor of pro life, and help with taxes, as evidenced by my extra $200 a paycheck. it's nice to see money that I work for go to me, and not stuff like PP that I nor anyone in my orbit will ever use.

[daoneandonly]

When and how did he excuse it? I'm not a Trump apologist, but last I heard he said there will be hell to pay if Saudis are found guilty

Whereas Hilalry, the champion for women, had no issue with her named foundation taking money from them, who just released a propaganda video patting themselves on the back for letting women drive, yeah wow, they come a long way, they just let women drive now.

Your inconsistency is maddening, you're quite clearly a Trump apologists, that's all you **** do.

The Clinton FOUNDATION may have taken money, but to what end is that any worse than backing, supporting and heavily endorsing a saudi mad man posing as reformer?

You say Trump is going to hold Mohammed bin Salman accountable, bull **** ****.

Trump himself has already given him a convenient out by floating the idea of rogue operatives, while also making it abundantly clear that he has no intention to alter any of the parameters of the Saudi weapons deal.

The Saudi's response? An expected admission to be released claiming an interrogation gone wrong.

A claim that quite obviously flies in the face of the facts. You don't send a secret 15 person delegation that includes a forensic specialist and autopsy expert to an interrogation.

Trump is everything you claim the Clinton's are, morally corrupt, entirely self serving and a serial liar without a moral compass.

And all I did was ask a question about how he's excusing it, that's not defending him, that's inquiring about information I wasn't aware of. Everything you mentioned about Trump, I don't argue, he's all those things, maybe even mysogist and racist, horrible attributes for any human being, but like I said in the above post, the general election only offers 2 viable candidates, I chose the lesser of 2 evils.

[queridiculo]

And all I did was ask a question about how he's excusing it, that's not defending him, that's inquiring about information I wasn't aware of. Everything you mentioned about Trump, I don't argue, he's all those things, maybe even mysogist and racist, horrible attributes for any human being, but like I said in the above post, the general election only offers 2 viable candidates, I chose the lesser of 2 evils.

Quite clearly and demonstrably so, you've done the exact opposite.

Sadly, as you continue to demonstrate in this thread over and over again, you're too lazy to inform yourself and prefer to regurgitate tired tropes.

[daoneandonly]

And all I did was ask a question about how he's excusing it, that's not defending him, that's inquiring about information I wasn't aware of. Everything you mentioned about Trump, I don't argue, he's all those things, maybe even mysogist and racist, horrible attributes for any human being, but like I said in the above post, the general election only offers 2 viable candidates, I chose the lesser of 2 evils.

Quite clearly and demonstrably so, you've done the exact opposite.

Sadly, as you continue to demonstrate in this thread over and over again, you're too lazy to inform yourself and prefer to regurgitate tired tropes.

You complain about tired topics, yet you're just upset because he won, it's 2 years later and the Dems are still crying in their cereal about it, it's tired, he won, move past it. Don't worry, you'll take back the House and perhaps even the Senate in a matter of weeks. I never praised Trump's name once, I thanked him for giving me my own money back, but it should have never have gotten to that, because it should have always been mine. My money shouldn't go to PP, or my health coverage should not have went up 21% because of ACA, those things serve me no purpose.

You don't need to presume to tell me how or what I feel, I don't like the Trump the person, but yesterday, today, tomorrow, 4 years ago, 4 years from now, I'll take Trump over Baby Kiillary again and again.

[daoneandonly]

people who are pro choice support baby killing

This is so not true. Frankly, anyone who tries to shift pro-life and pro-choice to make the mutually exclusive when they very obviously aren't supports killing babies more than anyone. Anyone that's about banning a problem rather than dealing with it has no interest in actually dealing with it or trying to functionally limit it has no real interest in solving it no matter how much they claim they do. But we've been down that road before. I know where you stand.

The argument that being pro choice does not inherently mean you support abortion is ridiculous and down right insulting. If you're pro choice, you support a woman's (and her male counterpart's) choice to terminate her child, to end the pregnancy, hence, you support the act. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise.

[I_Like_Dirt]

The argument that being pro choice does not inherently mean you support abortion is ridiculous and down right insulting. If you're pro choice, you support a woman's (and her male counterpart's) choice to terminate her child, to end the pregnancy, hence, you support the act. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise.

Now you're the one being insulting. I don't particularly want to see someone throw their life away with drugs, but that doesn't mean that I will just focus on keeping certain drugs banned and judging anyone who breaks that arbitrary law. I don't particularly support suicides, yet sooooooo many suicides are done with firearms and there is rather significant evidence to suggest that if firearms aren't available people who commit suicide won't actually find another way yet that doesn't mean I support an outright ban on firearms everywhere. These issues are far more detailed than a simple ban/no ban, and the insulting part is when someone suggests that it is, and that supporting a ban means you're against the issue and that opposing the ban means you're for it. You have absolutely no idea how the world works if you think that's true.

[verbal8]

Read on Twitter

?s=19


Pennsylvania was the linchpin of Donald Trump’s 2016 victory, but it could be ground zero of Democrats’ 2018 comeback. Not only are the incumbent Democratic senator and governor prohibitive favorites to win reelection, but Democrats could also pick up as many as a half-dozen congressional seats — roughly a quarter of the seats the party needs nationwide to win back the House.

Sweeping the swing districts in CA and NJ is roughly 1/2 the seats needed.

You don't have to look any further than our president to know that anything is possible in elections. With the House I see it very hard to see that everything will go the Republicans way - which is basically what needs to happen for them to hold the House.

[verbal8]

The blood tests is soooo stupid. Even russian, mongol, uzbek have same blood in large proportion. Even chinese have more thna this!!!!!!!!!!

Race is so stupid as a biological "thing"

[daoneandonly]

The argument that being pro choice does not inherently mean you support abortion is ridiculous and down right insulting. If you're pro choice, you support a woman's (and her male counterpart's) choice to terminate her child, to end the pregnancy, hence, you support the act. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise.

Now you're the one being insulting. I don't particularly want to see someone throw their life away with drugs, but that doesn't mean that I will just focus on keeping certain drugs banned and judging anyone who breaks that arbitrary law. I don't particularly support suicides, yet sooooooo many suicides are done with firearms and there is rather significant evidence to suggest that if firearms aren't available people who commit suicide won't actually find another way yet that doesn't mean I support an outright ban on firearms everywhere. These issues are far more detailed than a simple ban/no ban, and the insulting part is when someone suggests that it is, and that supporting a ban means you're against the issue and that opposing the ban means you're for it. You have absolutely no idea how the world works if you think that's true.

Your examples are not apples to apples though. Certain drugs are needed for medicinal purposes, they can be abused yes and that's a shame, but the drugs that aren't, why shouldn't they be banned? Firearms are needed for police, military, and sadly protection by your average Joe if he feels he needs that extra security, and yes severla types of firearms should be banned as well, no question.

As I said multiple times, abortion can be an unfortunate necessity in cases where the baby's life or the mother's life is in danger, or rape. Those are not choices the woman made, those are the crappiness of life in full effect. Now, oops we didn't mean to get pregnant let's abort, yes that's a choice, a choice that should be banned, should not be had, and as Ja Rule used to coin as his catchphrase, it's murder!

[daoneandonly]

Read on Twitter

?s=19


Pennsylvania was the linchpin of Donald Trump’s 2016 victory, but it could be ground zero of Democrats’ 2018 comeback. Not only are the incumbent Democratic senator and governor prohibitive favorites to win reelection, but Democrats could also pick up as many as a half-dozen congressional seats — roughly a quarter of the seats the party needs nationwide to win back the House.

Sweeping the swing districts in CA and NJ is roughly 1/2 the seats needed.

You don't have to look any further than our president to know that anything is possible in elections. With the House I see it very hard to see that everything will go the Republicans way - which is basically what needs to happen for them to hold the House.

I don't see a path where the Republicans can hold the majority post mid terms, but yeah like you said, anything can happen. Though I think if people just show up, it should be a done deal.

[dckingsfan]

... and help with taxes, as evidenced by my extra $200 a paycheck. it's nice to see money that I work for go to me, and not stuff like PP...

But that isn't actually what happened. The misaligned tax cuts are actually driving up the deficit which are going to squeeze all other programs that we need for growth (infrastructure, R&D, etc.). In the end, you will lose well more than that $200 in interest.

... my health coverage should not have went up 21% because of ACA...

Actually it didn't. It went up because neither party has address the cost drivers of healthcare. One should at least acknowledge and understand what is happening. I get that you didn't want to vote for Clinton. But Trump has only made things worse for you.

Cool that you got your choice for SCOTUS - kind of nice to rearrange the chairs on the Titanic.

[dckingsfan]

fivethirtyeight still has the Rs controlling the Senate.

[dckingsfan]

The argument that being pro choice does not inherently mean you support abortion is ridiculous and down right insulting. If you're pro choice, you support a woman's (and her male counterpart's) choice to terminate her child, to end the pregnancy, hence, you support the act. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise.

Now you're the one being insulting. I don't particularly want to see someone throw their life away with drugs, but that doesn't mean that I will just focus on keeping certain drugs banned and judging anyone who breaks that arbitrary law. I don't particularly support suicides, yet sooooooo many suicides are done with firearms and there is rather significant evidence to suggest that if firearms aren't available people who commit suicide won't actually find another way yet that doesn't mean I support an outright ban on firearms everywhere. These issues are far more detailed than a simple ban/no ban, and the insulting part is when someone suggests that it is, and that supporting a ban means you're against the issue and that opposing the ban means you're for it. You have absolutely no idea how the world works if you think that's true.

Dirt - this is an emotional argument not a logical arguement. He "feels" that anyone that doesn't want to ban abortions is a baby killer. There is no way to reason with that.

If someone believes you are a murder, they aren't going to listen to what you have to say.

[daoneandonly]

The argument that being pro choice does not inherently mean you support abortion is ridiculous and down right insulting. If you're pro choice, you support a woman's (and her male counterpart's) choice to terminate her child, to end the pregnancy, hence, you support the act. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise.

Now you're the one being insulting. I don't particularly want to see someone throw their life away with drugs, but that doesn't mean that I will just focus on keeping certain drugs banned and judging anyone who breaks that arbitrary law. I don't particularly support suicides, yet sooooooo many suicides are done with firearms and there is rather significant evidence to suggest that if firearms aren't available people who commit suicide won't actually find another way yet that doesn't mean I support an outright ban on firearms everywhere. These issues are far more detailed than a simple ban/no ban, and the insulting part is when someone suggests that it is, and that supporting a ban means you're against the issue and that opposing the ban means you're for it. You have absolutely no idea how the world works if you think that's true.

Dirt - this is an emotional argument not a logical arguement. He "feels" that anyone that doesn't want to ban abortions is a baby killer. There is no way to reason with that.

If someone believes you are a murder, they aren't going to listen to what you have to say.

Not necessarily. People who have legislative power and advance their pro choice agenda, in cases of nothing more than an accidental pregnancy, as well as the couples that actually willing to do it, yes they are murderers.

Being pro choice in that scenario doe snot make one a murderer, just supporters of it.

[dckingsfan]

Now you're the one being insulting. I don't particularly want to see someone throw their life away with drugs, but that doesn't mean that I will just focus on keeping certain drugs banned and judging anyone who breaks that arbitrary law. I don't particularly support suicides, yet sooooooo many suicides are done with firearms and there is rather significant evidence to suggest that if firearms aren't available people who commit suicide won't actually find another way yet that doesn't mean I support an outright ban on firearms everywhere. These issues are far more detailed than a simple ban/no ban, and the insulting part is when someone suggests that it is, and that supporting a ban means you're against the issue and that opposing the ban means you're for it. You have absolutely no idea how the world works if you think that's true.

Dirt - this is an emotional argument not a logical arguement. He "feels" that anyone that doesn't want to ban abortions is a baby killer. There is no way to reason with that.

If someone believes you are a murder, they aren't going to listen to what you have to say.

Not necessarily. People who have legislative power and advance their pro choice agenda, in cases of nothing more than an accidental pregnancy, as well as the couples that actually willing to do it, yes they are murderers.

Being pro choice in that scenario doe snot make one a murderer, just supporters of it.

And there you have it... your definition is that they are abetting a crime. You can't have any kind of discussion with them. They are criminals. They aren't legislators doing the will of the majority. They should be held to your standard.

And of course, it also allows you not to have to think about the poor legislative effort coming from your tribe. After all, they are with you on your issue.

[gtn130]

When and how did he excuse it? I'm not a Trump apologist, but last I heard he said there will be hell to pay if Saudis are found guilty

Um, if you read his full quote he doesn't acknowledge they even did it.

As of this moment, they deny it, and they deny it vehemently. Could it be them? Yes.

^ That's not a strong reaction! The rest of the world is condemning SA for doing this - CEOs are pulling out of the SA investment conference next week. Meanwhile, Trump is hemming and hawing when he has the entire US intelligence apparatus feeding him information.

Whereas Hilalry, the champion for women, had no issue with her named foundation taking money from them, who just released a propaganda video patting themselves on the back for letting women drive, yeah wow, they come a long way, they just let women drive now.

Why. The. ****. Does. This. Matter.

Hillary isn't President. Hillary never sidestepped a WaPo journalist being murdered by SA.

You seem to think that because one person does a bad thing, someone else doing a bad thing is now somehow not so bad. Stop doing this.

[daoneandonly]

Whereas Hilalry, the champion for women, had no issue with her named foundation taking money from them, who just released a propaganda video patting themselves on the back for letting women drive, yeah wow, they come a long way, they just let women drive now.

Why. The. ****. Does. This. Matter.

Hillary isn't President. Hillary never sidestepped a WaPo journalist being murdered by SA.

You seem to think that because one person does a bad thing, someone else doing a bad thing is now somehow not so bad. Stop doing this.[/quote]

It matters because America gave us 2 terrible, horrific, vile candidates to choose from in the general election, so I as many ppl felt stuck, we had to vote for one of these historically bad candidates, I voted for who I felt was the better of the 2 options.

[stilldropin20]

When and how did he excuse it? I'm not a Trump apologist, but last I heard he said there will be hell to pay if Saudis are found guilty

Um, if you read his full quote he doesn't acknowledge they even did it.

As of this moment, they deny it, and they deny it vehemently. Could it be them? Yes.

^ That's not a strong reaction! The rest of the world is condemning SA for doing this - CEOs are pulling out of the SA investment conference next week. Meanwhile, Trump is hemming and hawing when he has the entire US intelligence apparatus feeding him information.

Whereas Hilalry, the champion for women, had no issue with her named foundation taking money from them, who just released a propaganda video patting themselves on the back for letting women drive, yeah wow, they come a long way, they just let women drive now.

Why. The. ****. Does. This. Matter.

Hillary isn't President. Hillary never sidestepped a WaPo journalist being murdered by SA.

You seem to think that because one person does a bad thing, someone else doing a bad thing is now somehow not so bad. Stop doing this.

trump is not a petulant child that instantly over reacts. he makes moves 2 and 3 years in advance. Sometimes decades in advance. He understands that it takes years to put good deals deals together. People in a hurry often get bad deals. he campaigned on trade reform in 2015. and in 2108 is enacting that trade reform.

This whole thing happened 2 weeks ago. We barely have an investigation. Kashoogi was a bad actor for decades. good friend of osama bin laden. good friend and players involved in saudi and turkish government.


By western standards the entire middle east, israel aside, are all bad actors. They all suppress women's and childrens rights and have kings and military leaders that absorb most of the wealth and the poor in their countries do not have rights. Slaverly basically still exists in the entire middle east.

So they killed off one of their own? again? The turks are killing off hundred of thousands of their own people over the past decade. So are the syrians. The iraqi's have as well. Israel aside, The UAE and Saudis are the closest thing to an ally. What do you want to do?

I mean this is nothing more than another one of the thousands of cuts the left is and has been trying to inflict on trump since he won. Its now trumps fault that saudi killed fashoogi. And if it isn't trump's fault then trump is inadequate as a leader because CNN right now is telling us that Trump doesn't seem like a commander in chief because he doesn't know what happened yet. Like its a problem a whole 8 days later to say "we'll get to the bottom of this" and 14 days later dispatching Sec of State. Then CNN is compalaining that Pompeo is initially "smiling" while shaking hands with the king of Saudi Arabia.

Sorry libs. But this is Trump's call. Not yours. Sorry CNN it's never been your call. Sorry, but you lost the election. Donald trump is smarter than all of you combined. Trump has better ideas. better negotiation skills. And if the time comes to get firm with a foreign country we have all found that Trump not only knows how to be firm but is firm in ways that are actually effective. <--see chine. See mexico. See canada. And speaking of mexico, I do not doubt for one single second that trump will find a way to use money, funds, or resources from mexico to pay for at least some if not most of the wall.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Dirt - this is an emotional argument not a logical arguement. He "feels" that anyone that doesn't want to ban abortions is a baby killer. There is no way to reason with that.

If someone believes you are a murder, they aren't going to listen to what you have to say.

It's an emotional argument and not a logical one, agreed. I feel there is a bit more to it, though, in the sense that the emotion isn't centered just on the one issue, but also centered around a certain sense of superiority which is reinforced by making the issue effectively into a yes/no question when life simply doesn't work that way. Having such a superior high ground, it becomes inconceivable that anyone who isn't on that same high ground could possibly be reliable in a position of authority. That's a dangerous game on any issue. With abortion, it has effectively derailed most of the discussion around any other potential issues in politics and is to the point where people will flat out parrot things that are clearly not true, even knowing the hypocrisy of their own words though they will never admit it, as they still have that high ground. It turns what is an opportunity to help everyone into a zero sum game, which is why it is so dangerous, and also why it's so commonly found to be such a useful political tool.

[gtn130]

SD, no one cares man. You're banging out 10 paragraphs of nonsense that goes straight into the void. Nobody reads it