Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #21

    Apr 23, 2019, 04:17 AM
    Never forget the real scandal here: The world’s most powerful law enforcement/intelligence apparatus was weaponized to sabotage a rival presidential campaign & then to try to oust the duly elected president of the U.S. Everything else is just noise.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #22

    Apr 23, 2019, 05:36 AM
    Yes but they can't be very powerful, they didn't succeed
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #23

    Apr 23, 2019, 06:15 AM
    The real threat is Russia helped the dufus, and he wants them to help him again, and why wouldn't they? It worked so well before.
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,020, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #24

    Apr 23, 2019, 11:45 AM
    The real threat is Russia helped the dufus, and he wants them to help him again, and why wouldn't they? It worked so well before.
    Mr. Mueller disagreed with you.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #25

    Apr 23, 2019, 01:30 PM
    Why would they want Trump. He has done more than any President since Reagan to stall Russian ambitions . What we need is another Church Committee type of Congressional investigation looking into the FBI and CIA behavior .The Church committee looked into civil rights abuses by the intelligence ,law enforcement ,and national security agencies . We know that this originated at the top levels of the agencies and there was little involvement in the rank and file of the agencies . We also know how the MSM colluded to report leaked information by the leaders of the agencies for the purpose of providing these agencies with secondary confirmation of the misinformation these agencies were peddling.
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #26

    Apr 23, 2019, 03:11 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by jlisenbe View Post
    Mr. Mueller disagreed with you.
    According to his report, Russia worked on many levels against Hillary and for the dufus, and Vlad admitted he favored the dufus as prez in Helsinki. Not sure what you were reading.

    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    Why would they want Trump. He has done more than any President since Reagan to stall Russian ambitions . What we need is another Church Committee type of Congressional investigation looking into the FBI and CIA behavior .The Church committee looked into civil rights abuses by the intelligence ,law enforcement ,and national security agencies . We know that this originated at the top levels of the agencies and there was little involvement in the rank and file of the agencies . We also know how the MSM colluded to report leaked information by the leaders of the agencies for the purpose of providing these agencies with secondary confirmation of the misinformation these agencies were peddling.
    Has he? The dufus hasn't taken on inch of ground from Vlad, and has seceded Syria to the Russian/Iranian coalition. We can argue about your conspiracy theory, about misinformation, and that fake news meme the dufus spouts, but until you get to a court or OFFICIAL investigation the dufus and you have squat. Less than you had on Hillary for sure.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #27

    Apr 24, 2019, 07:45 PM
    I think the theme of "I was robbed" has become old and tired, Hilliary was not robbed, certainly not by any small influence the Russians might have been able to exert. What won for Trump was a neglected electorate and an antiquated system of selecting a President.
    waltero's Avatar
    waltero Posts: 620, Reputation: 5
    Senior Member
     
    #28

    Apr 24, 2019, 11:33 PM
    What won for Trump was a neglected electorate and an antiquated system of selecting a President.
    Another reason is distrust of people and parties who hold power for too long.

    There are very good explanations for why voters rarely choose a president from the same party for three consecutive terms. You would have to go all the way back to 1836 to find a Democrat being elected to succeed afrom the same party (excluding Franklin Delano Roosevelt)...it was over before it began. Hillary and Obama lost because they were being ignant...too many mistakes made through being overconfident.

    When I heard Obama snidely speak "Donald Trump will not be President"...(why would he say that?) it could only mean one thing, Trump would be President. It was as if he set himself (Hillary) up for failure.




    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #29

    Apr 24, 2019, 11:40 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by waltero View Post
    Another reason is distrust of people and parties who hold power for too long.

    There are very good explanations for why voters rarely choose a president from the same party for three consecutive terms. You would have to go all the way back to 1836 to find a Democrat being elected to succeed afrom the same party (excluding Franklin Delano Roosevelt)...it was over before it began. Hillary and Obama lost because they were being ignant...too many mistakes made through being overconfident.



    Yes, eight years is long enough for any party to lose momentum. Their program has been largely implemented by then and if not, it isn't going to happen. Mistakes have become very apparent in that time
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,020, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #30

    Apr 25, 2019, 03:59 AM
    I think Trump won because HC was such a weak candidate.
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #31

    Apr 25, 2019, 07:33 AM
    I think Waltero makes a great point as the incumbent party rarely gets a third consecutive term as president, Bush senior being my only recollection and he got dumped after one term. Social media has greatly changed the game though, and made us exploitable, and gives EVERYBODY a way to coalesce around new ideas and concept. Works the same way for the dastardly as the good guys.

    Looking forward to the next vote.
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,020, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #32

    Apr 25, 2019, 07:42 AM
    Works the same way for the dastardly as the good guys.
    There are good guys??
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #33

    Apr 25, 2019, 09:23 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by jlisenbe View Post
    There are good guys??
    You're a good guy... aren't you? I think so, despite our differences of opinion and candidate choices.
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,020, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #34

    Apr 25, 2019, 10:56 AM
    You're a good guy... aren't you? I think so, despite our differences of opinion and candidate choices.
    I feel the same way about you. As to pres candidates, I don't know of anyone I would refer to as having good character in either party other than Dr. Ben Carson, but he is not a candidate this time around.
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #35

    Apr 25, 2019, 11:58 AM
    LOL, I'm comfortable with Biden, Warren, Harris, and Kobashar, but Carson is a fish out of water that just doesn't impress me. Even the highly popular Saunders hasn't shown the pragmatism I favor to implement a reasonable plan in my estimation. I share his ideas, but the devil is in the details.
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,020, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #36

    Apr 25, 2019, 12:58 PM
    Well, if you are just looking at policies and not so much character, I'll stick with Trump. Kind of a low character guy, but then so were (in my view) HC and Obama. But he has hit on 2 of my three key issues. 1. healthy economy 2. nominate SC judges who believe in the Constitution. 3. balance the budget.

    He has blown it on #3, which is huge, but then Obama went 0/3 and HC was too connected with his policies for me to consider.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #37

    Apr 25, 2019, 01:35 PM
    I think the theme of "I was robbed" has become old and tired, Hilliary was not robbed, certainly not by any small influence the Russians might have been able to exert. What won for Trump was a neglected electorate and an antiquated system of selecting a President.
    agree except there is nothing antiquated in the way we select the President .
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #38

    Apr 25, 2019, 01:48 PM
    I don't have the same bias against liberal judges versus conservative ones as you do, but the dirty trick by Slick Mitch bummed me out, even though I have nothing against Gorsuch at all. Every time I review some of these picks being pushed through now though, I cringe, as well as the fed picks and the cabinets. Too many scandals for me followed by resignations to avoid investigations. I worry when you let big corporations police themselves and a congress too dumb to even know what they're doing.

    I tend to think long term strategy that quick fixes that can bite you later. I mean good grief we handled the Ebola and Zika outbreaks and we can't get a handle on Measles? Something is very wrong here lately.
    jlisenbe's Avatar
    jlisenbe Posts: 5,020, Reputation: 157
    Uber Member
     
    #39

    Apr 25, 2019, 02:10 PM
    agree except there is nothing antiquated in the way we select the President .
    Exactly correct.

    a congress too dumb to even know what they're doing.
    I would tend to agree with that, even though I must point out the congress is controlled by democrats.
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #40

    Apr 25, 2019, 02:24 PM
    Explain the factual accuracy of that last line please.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

The Mueller indictments [ 937 Answers ]

Inspector Clouseau brought down a bakers dozen of indictments yesterday against Ruskies working out of St Petersburg .(taking bets right now on the chances of ever getting those charged onto US soil).The charge is that they dressed up like American snowflakes in pajamas, in their mother's basement...

Mueller climatrol 137-115 [ 1 Answers ]

I have a Mueller Climatrol Model 137-115. I came home at lunch the fan was blowing. When I set the thermostat to 70 the burners kick on and heat up and it heats the house. When the house gets to desired temperature the fans stays on, burners go off. I've changed thermostat, same thing...

Mueller climatrol motor? [ 0 Answers ]

I have a Climatroloil forced furnace, MN.227-1-110, SN. 2EZ. 88000 BTU per hr. It has stopped working. The blower will work if I turn it on manual, but if I put it on auto nothing works. I am told I need a motor for it. Can anyone tell me where I would fine one and about how much it will cost. ...

How to restart a mueller furnace? [ 0 Answers ]

I ran out of oil. After getting oil in the tank I can't get the furnace to work. I've looked all over for a reset button, but there isn't one.

Mueller Climatrol [ 4 Answers ]

I have bunch of old Units labeled: Mueller Climatrol Recessed Summner Conditioner Model 910-100 10500 BTU oer hour 230V Milwaukee WI


View more questions Search