Jump to content

Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 14.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I feel this needs to be shared.  

You remember 4, 8, and 12 years ago a candidate going so far beyond the pale that their own party disavowed their statements? You remember former Presidents from the candidate's own party refusing to

Posted Images

Reminded of this recently:

 

Quote

“In light of the contentious presidential election already well underway, my colleagues and I on the Judiciary Committee have already given our advice and consent on this issue: We will not have any hearings or votes on President Obama’s pick [for the Supreme Court]".
-Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), March 16. 2016

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Tom Cowan said:

This one, we have 2 more. Right?  duck and cover!

 

Maybe.  I skipped it.  I think my brain actively chose to reject that it was gonna happen because it figured it was going to be a horror.
Looked at the recaps...a very common theme was, if it's going to be that kind of debacle, what's the point of having them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

[A] very common theme was, if it's going to be that kind of debacle, what's the point of having them?

 

I know this is a rhetorical question, but...

 

Trump and the GOP want to have them to rile up the base and make sure that Republican voters are properly motivated/indoctrinated/cowed/terrified for Election Day.

 

Biden and the Democrats want to have them to expose Donald Trump for the [REDACTED] he is and to try to put across a message of hope for sanity in government.

 

In any event, the debates aren't going to show us anything we didn't already know--except maybe that Joe Biden is more capable that he's made out to be--and are unlikely to change anyone's minds.

 

And that bring us back to the rhetorical question: What's the point of having them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

 

Maybe.  I skipped it.  I think my brain actively chose to reject that it was gonna happen because it figured it was going to be a horror.
Looked at the recaps...a very common theme was, if it's going to be that kind of debacle, what's the point of having them?

 

Dark comedy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ten minutes into the debate, my brother said in disgust, "This is a farce." 45 minutes in, I decided there was no point in continuing to watch the farce, because it was truly not funny.

 

What burns me most is that to his loyal base, Trump's bullying, blustering, talking over Biden and Wallace probably looked "STRONG!" I am sure that right-wing media are gloating that Trump ate Biden's lunch, and Wallace's too.

 

I don't think there's any point in watching the remaining two debates unless the moderator is given a mute button to use on interruptions.

 

Dean Shomshak

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pariah said:

Mute button ... bullhorn ... shock collar ... something.

 

 

If those are required, then what's the point?  
Say you had a mute button.  What's gonna happen?  Trump is gonna bombast, blast, and/or lie.  Biden is going to be forced to waste his time countering Trump's BS.  The actual amount of policy elucidation will still be VERY small.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Pariah said:

 

I know this is a rhetorical question, but...

 

Trump and the GOP want to have them to rile up the base and make sure that Republican voters are properly motivated/indoctrinated/cowed/terrified for Election Day.

 

Biden and the Democrats want to have them to expose Donald Trump for the [REDACTED] he is and to try to put across a message of hope for sanity in government.

 

In any event, the debates aren't going to show us anything we didn't already know--except maybe that Joe Biden is more capable that he's made out to be--and are unlikely to change anyone's minds.

 

And that bring us back to the rhetorical question: What's the point of having them?

 

Trump won't cancel them.

 

If Biden cancels them, Trump will spin it that Biden is afraid to face him, or at least too sleepy to face him.

 

So the only point is to prove that Biden is neither afraid nor asleep.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DShomshak said:

What burns me most is that to his loyal base, Trump's bullying, blustering, talking over Biden and Wallace probably looked "STRONG!" I am sure that right-wing media are gloating that Trump ate Biden's lunch, and Wallace's too.

 

 

That's because those people eat Fox News.  This is why I've blasted the right news media for years now.  Trump is a symptom of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TrickstaPriest said:

That's because those people eat Fox News.  This is why I've blasted the right news media for years now.  Trump is a symptom of them.

 

9 minutes ago, archer said:

Feedback loop.

 

You're two for two, gentlemen. What else have you got?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Portland's sheriff says Trump lied in the debate last night when he claimed the sheriff had endorsed him.

 

His tweet, "In tonight’s presidential debate the President said the “Portland Sheriff” supports him. As the Multnomah County Sheriff I have never supported Donald Trump and will never support him."

 

Portland is the county seat of Multnomah County.

 

The sheriff added in interviews, “Donald Trump has made my job a hell of a lot harder since he started talking about Portland, but I never thought he'd try to turn my wife against me!”

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/518900-sheriff-from-portland-quickly-refutes-trump-claim-he-had-offered

 

Nearby counties:
Pat Garrett, the sheriff of Washington County, ""Sheriff Garrett has not endorsed President Trump and does not intend on making any national endorsement"

 

A spokesperson for Clackamas County Sheriff Craig Roberts said, "Sheriff Roberts has not made any national endorsement."

 

https://www.kgw.com/article/news/politics/elections/debate-trump-claims-portland-sheriff-endorses-him/283-ba47d284-705b-4fb3-9360-3ec81c06fb97

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Pariah said:

You're two for two, gentlemen. What else have you got?

 

Nothing good?  :(

 

23 minutes ago, archer said:

His tweet, "In tonight’s presidential debate the President said the “Portland Sheriff” supports him. As the Multnomah County Sheriff I have never supported Donald Trump and will never support him."

 

The sheriff added in interviews, “Donald Trump has made my job a hell of a lot harder since he started talking about Portland, but I never thought he'd try to turn my wife against me!”

 

I appreciate you saying this, if nothing else it helps attack the constant rhetoric that 'the police are all for Trump no matter what' type garbage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...