Moderators: richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1025
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:08 pm

seb146 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
seb146 wrote:

You do understand, don't you, the most damning piece of evidence that Republicans are relying on is an interview on Larry King that names no one. There were other men in the Senate that had problems with sexual harassment at that time.


To quote a prominent Democratic senator:

Back to Videos
Sen. Hirono: Men Need To "Shut Up," Kavanaugh Accuser Needs To Be Believed And I Believe Her
Posted By Ian Schwartz
On Date September 18, 2018

Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) told men to "shut up and step up" when it comes to Brett Kavanaugh's sexual assault accusation. Asked whether her being one of four women on the Senate Judiciary Committee impacts the Kavanaugh confirmation proceedings, Senator Hirono says, "I just want to say to the men of this country: Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change."

https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/20 ... des-story/

Soon enough, I keep repeating, no politician is going to be good enough to run as Democrat, you guys have made your own grave with your standards.
"Not only do women like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed. They need to be believed," Hirono said. "We cannot continue the victimization and the smearing of someone like Dr. Ford."

"We have to create an environment where women can come forward and be heard and be listened to. I want to thank Dr. Ford. I commend her courage. I believe her," the Senator said.



Hirono told the media that she would "expect the members of the press" to "talk about how unfair" Kavanaugh's accuser is being treated at a press conference Tuesday evening.


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... e_her.html

Why can't Reade get the same benefit Ford got? Basically the standard set was that women should be believed no matter what. It turns out only certain women to certain men.


Why are Republicans always the ones to set the tone? More importantly, why do Republicans only support the accusers when it benefits them? Republicans want everyone to be like them, fine. Let's do it. Let's call Reade a liar and opportunist. Let's accuse her of making false statements at every turn. Republicans were not willing to listen to Ford for those reasons. So, let's be consistent. Seems fair. Or, go back and understand that Ford was telling the truth? Maybe then we will take this sudden change of heart by Republicans seriously. But, right now, we can not and we should not. Republicans did not want us to believe Ford then but want us to believe Reade now. Republicans laughed and mocked and shut down Ford then but demand Reade be given her day. At least be consistent.

Again: Democrats are being consistent. There are holes in her story. She had all these years of #metoo to come forward but she did not. Until now. And the most crucial piece of evidence is a phone call to Larry King.

But, Republicans and the MAGA cult members have made up their minds. What good would it do? State media sides with Reade before any testimony or trial. Biden is already guilty on all charges.


Nope, I am not saying I believe her, nor I am telling you to believe her. All I am saying, the Democrats and the democrat media made a standard. And they forced us to accept that standard. Now that almost the same situation is happening but in their side, they are not abiding by their own set standards.

So lets stop pretending we care about things, because we don't. Its all politics, that's the reality. Look how the democratic nomination ended, all white men, wealthy. Democrats are the most hypocrites in the US political scene. Not saying republican's aren't, but your standards which you always set, can't even be met when it happens on your side.
“It’s easy to confuse ‘what is’ with ‘what ought to be,’ especially when ‘what is’ has worked out in your favor.” Tyrion Lannister
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 2225
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:11 pm

UnMAXed wrote:
stl07 wrote:
I still can't understand how trump's klan is calling Biden a sex predator over an accusation but refuses to see any wrong in Trump's proven sexual misconduct

Actually it is eight women accusing him, not just one.
Say their names:
-Lucy Flores
-Amy Lappos
-D.J Hill
-Caitlyn Caruso
-Ally Coll
-Sofie Karasek
-Vail Kohnert-Yount
-Tara Reade

Oh sorry, maybe I should list out all the accusations against Trump, which would exceed the post limit on a.net.
Instead of typing in "mods", consider using the report function.
Love how every "travel blogger" says they will never fly AA/Ethihad again and then says it again and again on subsequent flights.
 
FTMCPIUS
Posts: 319
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2017 7:10 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Mon Apr 27, 2020 6:08 pm

seb146 wrote:
FTMCPIUS wrote:
seb146 wrote:

Yes. Yes it does.

Republicans DEMANDED Kavanaugh be found innocent and there was no basis because the evidence was paper thin. Just like this accusation. There was some call in show who said something about a Senator. So? Which one? There are 100 Senators. There were 100 Senators in 1993. Prove it was Biden. One caller one time to one show said no names. Just that it was a Senator.

There were several women who came forward and accused Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh was accused of sexual assault many years ago. Biden was accused of sexual assault many years ago. What is the difference? A man accused of sexual assault vs. a man accused of sexual assault. Republicans insist they are completely different. So, how? How are they different?

Several 'invented' witnesses did come forward and accuse Kavanaugh, the most noteworthy one being Blasey Ford. You know, the over-prepared professor 'victim' with the well-practiced innocent little girl voice.

None of the witnesses were deemed credible, and not just by Republicans. The American public in general was understandably skeptical. You know that -- several links available. The fact that Republicans dismissed her (and others') accusations did not make those accusations true by default.

So, yes, Dems should DEMAND Biden be found innocent via a fair hearing (trial). What would be the problem with that? Seems fair to me.


"The American public in general" means Fox viewers and MAGA supporters because they had been seeing her accusations framed in the context of "she is a liar and opportunist and can not be trusted". No one is saying keep Biden's accuser quiet. Although, we do have precedent from the current leader of the Republican party.

So, how about this:

How about we all just start off by understanding Biden's accuser is lying. All she wants is money, all she wants is a moment in the sun. Let's start there. She is a liar. Just like with Ford. Frame all her testimony in that context. She is not credible at all. Just like Ford. Republicans love the "both sides do it" so, let's play that game. Both sides lie to get what they want. In this case, Republicans are lying to discredit Biden and make him look like a monster. Even though she is clearly lying. Just like Ford allegedly did.

We could not believe Ford because it happened so long ago and everyone was drunk and her memory is faulty but his is not. Likewise, we can not believe this accuser because it happened so long ago and there were a number of people there and her memory is faulty. Republicans suddenly want us to be on their side. So, let's do it.

You do understand, don't you, the most damning piece of evidence that Republicans are relying on is an interview on Larry King that names no one. There were other men in the Senate that had problems with sexual harassment at that time.


The American public "in general" meant anyone with an ounce of common sense and a belief in fairness. As mightily as the media tried to sway public opinion, those not gullible enough to see through that were in the majority. Perhaps not in the polls taken by the same pollsters -- polls that (by virtue of their targeting and nature of their questions) had HRC up by 4-6 points in the swing states she lost. I'm sure you agree that pollsters, regardless of their political bent, can and do employ clever methods in order to skew results in favor of their agenda.

OK, now let's start off by understanding Biden's accuser (and the others) is lying. Then, why is the Left so opposed to the same type of publicly broadcast scrutiny (in the form of hearing(s) that were held for Kavanaugh? Can you explain why this is not a fair approach to the matter?
 
stratosphere
Posts: 1727
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:45 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:46 pm

seb146 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
seb146 wrote:

You do understand, don't you, the most damning piece of evidence that Republicans are relying on is an interview on Larry King that names no one. There were other men in the Senate that had problems with sexual harassment at that time.


To quote a prominent Democratic senator:

Back to Videos
Sen. Hirono: Men Need To "Shut Up," Kavanaugh Accuser Needs To Be Believed And I Believe Her
Posted By Ian Schwartz
On Date September 18, 2018

Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) told men to "shut up and step up" when it comes to Brett Kavanaugh's sexual assault accusation. Asked whether her being one of four women on the Senate Judiciary Committee impacts the Kavanaugh confirmation proceedings, Senator Hirono says, "I just want to say to the men of this country: Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing for a change."

"Not only do women like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed. They need to be believed," Hirono said. "We cannot continue the victimization and the smearing of someone like Dr. Ford."

"We have to create an environment where women can come forward and be heard and be listened to. I want to thank Dr. Ford. I commend her courage. I believe her," the Senator said.



Hirono told the media that she would "expect the members of the press" to "talk about how unfair" Kavanaugh's accuser is being treated at a press conference Tuesday evening.


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... e_her.html

Why can't Reade get the same benefit Ford got? Basically the standard set was that women should be believed no matter what. It turns out only certain women to certain men.


Why are Republicans always the ones to set the tone? More importantly, why do Republicans only support the accusers when it benefits them? Republicans want everyone to be like them, fine. Let's do it. Let's call Reade a liar and opportunist. Let's accuse her of making false statements at every turn. Republicans were not willing to listen to Ford for those reasons. So, let's be consistent. Seems fair. Or, go back and understand that Ford was telling the truth? Maybe then we will take this sudden change of heart by Republicans seriously. But, right now, we can not and we should not. Republicans did not want us to believe Ford then but want us to believe Reade now. Republicans laughed and mocked and shut down Ford then but demand Reade be given her day. At least be consistent.

Again: Democrats are being consistent. There are holes in her story. She had all these years of #metoo to come forward but she did not. Until now. And the most crucial piece of evidence is a phone call to Larry King.

But, Republicans and the MAGA cult members have made up their minds. What good would it do? State media sides with Reade before any testimony or trial. Biden is already guilty on all charges.


Are you kidding me? " She had all these years to come forward" Did you just say that ? That is exactly what was said about Christine Blasey Ford she had over 30 years to come forward and did not. Not to mention the MSM looked under every rock and gave coverage to women that Avenatti brought forward like they had any credibility. The one thing Biden has in his favor well two things the MSM will look the other way and COVID-19 is eating up all the headlines right now.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21971
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:34 pm

stratosphere wrote:
seb146 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

To quote a prominent Democratic senator:



https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... e_her.html

Why can't Reade get the same benefit Ford got? Basically the standard set was that women should be believed no matter what. It turns out only certain women to certain men.


Why are Republicans always the ones to set the tone? More importantly, why do Republicans only support the accusers when it benefits them? Republicans want everyone to be like them, fine. Let's do it. Let's call Reade a liar and opportunist. Let's accuse her of making false statements at every turn. Republicans were not willing to listen to Ford for those reasons. So, let's be consistent. Seems fair. Or, go back and understand that Ford was telling the truth? Maybe then we will take this sudden change of heart by Republicans seriously. But, right now, we can not and we should not. Republicans did not want us to believe Ford then but want us to believe Reade now. Republicans laughed and mocked and shut down Ford then but demand Reade be given her day. At least be consistent.

Again: Democrats are being consistent. There are holes in her story. She had all these years of #metoo to come forward but she did not. Until now. And the most crucial piece of evidence is a phone call to Larry King.

But, Republicans and the MAGA cult members have made up their minds. What good would it do? State media sides with Reade before any testimony or trial. Biden is already guilty on all charges.


Are you kidding me? " She had all these years to come forward" Did you just say that ? That is exactly what was said about Christine Blasey Ford she had over 30 years to come forward and did not. Not to mention the MSM looked under every rock and gave coverage to women that Avenatti brought forward like they had any credibility. The one thing Biden has in his favor well two things the MSM will look the other way and COVID-19 is eating up all the headlines right now.


The "she had all these years" was good enough to attack and discredit Ford and make her completely unreliable when it came time to give her side of the story, why not now?

Reade had all this time to come forward. 2008 and 2012 as well as 2016. Any of those years, actually, since 2008. Righties are now all on board with #metoo when it comes to this one woman. I say you all should have been on board with #metoo from the start.

It is also curious to me that, if this did happen, there would have been paperwork or a complaint filed away somewhere that any right wing reporter would have found. Right wing reporters are good at "finding" things. They let other actual reporters do the actual work of investigating, but still. This incident allegedly happened in 1993? A former roommate heard that reports were filed

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/tara-rea ... 09554.html

HuffPost reports that "...in 1995 or 1996" Reade confided in her roommate. She doesn't know when, but let's just assume for the sake of righties heads not exploding. The HuffPost article continues that "(Reade) complained to several of Biden’s senior aides about the senator’s behavior toward her at the time and also filed a complaint with the Senate." Which means there would have been papers filed somewhere about this.

Again, Republicans were out in force assassinating Ford's character and story before she had a chance to give her side of the incident but, now, we must believe this one woman this one time because #metoo is so wonderful. After all the trash talk and hate Republicans, conservatives, MAGA, righties are/were heaping on #metoo.

Let Reade testify. But know that she is not credible by Republican's own rules. She had the cover of #metoo and sexual assault survivors and right wing attorneys that would gladly "take down" Biden. She had many, many, many, many opportunities. This was such a huge gift Republicans had been given as far back as 2008. But we heard nothing.

Or, maybe like Ford, she did not want to come forward? Let's not forget that Ford constantly said she did not want to come forward. She lodged an anonymous complaint at first. That was when the character assassinations began by the right.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/ ... ine-829983
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
apodino
Posts: 3749
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

Re: Biden's follies

Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:19 pm

seb146 wrote:
HuffPost reports that "...in 1995 or 1996" Reade confided in her roommate. She doesn't know when, but let's just assume for the sake of righties heads not exploding. The HuffPost article continues that "(Reade) complained to several of Biden’s senior aides about the senator’s behavior toward her at the time and also filed a complaint with the Senate." Which means there would have been papers filed somewhere about this.

You are correct, however those papers are currently stored at the University of Delaware and are sealed. Biden is not allowing this to be unsealed, and the University is saying they will not let these records be unsealed until two years after Joe Biden retires from public service. Progressive media has been trying to get these unsealed to no avail.

I am going to ask you again Seb, why do you continue to give progressives the middle finger when it comes to this story? You keep pointing out that republicans are pushing this story when it is not true. It is progressives who are pushing this story. So are all these progressives wrong to want this story to be heard? Why are you trying to discredit all these progressives?
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:29 pm

apodino wrote:
seb146 wrote:
HuffPost reports that "...in 1995 or 1996" Reade confided in her roommate. She doesn't know when, but let's just assume for the sake of righties heads not exploding. The HuffPost article continues that "(Reade) complained to several of Biden’s senior aides about the senator’s behavior toward her at the time and also filed a complaint with the Senate." Which means there would have been papers filed somewhere about this.

You are correct, however those papers are currently stored at the University of Delaware and are sealed. Biden is not allowing this to be unsealed, and the University is saying they will not let these records be unsealed until two years after Joe Biden retires from public service. Progressive media has been trying to get these unsealed to no avail.

I am going to ask you again Seb, why do you continue to give progressives the middle finger when it comes to this story? You keep pointing out that republicans are pushing this story when it is not true. It is progressives who are pushing this story. So are all these progressives wrong to want this story to be heard? Why are you trying to discredit all these progressives?


Exactly. It's Bernie's people that are much louder on this front especially on Twitter.
They were tossed away again and this time vs a guy that is probably the weakest candidate in US history.
Bernie would do much better if not best against Trump. DNC will have to rig the whole thing to make Joe my last name is Doe win.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2336
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 2:02 am

I have no idea if Biden did anything wrong with these women and I haven't commented on it. But it shows just what hypocrites the democrats are. They constantly cried "believe all women" during the Kavanaugh hearings but we haven't heard a peep out of them with Biden. When are they going to apologize to Kavanaugh for putting him through hell without a shred of evidence?
 
NIKV69
Topic Author
Posts: 13316
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 11:57 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
I have no idea if Biden did anything wrong with these women and I haven't commented on it. But it shows just what hypocrites the democrats are. They constantly cried "believe all women" during the Kavanaugh hearings but we haven't heard a peep out of them with Biden. When are they going to apologize to Kavanaugh for putting him through hell without a shred of evidence?


Apologize? Evidience? Those concepts those play in the Pelosi world. It's politics and winning seats and elections by any cost.
I am the Googlizer!!!
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 2:06 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
I have no idea if Biden did anything wrong with these women and I haven't commented on it. But it shows just what hypocrites the democrats are. They constantly cried "believe all women" during the Kavanaugh hearings but we haven't heard a peep out of them with Biden. When are they going to apologize to Kavanaugh for putting him through hell without a shred of evidence?


Apologize? Evidience? Those concepts those play in the Pelosi world. It's politics and winning seats and elections by any cost.


Here's the dilemma. Right now, 2020 is a choice between Trump and Biden. So I think we should give all accusers an opportunity to come forward and share their stories about run-ins with either of these men. Let's examine all of the accusations thoroughly. If we do that, I promise you we will hear Trump's name a whole lot more than Biden's.

It begs the question, if you are a Trump supporter, are past sexual transgressions really something you want to bring to the forefront?
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 2:18 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
There is no way we will have that many deaths. 4400 dead now leads me to believe we will have at worst 10 to 20 thousand as worst case and I feel it will be less. As for unemployment depends on the bounce back don't forget once we get the all clear people will go overboard with the vacationing etc and I think we will get a good comeback. Remains to be seen but at present I think Biden is unelectable. He is out of it, can't function without his wife by his side, creepy and can't be trusted to finish a term so the US will reject him by the same electoral count as Hillary probably.


Whoops. I wonder if the rest of your predictions will be as accurate as this one.....
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 3:30 pm

2122M wrote:
NIKV69 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
I have no idea if Biden did anything wrong with these women and I haven't commented on it. But it shows just what hypocrites the democrats are. They constantly cried "believe all women" during the Kavanaugh hearings but we haven't heard a peep out of them with Biden. When are they going to apologize to Kavanaugh for putting him through hell without a shred of evidence?


Apologize? Evidience? Those concepts those play in the Pelosi world. It's politics and winning seats and elections by any cost.


Here's the dilemma. Right now, 2020 is a choice between Trump and Biden. So I think we should give all accusers an opportunity to come forward and share their stories about run-ins with either of these men. Let's examine all of the accusations thoroughly. If we do that, I promise you we will hear Trump's name a whole lot more than Biden's.

It begs the question, if you are a Trump supporter, are past sexual transgressions really something you want to bring to the forefront?


So basically a douche bag and illiterate that is trying to do something (you simply can't deny him that) vs somebody that falls asleep on live broadcast, has serious memory issues, also appears to be a douche vs women, changes positions depending on where wind blows, is in office for 40 years, had his fingers in several wars that led to global crisis and millions of people relocated with many lost lives and is one of the people that led US to the shit show it is now by selling the country since the 80s.
Lesser evil is Trump as crazy as it sounds. Logically speaking.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 3:58 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
NIKV69 wrote:

Apologize? Evidience? Those concepts those play in the Pelosi world. It's politics and winning seats and elections by any cost.


Here's the dilemma. Right now, 2020 is a choice between Trump and Biden. So I think we should give all accusers an opportunity to come forward and share their stories about run-ins with either of these men. Let's examine all of the accusations thoroughly. If we do that, I promise you we will hear Trump's name a whole lot more than Biden's.

It begs the question, if you are a Trump supporter, are past sexual transgressions really something you want to bring to the forefront?


So basically a douche bag and illiterate that is trying to do something (you simply can't deny him that) vs somebody that falls asleep on live broadcast also appears to be a douche vs women, changes positions depending on where wind blows, is in office for 40 years and is one of the people that led US to the shit show it is now by selling the country since the 80s.
Lesser evil is Trump as crazy as it sounds. Logically speaking.


Obviously Trump is you're preferred candidate and Biden is mine. We could go all day back and forth discussing their various shortcomings and strengths. But the last string of posts here is all about sexual assault allegations against Biden, so clearly a candidate's past sexual misconduct is of great interest to you. Do you want to re-hash all of Trumps sexual harassment issues? How about just re-playing the "grab 'em by the p**sy" tape a few times? Is attacking Biden based on the recent sexual harassment claims really a hill you want to die on?

I wouldn't focus to much on trustworthiness or mental acuity either. Trump is no all-star on those fronts.

Flip-flopping? How about Trump being an avid pro-choice advocate in the 90s? How about campaigning on keeping parts of Obamacare then acting to try and repeal it altogether? How about supporting the invasion of Iraq in the 90s and now claiming to have always been against it? How about promising stringent background checks after shootings in Parkland, Dayton and El Paso, then backing away from that any time there is an election close.

But if Trump is your guy, then Trump is your guy. Go out and do your best to re-elect him; a known compulsive liar who proud of his past sexual misconduct. Then you can get 4 more years of broken promises ("When I'm elected president I'll release my tax returns and never play golf!") and broken government (over 150 key federal position unfilled). But hey, at least he'll stand up for neo-nazis!
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:06 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

Here's the dilemma. Right now, 2020 is a choice between Trump and Biden. So I think we should give all accusers an opportunity to come forward and share their stories about run-ins with either of these men. Let's examine all of the accusations thoroughly. If we do that, I promise you we will hear Trump's name a whole lot more than Biden's.

It begs the question, if you are a Trump supporter, are past sexual transgressions really something you want to bring to the forefront?


So basically a douche bag and illiterate that is trying to do something (you simply can't deny him that) vs somebody that falls asleep on live broadcast also appears to be a douche vs women, changes positions depending on where wind blows, is in office for 40 years and is one of the people that led US to the shit show it is now by selling the country since the 80s.
Lesser evil is Trump as crazy as it sounds. Logically speaking.


Obviously Trump is you're preferred candidate and Biden is mine. We could go all day back and forth discussing their various shortcomings and strengths. But the last string of posts here is all about sexual assault allegations against Biden, so clearly a candidate's past sexual misconduct is of great interest to you. Do you want to re-hash all of Trumps sexual harassment issues? How about just re-playing the "grab 'em by the p**sy" tape a few times? Is attacking Biden based on the recent sexual harassment claims really a hill you want to die on?

I wouldn't focus to much on trustworthiness or mental acuity either. Trump is no all-star on those fronts.

Flip-flopping? How about Trump being an avid pro-choice advocate in the 90s? How about campaigning on keeping parts of Obamacare then acting to try and repeal it altogether? How about supporting the invasion of Iraq in the 90s and now claiming to have always been against it? How about promising stringent background checks after shootings in Parkland, Dayton and El Paso, then backing away from that any time there is an election close.

But if Trump is your guy, then Trump is your guy. Go out and do your best to re-elect him; a known compulsive liar who proud of his past sexual misconduct. Then you can get 4 more years of broken promises ("When I'm elected president I'll release my tax returns and never play golf!") and broken government (over 150 key federal position unfilled). But hey, at least he'll stand up for neo-nazis!


I actually wouldn't mind all allegations to receive full treatment.
Rich man being rich vs top rich politician being a top rich politician.
You know, that kind from the ground all stuff they did for the past 20 years and that includes potential benefits coming from their respective positions. Family members included.

Also Trump was never "my guy" till NY cancelled the primary. Lesser evil.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:26 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
You know, that kind from the ground all stuff they did for the past 20 years and that includes potential benefits coming from their respective positions. Family members included.


umm.. what?

PixelPilot wrote:
Also Trump was never "my guy" till NY cancelled the primary. Lesser evil.


Yea, I'll call BS on that. A common Trump Troll tactic is to pretend to be a potential Sanders supporter that is going over to Trump now because of Biden. That and your tenuous grasp on the English language (see confusion above) have all the signs of a Trump Troll at work. You'll deny it, as you should, but I call BS.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:36 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
You know, that kind from the ground all stuff they did for the past 20 years and that includes potential benefits coming from their respective positions. Family members included.


umm.. what?

PixelPilot wrote:
Also Trump was never "my guy" till NY cancelled the primary. Lesser evil.


Yea, I'll call BS on that. A common Trump Troll tactic is to pretend to be a potential Sanders supporter that is going over to Trump now because of Biden. That and your tenuous grasp on the English language (see confusion above) have all the signs of a Trump Troll at work. You'll deny it, as you should, but I call BS.


What what? I real inquiry into their lives. Investigation to show their true character and shed light on the things they did and how many lives it affected and in which way. That's what. Or all of a sudden you changed your mind and you wouldn't want that?

As for the second part call it as you like. Your mind was already made up long time ago. Also calling me a trump troll is typical when you run out of steam and real arguments. Only thing you got left is to try and insult as everything else you have has no merit / essence. Just emotions. TDS.
Last edited by PixelPilot on Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:45 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
You know, that kind from the ground all stuff they did for the past 20 years and that includes potential benefits coming from their respective positions. Family members included.


umm.. what?

PixelPilot wrote:
Also Trump was never "my guy" till NY cancelled the primary. Lesser evil.


Yea, I'll call BS on that. A common Trump Troll tactic is to pretend to be a potential Sanders supporter that is going over to Trump now because of Biden. That and your tenuous grasp on the English language (see confusion above) have all the signs of a Trump Troll at work. You'll deny it, as you should, but I call BS.


What what? I real inquiry into their lives. That's what. Or all of a sudden we wouldn't want that?

As for the second part call it as you like. Your mind was already made up long time ago. Also calling me a trump troll is typical when you run out of steam and real arguments. Only thing you got left is to insult / incite as everything else you have has no merit / essence. Just emotions. TDS.


Who said I've run out of steam? Lets talk about family, since you brought it up. I assume you are talking about Hunter Biden and his position on the Ukrainian company he got due to political connections instead of qualifications. Fair enough. Did Joe Biden or Obama benefit at all? No. So if you want to make a big conspiracy out of that, by all means, do your best. Trump already tried and failed.

Now lets look at Trump.

He gave Ivanka a position in the White House as Sr. Advisor. Based on her qualifications? I think not....

Jared Kushner has been assigned to a variety of White House roles to which he in extremely unqualified for (or at least no more qualified than Biden was for his position).

Of course, all of Trump's family still has private interests in fashion, real estate etc... So if you think there is a conflict of interests with Hunter Biden, you must be appalled at the Trump family ties.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21971
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:49 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
I have no idea if Biden did anything wrong with these women and I haven't commented on it. But it shows just what hypocrites the democrats are. They constantly cried "believe all women" during the Kavanaugh hearings but we haven't heard a peep out of them with Biden. When are they going to apologize to Kavanaugh for putting him through hell without a shred of evidence?


So we should be attacking her and sending her threatening letters like Republicans did/do with Ford?
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:52 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

umm.. what?



Yea, I'll call BS on that. A common Trump Troll tactic is to pretend to be a potential Sanders supporter that is going over to Trump now because of Biden. That and your tenuous grasp on the English language (see confusion above) have all the signs of a Trump Troll at work. You'll deny it, as you should, but I call BS.


What what? I real inquiry into their lives. That's what. Or all of a sudden we wouldn't want that?

As for the second part call it as you like. Your mind was already made up long time ago. Also calling me a trump troll is typical when you run out of steam and real arguments. Only thing you got left is to insult / incite as everything else you have has no merit / essence. Just emotions. TDS.


Who said I've run out of steam? Lets talk about family, since you brought it up. I assume you are talking about Hunter Biden and his position on the Ukrainian company he got due to political connections instead of qualifications. Fair enough. Did Joe Biden or Obama benefit at all? No. So if you want to make a big conspiracy out of that, by all means, do your best. Trump already tried and failed.

Now lets look at Trump.

He gave Ivanka a position in the White House as Sr. Advisor. Based on her qualifications? I think not....

Jared Kushner has been assigned to a variety of White House roles to which he in extremely unqualified for (or at least no more qualified than Biden was for his position).

Of course, all of Trump's family still has private interests in fashion, real estate etc... So if you think there is a conflict of interests with Hunter Biden, you must be appalled at the Trump family ties.


One is pretty clear while other is being protected by the media. As with everything Biden related. All you have to do is look at the amount of coverage similar subjects get.
And if they both get buried that means one hand washes the other. Yeah, I would LOVE both of them to be investigated in real manner.
Lesser evil does not equal I support him. It's just that. Lesser evil.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:54 pm

seb146 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
I have no idea if Biden did anything wrong with these women and I haven't commented on it. But it shows just what hypocrites the democrats are. They constantly cried "believe all women" during the Kavanaugh hearings but we haven't heard a peep out of them with Biden. When are they going to apologize to Kavanaugh for putting him through hell without a shred of evidence?


So we should be attacking her and sending her threatening letters like Republicans did/do with Ford?


Of course not.
Then again, shouldn't dems say sorry for supporting Avenati like a movie star while he is a fraud?
They were championing his "sources" and hammering Kavanaugh as if they had all the facts while it was all another sham.

It goes both ways.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:57 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

What what? I real inquiry into their lives. That's what. Or all of a sudden we wouldn't want that?

As for the second part call it as you like. Your mind was already made up long time ago. Also calling me a trump troll is typical when you run out of steam and real arguments. Only thing you got left is to insult / incite as everything else you have has no merit / essence. Just emotions. TDS.


Who said I've run out of steam? Lets talk about family, since you brought it up. I assume you are talking about Hunter Biden and his position on the Ukrainian company he got due to political connections instead of qualifications. Fair enough. Did Joe Biden or Obama benefit at all? No. So if you want to make a big conspiracy out of that, by all means, do your best. Trump already tried and failed.

Now lets look at Trump.

He gave Ivanka a position in the White House as Sr. Advisor. Based on her qualifications? I think not....

Jared Kushner has been assigned to a variety of White House roles to which he in extremely unqualified for (or at least no more qualified than Biden was for his position).

Of course, all of Trump's family still has private interests in fashion, real estate etc... So if you think there is a conflict of interests with Hunter Biden, you must be appalled at the Trump family ties.


One is pretty clear while other is being protected by the media. As with everything Biden related. All you have to do is look at the amount of coverage similar subjects get.
And if they both get buried that means one hand washes the other. Yeah, I would LOVE both of them to be investigated in real manner.
Lesser evil does not equal I support him. It's just that. Lesser evil.


Maybe, just maybe,Trump's transgressions are pretty clear because the actually happened and were gross abuses of power with obvious conflict of interests as opposed to Biden's which are neutral at worst.

Both sides are not the same.....
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:00 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

Who said I've run out of steam? Lets talk about family, since you brought it up. I assume you are talking about Hunter Biden and his position on the Ukrainian company he got due to political connections instead of qualifications. Fair enough. Did Joe Biden or Obama benefit at all? No. So if you want to make a big conspiracy out of that, by all means, do your best. Trump already tried and failed.

Now lets look at Trump.

He gave Ivanka a position in the White House as Sr. Advisor. Based on her qualifications? I think not....

Jared Kushner has been assigned to a variety of White House roles to which he in extremely unqualified for (or at least no more qualified than Biden was for his position).

Of course, all of Trump's family still has private interests in fashion, real estate etc... So if you think there is a conflict of interests with Hunter Biden, you must be appalled at the Trump family ties.


One is pretty clear while other is being protected by the media. As with everything Biden related. All you have to do is look at the amount of coverage similar subjects get.
And if they both get buried that means one hand washes the other. Yeah, I would LOVE both of them to be investigated in real manner.
Lesser evil does not equal I support him. It's just that. Lesser evil.


Maybe, just maybe,Trump's transgressions are pretty clear because the actually happened and were gross abuses of power with obvious conflict of interests as opposed to Biden's which are neutral at worst.

Both sides are not the same.....


Absolutely, never said you are wrong. But also maybe Biden is way better at hidings his tracks due to a massive support of dems that are ok with helping him.
Or worse. They ARE the same and we're just fed the hate to focus on fighting instead of looking at what they are really doing.

Like I said. I would love a real investigation but it will never happen. To many people benefit from both of them to even give a crap about regular folks or truth for that matter.
Last edited by PixelPilot on Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21971
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:01 pm

apodino wrote:
seb146 wrote:
HuffPost reports that "...in 1995 or 1996" Reade confided in her roommate. She doesn't know when, but let's just assume for the sake of righties heads not exploding. The HuffPost article continues that "(Reade) complained to several of Biden’s senior aides about the senator’s behavior toward her at the time and also filed a complaint with the Senate." Which means there would have been papers filed somewhere about this.

You are correct, however those papers are currently stored at the University of Delaware and are sealed. Biden is not allowing this to be unsealed, and the University is saying they will not let these records be unsealed until two years after Joe Biden retires from public service. Progressive media has been trying to get these unsealed to no avail.

I am going to ask you again Seb, why do you continue to give progressives the middle finger when it comes to this story? You keep pointing out that republicans are pushing this story when it is not true. It is progressives who are pushing this story. So are all these progressives wrong to want this story to be heard? Why are you trying to discredit all these progressives?


I don't see "progressives" pushing this story. I see Republicans cheering this on and "progressives" and Democrats largely being quiet. I think progressives/Democrats are being quiet because, no matter what we say, Republicans will shout and cheer and whine and carry on about hypocrisy. I am not saying Reade's story is "not true" that is just you reading things into my posts. She told two people and filed a complaint with the Senate. Curiously, no one knew about this until now. I just find that odd. All this time Republicans were attacking the Obama administration and looking for any and all flaws and never ever came across this at all ever? Just seems odd.

They had every opportunity to file FOIA request for these documents, if the only copy is locked away at UD. BTW, according to sources, those records would be public two years after Biden's retirement from public life. Which, could have been 2019. It has been my experience dealing with HR that multiple copies of a complaint, no matter the complaint, are out there. It just seems odd.

Republicans should have found this and shouted it from the rooftops in 2008 and may have turned the election to favor McCain/Palin. It just seems odd.

As I have said before, no one is demanding Reade not testify. That is being read into these posts and this story. The Biden campaign has even said let her testify. And, oh, look, a founder of #metoo is even supporting Biden while, at the same time, saying Reade should testify. Just like everyone else.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/me-too-t ... gHXLgRgh4A
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:07 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

One is pretty clear while other is being protected by the media. As with everything Biden related. All you have to do is look at the amount of coverage similar subjects get.
And if they both get buried that means one hand washes the other. Yeah, I would LOVE both of them to be investigated in real manner.
Lesser evil does not equal I support him. It's just that. Lesser evil.


Maybe, just maybe,Trump's transgressions are pretty clear because the actually happened and were gross abuses of power with obvious conflict of interests as opposed to Biden's which are neutral at worst.

Both sides are not the same.....


Absolutely, never said you are wrong. But also maybe Biden is way better at hidings his tracks due to a massive support of dems that are ok with helping him.
Or worse. They ARE the same and we're just fed the hate to focus on fighting instead of looking at what they are really doing.

Like I said. I would love a real investigation but it will never happen. To many people benefit from both of them to even give a crap about regular folks or truth for that matter.


One is clearly worse than the other, so you explain it away by saying that Biden's faults are just hidden better (of course you offer no evidence of that). I can only assume that is because you really, really want Biden to be as bad as Trump, but sadly, he is not.....

Anyway, at least you've come a long way in just a short time from "lesser evil is Trump" to "Or worse, they are the same".
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:12 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

Maybe, just maybe,Trump's transgressions are pretty clear because the actually happened and were gross abuses of power with obvious conflict of interests as opposed to Biden's which are neutral at worst.

Both sides are not the same.....


Absolutely, never said you are wrong. But also maybe Biden is way better at hidings his tracks due to a massive support of dems that are ok with helping him.
Or worse. They ARE the same and we're just fed the hate to focus on fighting instead of looking at what they are really doing.

Like I said. I would love a real investigation but it will never happen. To many people benefit from both of them to even give a crap about regular folks or truth for that matter.


One is clearly worse than the other, so you explain it away by saying that Biden's faults are just hidden better (of course you offer no evidence of that). I can only assume that is because you really, really want Biden to be as bad as Trump, but sadly, he is not.....

Anyway, at least you've come a long way in just a short time from "lesser evil is Trump" to "Or worse, they are the same".


Yeah, hypothetical "MAYBE" like I used to counter your maybe in my case is considered as definitive :roll: lol. I can't.

And your opinion of Biden. Like you know that how?
Spending diners with him every weekend?
That's where you are wrong. You just believe but that doesn't equal as a fact.
Emotional approach vs rational.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:20 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

Absolutely, never said you are wrong. But also maybe Biden is way better at hidings his tracks due to a massive support of dems that are ok with helping him.
Or worse. They ARE the same and we're just fed the hate to focus on fighting instead of looking at what they are really doing.

Like I said. I would love a real investigation but it will never happen. To many people benefit from both of them to even give a crap about regular folks or truth for that matter.


One is clearly worse than the other, so you explain it away by saying that Biden's faults are just hidden better (of course you offer no evidence of that). I can only assume that is because you really, really want Biden to be as bad as Trump, but sadly, he is not.....

Anyway, at least you've come a long way in just a short time from "lesser evil is Trump" to "Or worse, they are the same".


Yeah, hypothetical "MAYBE" like I used to counter your maybe in my case is considered as definitive :roll: lol. I can't.

And your opinion of Biden. Like you know that how?
Spending diners with him every weekend?
That's where you are wrong. You just believe but that doesn't equal as a fact.
Emotional approach vs rational.


Biden has been in politics on a federal level in 1973. How many opportunities have opponents had to investigate him and any of his wrongdoings? He's been chair of the Judiciary and Foreign Relations committee, you don't think there have been republicans dying to take him down when he help those posts? And are you implying that GOP opposition research is so terrible they overlooked all these terrible things Biden has allegedly done when he was a VP candidate? Twice?

People that want to hurt him have had all the opportunities in the world. Either the GOP is completely inept (which I don't believe) or Biden's past is not nearly as checkered as you want it to be.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:22 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

One is clearly worse than the other, so you explain it away by saying that Biden's faults are just hidden better (of course you offer no evidence of that). I can only assume that is because you really, really want Biden to be as bad as Trump, but sadly, he is not.....

Anyway, at least you've come a long way in just a short time from "lesser evil is Trump" to "Or worse, they are the same".


Yeah, hypothetical "MAYBE" like I used to counter your maybe in my case is considered as definitive :roll: lol. I can't.

And your opinion of Biden. Like you know that how?
Spending diners with him every weekend?
That's where you are wrong. You just believe but that doesn't equal as a fact.
Emotional approach vs rational.


Biden has been in politics on a federal level in 1973. How many opportunities have opponents had to investigate him and any of his wrongdoings? He's been chair of the Judiciary and Foreign Relations committee, you don't think there have been republicans dying to take him down when he help those posts? And are you implying that GOP opposition research is so terrible they overlooked all these terrible things Biden has allegedly done when he was a VP candidate? Twice?

People that want to hurt him have had all the opportunities in the world. Either the GOP is completely inept (which I don't believe) or Biden's past is not nearly as checkered as you want it to be.


Or maybe till Trump one hand washed the other.
 
NIKV69
Topic Author
Posts: 13316
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 5:24 pm

2122M wrote:
NIKV69 wrote:
There is no way we will have that many deaths. 4400 dead now leads me to believe we will have at worst 10 to 20 thousand as worst case and I feel it will be less. As for unemployment depends on the bounce back don't forget once we get the all clear people will go overboard with the vacationing etc and I think we will get a good comeback. Remains to be seen but at present I think Biden is unelectable. He is out of it, can't function without his wife by his side, creepy and can't be trusted to finish a term so the US will reject him by the same electoral count as Hillary probably.


Whoops. I wonder if the rest of your predictions will be as accurate as this one.....


I think I am more glad the prediction that 250 thousand would be dead was wrong. As I hope all would be here.
I am the Googlizer!!!
 
stratosphere
Posts: 1727
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:45 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:31 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

One is clearly worse than the other, so you explain it away by saying that Biden's faults are just hidden better (of course you offer no evidence of that). I can only assume that is because you really, really want Biden to be as bad as Trump, but sadly, he is not.....

Anyway, at least you've come a long way in just a short time from "lesser evil is Trump" to "Or worse, they are the same".


Yeah, hypothetical "MAYBE" like I used to counter your maybe in my case is considered as definitive :roll: lol. I can't.

And your opinion of Biden. Like you know that how?
Spending diners with him every weekend?
That's where you are wrong. You just believe but that doesn't equal as a fact.
Emotional approach vs rational.


Biden has been in politics on a federal level in 1973. How many opportunities have opponents had to investigate him and any of his wrongdoings? He's been chair of the Judiciary and Foreign Relations committee, you don't think there have been republicans dying to take him down when he help those posts? And are you implying that GOP opposition research is so terrible they overlooked all these terrible things Biden has allegedly done when he was a VP candidate? Twice?

People that want to hurt him have had all the opportunities in the world. Either the GOP is completely inept (which I don't believe) or Biden's past is not nearly as checkered as you want it to be.


Oh it's probably plenty checkered it's just no one had the incentive or desire to look most likely because most politicians have skeletons in their own closets on both sides of the aisle. Kavanaugh was vetted in his various appointments to different positions but the left wingers came unhinged when it came to Trump appointing another conservative to the Supreme Court so they were bound and determined to dig up some kind of dirt on him to block his nomination. I am skeptical of any of these #me too women to be honest not that I don't believe them it's just too convenient to be brought to the surface at election or appointment time especially after 20 or 30 years. Biden has plenty of dirt to be found if they want to dig for it.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:39 pm

stratosphere wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

Yeah, hypothetical "MAYBE" like I used to counter your maybe in my case is considered as definitive :roll: lol. I can't.

And your opinion of Biden. Like you know that how?
Spending diners with him every weekend?
That's where you are wrong. You just believe but that doesn't equal as a fact.
Emotional approach vs rational.


Biden has been in politics on a federal level in 1973. How many opportunities have opponents had to investigate him and any of his wrongdoings? He's been chair of the Judiciary and Foreign Relations committee, you don't think there have been republicans dying to take him down when he help those posts? And are you implying that GOP opposition research is so terrible they overlooked all these terrible things Biden has allegedly done when he was a VP candidate? Twice?

People that want to hurt him have had all the opportunities in the world. Either the GOP is completely inept (which I don't believe) or Biden's past is not nearly as checkered as you want it to be.


Oh it's probably plenty checkered it's just no one had the incentive or desire to look most likely because most politicians have skeletons in their own closets on both sides of the aisle. Kavanaugh was vetted in his various appointments to different positions but the left wingers came unhinged when it came to Trump appointing another conservative to the Supreme Court so they were bound and determined to dig up some kind of dirt on him to block his nomination. I am skeptical of any of these #me too women to be honest not that I don't believe them it's just too convenient to be brought to the surface at election or appointment time especially after 20 or 30 years. Biden has plenty of dirt to be found if they want to dig for it.


You think 'they' didn't want to find it during his first 2 presidential runs? His 2 campaigns as VP? I mean, they dug up some trivial stuff in the past, but compared to everything Trump has done, the 'scandals' that derailed his '88 campaign look like nothing today.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:45 pm

2122M wrote:
stratosphere wrote:
2122M wrote:

Biden has been in politics on a federal level in 1973. How many opportunities have opponents had to investigate him and any of his wrongdoings? He's been chair of the Judiciary and Foreign Relations committee, you don't think there have been republicans dying to take him down when he help those posts? And are you implying that GOP opposition research is so terrible they overlooked all these terrible things Biden has allegedly done when he was a VP candidate? Twice?

People that want to hurt him have had all the opportunities in the world. Either the GOP is completely inept (which I don't believe) or Biden's past is not nearly as checkered as you want it to be.


Oh it's probably plenty checkered it's just no one had the incentive or desire to look most likely because most politicians have skeletons in their own closets on both sides of the aisle. Kavanaugh was vetted in his various appointments to different positions but the left wingers came unhinged when it came to Trump appointing another conservative to the Supreme Court so they were bound and determined to dig up some kind of dirt on him to block his nomination. I am skeptical of any of these #me too women to be honest not that I don't believe them it's just too convenient to be brought to the surface at election or appointment time especially after 20 or 30 years. Biden has plenty of dirt to be found if they want to dig for it.


You think 'they' didn't want to find it during his first 2 presidential runs? His 2 campaigns as VP? I mean, they dug up some trivial stuff in the past, but compared to everything Trump has done, the 'scandals' that derailed his '88 campaign look like nothing today.


At no time in history you had globally reaching social media & cancel culture fueled by foreign interests and money like you do now.
Close to a billion $$ donated to colleges by Russians and China and people wonder (some don't which is the crazy story here) how come young students need safe spaces after a democratic election and why communism is spreading.

There's no comparison. Not even close.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:51 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
stratosphere wrote:

Oh it's probably plenty checkered it's just no one had the incentive or desire to look most likely because most politicians have skeletons in their own closets on both sides of the aisle. Kavanaugh was vetted in his various appointments to different positions but the left wingers came unhinged when it came to Trump appointing another conservative to the Supreme Court so they were bound and determined to dig up some kind of dirt on him to block his nomination. I am skeptical of any of these #me too women to be honest not that I don't believe them it's just too convenient to be brought to the surface at election or appointment time especially after 20 or 30 years. Biden has plenty of dirt to be found if they want to dig for it.


You think 'they' didn't want to find it during his first 2 presidential runs? His 2 campaigns as VP? I mean, they dug up some trivial stuff in the past, but compared to everything Trump has done, the 'scandals' that derailed his '88 campaign look like nothing today.


At no time in history you had globally reaching social media & cancel culture fueled by foreign interests and money like you do now.
Close to a billion $$ donated to colleges by Russians and China and people wonder (some don't which is the crazy story here) how come young students need safe spaces after a democratic election and why communism is spreading.

There's no comparison. Not even close.


Yea, imagine if they had the internet and social media back in 2012 during his 2nd VP run.

Oh wait....
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:59 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

You think 'they' didn't want to find it during his first 2 presidential runs? His 2 campaigns as VP? I mean, they dug up some trivial stuff in the past, but compared to everything Trump has done, the 'scandals' that derailed his '88 campaign look like nothing today.


At no time in history you had globally reaching social media & cancel culture fueled by foreign interests and money like you do now.
Close to a billion $$ donated to colleges by Russians and China and people wonder (some don't which is the crazy story here) how come young students need safe spaces after a democratic election and why communism is spreading.

There's no comparison. Not even close.


Yea, imagine if they had the internet and social media back in 2012 during his 2nd VP run.

Oh wait....


They did but since they are part of the establishment they made sure it was fair.
Since Trump, right / conservative censorship is through the roof. Social media bias is insane.
All of this can be new to you only if you have your head in the sand because at this point of time simply fits your agenda.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 7:07 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

At no time in history you had globally reaching social media & cancel culture fueled by foreign interests and money like you do now.
Close to a billion $$ donated to colleges by Russians and China and people wonder (some don't which is the crazy story here) how come young students need safe spaces after a democratic election and why communism is spreading.

There's no comparison. Not even close.


Yea, imagine if they had the internet and social media back in 2012 during his 2nd VP run.

Oh wait....


They did but since they are part of the establishment they made sure it was fair.
Since Trump, right / conservative censorship is through the roof. Social media bias is insane.
All of this can be new to you only if you have your head in the sand because at this point of time simply fits your agenda.


I would argue that you think censorship is up since Trump because of your bias. More people call him out for doing/saying dumb things because he does and says more dumb things then past presidents. There is more negative coverage because he does more negative things. There is more opposition to him because more people oppose him. It's as simple as that. There is no global media conspiracy, no deep state operatives and Trump is no victim.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 7:27 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

Yea, imagine if they had the internet and social media back in 2012 during his 2nd VP run.

Oh wait....


They did but since they are part of the establishment they made sure it was fair.
Since Trump, right / conservative censorship is through the roof. Social media bias is insane.
All of this can be new to you only if you have your head in the sand because at this point of time simply fits your agenda.


I would argue that you think censorship is up since Trump because of your bias. More people call him out for doing/saying dumb things because he does and says more dumb things then past presidents. There is more negative coverage because he does more negative things. There is more opposition to him because more people oppose him. It's as simple as that. There is no global media conspiracy, no deep state operatives and Trump is no victim.


But I don't mind the negative coverage as long as it is applied to both sides.
That's the thing.
People with half million followers are being banned without ever breaking twitter policy. Trump supporters obviously.
Youtube taking down videos of doctors talking about covid "because they are against WHO guidelines" yet WHO videos that there's no evidence of covid human to human transmission is still up.
Many conservative YT creators are being demonetized or banned while some seriously vile liberals / progressives are free to spread the hate.
That all looks exactly like having agenda.

You can't see that cause it fits yours.
Have I ever called you a name that somehow describes the narrative against the left? Yet you have no issue calling me a trump troll cause I have a different point of view.
Labeling, can be insulting to some, technically hate speech too and best part you don't know me and you are way off but so what right? Fits your boat and moderators don't care either. Now let me call you few names that right likes to use against liberals and I will get a ban. I already did even though it wasn't even directing at the poster. I used it to describe the behavior.

Don't see a issue here? You think you are more righteous or special? You think your opinion is the only one? It is ok to censor others to reach your own goals?
If any of those are a yes then you are not a democrat. You just want authoritarian power.
 
winginit
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 7:41 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

They did but since they are part of the establishment they made sure it was fair.
Since Trump, right / conservative censorship is through the roof. Social media bias is insane.
All of this can be new to you only if you have your head in the sand because at this point of time simply fits your agenda.


I would argue that you think censorship is up since Trump because of your bias. More people call him out for doing/saying dumb things because he does and says more dumb things then past presidents. There is more negative coverage because he does more negative things. There is more opposition to him because more people oppose him. It's as simple as that. There is no global media conspiracy, no deep state operatives and Trump is no victim.


But I don't mind the negative coverage as long as it is applied to both sides.
That's the thing.
People with half million followers are being banned without ever breaking twitter policy. Trump supporters obviously.
Youtube taking down videos of doctors talking about covid "because they are against WHO guidelines" yet WHO videos that there's no evidence of covid human to human transmission is still up.
Many conservative YT creators are being demonetized or banned while some seriously vile liberals / progressives are free to spread the hate.
That all looks exactly like having agenda.


I'm going to play devil's advocate a bit here so know that the below doesn't necessarily align with my own views or what I think is right:

So, if news outlets ranging from Fox News to let's say MSNBC have agendas, which they do, and there's no framework to prevent agenda-based reporting even to the detriment of the 'other side', why should Twitter or YouTube via Google or Facebook not be granted the same flexibility? Not that he would do this, but if I'm Jack Dorsey and I'm very liberal and have an agenda, why can't I just say "You know what? f*** you, this is my company and I'm going to silence conservative voices and if conservatives don't like that tough s*** because again, this is my company."

Apart from shareholder pressure, what's to stop Dorsey and Twitter or even say Google or Facebook or what have you from doing that?

The point being, it's very interesting hearing from mostly conservative voices that private companies should be able to essentially do whatever they want so long as it's legal until it's to the detriment of conservatives. The world of contemporary Bay Area based tech is liberal - deal with it. Don't like it? Build a rival platform or seek legislation to remedy the issue (as was the case back in the day with news outlets)
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 7:45 pm

winginit wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

I would argue that you think censorship is up since Trump because of your bias. More people call him out for doing/saying dumb things because he does and says more dumb things then past presidents. There is more negative coverage because he does more negative things. There is more opposition to him because more people oppose him. It's as simple as that. There is no global media conspiracy, no deep state operatives and Trump is no victim.


But I don't mind the negative coverage as long as it is applied to both sides.
That's the thing.
People with half million followers are being banned without ever breaking twitter policy. Trump supporters obviously.
Youtube taking down videos of doctors talking about covid "because they are against WHO guidelines" yet WHO videos that there's no evidence of covid human to human transmission is still up.
Many conservative YT creators are being demonetized or banned while some seriously vile liberals / progressives are free to spread the hate.
That all looks exactly like having agenda.


I'm going to play devil's advocate a bit here so know that the below doesn't necessarily align with my own views or what I think is right:

So, if news outlets ranging from Fox News to let's say MSNBC have agendas, which they do, and there's no framework to prevent agenda-based reporting even to the detriment of the 'other side', why should Twitter or YouTube via Google or Facebook not be granted the same flexibility? Not that he would do this, but if I'm Jack Dorsey and I'm very liberal and have an agenda, why can't I just say "You know what? f*** you, this is my company and I'm going to silence conservative voices and if conservatives don't like that tough s*** because again, this is my company."

Apart from shareholder pressure, what's to stop Dorsey and Twitter or even say Google or Facebook or what have you from doing that?

The point being, it's very interesting hearing from mostly conservative voices that private companies should be able to essentially do whatever they want so long as it's legal until it's to the detriment of conservatives. The world of tech is liberal - deal with it. Don't like it? Build a rival platform or seek legislation to remedy the issue (as was the case back in the day with news outlets)


Don't get me wrong, you are absolutely right.
They can do that.
BUT if you are talking about difference between elections in 2012 and 2020 you simply have to acknowledge that another set of very powerful factors joined the table.
There's just no comparison and it is easy to see why liberal / progressive voices seem to be louder which can give clueless people the idea that it's "because more people think like this" or something like that while in reality it's because media these days in general is controlled by liberals / globalists. Just facts.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 7:48 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

They did but since they are part of the establishment they made sure it was fair.
Since Trump, right / conservative censorship is through the roof. Social media bias is insane.
All of this can be new to you only if you have your head in the sand because at this point of time simply fits your agenda.


I would argue that you think censorship is up since Trump because of your bias. More people call him out for doing/saying dumb things because he does and says more dumb things then past presidents. There is more negative coverage because he does more negative things. There is more opposition to him because more people oppose him. It's as simple as that. There is no global media conspiracy, no deep state operatives and Trump is no victim.


But I don't mind the negative coverage as long as it is applied to both sides.
That's the thing.
People with half million followers are being banned without ever breaking twitter policy. Trump supporters obviously.
Youtube taking down videos of doctors talking about covid "because they are against WHO guidelines" yet WHO videos that there's no evidence of covid human to human transmission is still up.
Many conservative YT creators are being demonetized or banned white some seriously vile liberals are free to spread the hate.
That all looks exactly like having agenda.

You can't see that cause it fits yours.
Have I ever called you a name that somehow describes the narrative against the left? Yet you have no issue calling me a trump troll cause I have a different point of view.
Labeling, can be insulting to some, technically hate speech too and best part you don't know me and you are way off but so what right? Fits your boat and moderators don't care either.
Don't see a issue here? You think you are more righteous or special? You think your opinion is the only one? It is ok to censor others to reach your own goals?
If any of those are a yes then you are not a democrat. You just want authoritarian power.


You can't censor 100 left leaning youtube channels just to be fair because you had to had to ban 100 right leaning youtube channels for spreading hate speech. You can't force an editor to run a negative article against a democrat just because they ran a negative article about Trump just to keep things fair.

Trump and Trump supporters do more, for lack of a better word, 'bad' things. If they get more negative coverage, its not because of some media bias you are imagining, its because they deserve more negative coverage.

To directly answer your questions, yes, I absolutely think opposition to Trump is more righteous than support of Trump. I absolutely think it's OK for social media platforms to censor hate speech and I have no problem calling you a Trump Troll when you posts are all classic Trump trolling posts.

Am I a democrat? Yes. But do I want authoritarian power? Hell no! I badly miss the real republican party. I miss the real debate. I want to be able to see to highly educated politicians from opposite sides of the aisle lay out compelling arguments to support their case. The Trump GOP cannot do that. They are right-wing extremists and there can be no discussing middle ground with someone giving the benefit of the doubt to Neo-Nazis.
 
winginit
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 7:49 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
winginit wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

But I don't mind the negative coverage as long as it is applied to both sides.
That's the thing.
People with half million followers are being banned without ever breaking twitter policy. Trump supporters obviously.
Youtube taking down videos of doctors talking about covid "because they are against WHO guidelines" yet WHO videos that there's no evidence of covid human to human transmission is still up.
Many conservative YT creators are being demonetized or banned while some seriously vile liberals / progressives are free to spread the hate.
That all looks exactly like having agenda.


I'm going to play devil's advocate a bit here so know that the below doesn't necessarily align with my own views or what I think is right:

So, if news outlets ranging from Fox News to let's say MSNBC have agendas, which they do, and there's no framework to prevent agenda-based reporting even to the detriment of the 'other side', why should Twitter or YouTube via Google or Facebook not be granted the same flexibility? Not that he would do this, but if I'm Jack Dorsey and I'm very liberal and have an agenda, why can't I just say "You know what? f*** you, this is my company and I'm going to silence conservative voices and if conservatives don't like that tough s*** because again, this is my company."

Apart from shareholder pressure, what's to stop Dorsey and Twitter or even say Google or Facebook or what have you from doing that?

The point being, it's very interesting hearing from mostly conservative voices that private companies should be able to essentially do whatever they want so long as it's legal until it's to the detriment of conservatives. The world of tech is liberal - deal with it. Don't like it? Build a rival platform or seek legislation to remedy the issue (as was the case back in the day with news outlets)


Don't get me wrong, you are absolutely right.
They can do that.
BUT if you are talking about difference between elections in 2012 and 2020 you simply have to acknowledge that another set of very powerful factors joined the table.
There's just no comparison and it is easy to see why liberal / progressive voices seem to be louder which can give clueless people the idea that it's "because more people think like this" or something like that while in reality it's because media these days in general is controlled by liberals / globalists. Just facts.


No doubt.

But again, if I'm Dorsey or Zuck or whomever and that's my goal based on my own liberal bias and agenda, at present there's nothing to stop me from looking at the situation that you've laid out there and saying "you know what - mission accomplished".

What I'm not hearing is a remedy for that if it is indeed a problem.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 7:58 pm

winginit wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
winginit wrote:

I'm going to play devil's advocate a bit here so know that the below doesn't necessarily align with my own views or what I think is right:

So, if news outlets ranging from Fox News to let's say MSNBC have agendas, which they do, and there's no framework to prevent agenda-based reporting even to the detriment of the 'other side', why should Twitter or YouTube via Google or Facebook not be granted the same flexibility? Not that he would do this, but if I'm Jack Dorsey and I'm very liberal and have an agenda, why can't I just say "You know what? f*** you, this is my company and I'm going to silence conservative voices and if conservatives don't like that tough s*** because again, this is my company."

Apart from shareholder pressure, what's to stop Dorsey and Twitter or even say Google or Facebook or what have you from doing that?

The point being, it's very interesting hearing from mostly conservative voices that private companies should be able to essentially do whatever they want so long as it's legal until it's to the detriment of conservatives. The world of tech is liberal - deal with it. Don't like it? Build a rival platform or seek legislation to remedy the issue (as was the case back in the day with news outlets)


Don't get me wrong, you are absolutely right.
They can do that.
BUT if you are talking about difference between elections in 2012 and 2020 you simply have to acknowledge that another set of very powerful factors joined the table.
There's just no comparison and it is easy to see why liberal / progressive voices seem to be louder which can give clueless people the idea that it's "because more people think like this" or something like that while in reality it's because media these days in general is controlled by liberals / globalists. Just facts.


No doubt.

But again, if I'm Dorsey or Zuck or whomever and that's my goal based on my own liberal bias and agenda, at present there's nothing to stop me from looking at the situation that you've laid out there and saying "you know what - mission accomplished".

What I'm not hearing is a remedy for that if it is indeed a problem.


Only way is to regulate them so that bias is not allowed.
I think it is actually safer for us all.
If you separate people to split platforms depending on your beliefs you will end up with even more polarized society.
Uncontested thoughts grow exponentially larger and potentially dangerous than those that are countered. Bad idea for general safety of everybody.

Or do like some harvard teachers are saying lately.
Just censor the whole thing like china did cause it is the only way to take control of that constant growth of division / negativity.
Hello CCP I guess but hey, seems like we're heading that way anyway and censor from the liberal media is in fact some version of it already.
You are free to post anti trump comments on fox articles by the way so I guess they take freedom of speech more to their heart than lets say CNN that simply removed comments all together to make sure nobody questions what they say like it was in the past.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:09 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

I would argue that you think censorship is up since Trump because of your bias. More people call him out for doing/saying dumb things because he does and says more dumb things then past presidents. There is more negative coverage because he does more negative things. There is more opposition to him because more people oppose him. It's as simple as that. There is no global media conspiracy, no deep state operatives and Trump is no victim.


But I don't mind the negative coverage as long as it is applied to both sides.
That's the thing.
People with half million followers are being banned without ever breaking twitter policy. Trump supporters obviously.
Youtube taking down videos of doctors talking about covid "because they are against WHO guidelines" yet WHO videos that there's no evidence of covid human to human transmission is still up.
Many conservative YT creators are being demonetized or banned white some seriously vile liberals are free to spread the hate.
That all looks exactly like having agenda.

You can't see that cause it fits yours.
Have I ever called you a name that somehow describes the narrative against the left? Yet you have no issue calling me a trump troll cause I have a different point of view.
Labeling, can be insulting to some, technically hate speech too and best part you don't know me and you are way off but so what right? Fits your boat and moderators don't care either.
Don't see a issue here? You think you are more righteous or special? You think your opinion is the only one? It is ok to censor others to reach your own goals?
If any of those are a yes then you are not a democrat. You just want authoritarian power.


You can't censor 100 left leaning youtube channels just to be fair because you had to had to ban 100 right leaning youtube channels for spreading hate speech. You can't force an editor to run a negative article against a democrat just because they ran a negative article about Trump just to keep things fair.

Trump and Trump supporters do more, for lack of a better word, 'bad' things. If they get more negative coverage, its not because of some media bias you are imagining, its because they deserve more negative coverage.

To directly answer your questions, yes, I absolutely think opposition to Trump is more righteous than support of Trump. I absolutely think it's OK for social media platforms to censor hate speech and I have no problem calling you a Trump Troll when you posts are all classic Trump trolling posts.

Am I a democrat? Yes. But do I want authoritarian power? Hell no! I badly miss the real republican party. I miss the real debate. I want to be able to see to highly educated politicians from opposite sides of the aisle lay out compelling arguments to support their case. The Trump GOP cannot do that. They are right-wing extremists and there can be no discussing middle ground with someone giving the benefit of the doubt to Neo-Nazis.


So you miss real debate but I quote: I absolutely think opposition to Trump is more righteous than support of Trump. I absolutely think it's OK for social media platforms to censor hate speech and I have no problem calling you a Trump Troll when you posts are all classic Trump trolling posts.

Perfect example of how to contradict yourself in one statement.
The reason you can't even see it is cause you do not know what a real debate is anymore.
You simply believe that your truth is the only truth hence calling other people trump trolls.

PS. calling somebody trump troll can be considering hate speech especially in context to what you just wrote. So now what?
Last edited by PixelPilot on Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 1025
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:19 pm

2122M wrote:
You can't censor 100 left leaning youtube channels just to be fair because you had to had to ban 100 right leaning youtube channels for spreading hate speech. You can't force an editor to run a negative article against a democrat just because they ran a negative article about Trump just to keep things fair.

Trump and Trump supporters do more, for lack of a better word, 'bad' things. If they get more negative coverage, its not because of some media bias you are imagining, its because they deserve more negative coverage.

To directly answer your questions, yes, I absolutely think opposition to Trump is more righteous than support of Trump. I absolutely think it's OK for social media platforms to censor hate speech and I have no problem calling you a Trump Troll when you posts are all classic Trump trolling posts.

Am I a democrat? Yes. But do I want authoritarian power? Hell no! I badly miss the real republican party. I miss the real debate. I want to be able to see to highly educated politicians from opposite sides of the aisle lay out compelling arguments to support their case. The Trump GOP cannot do that. They are right-wing extremists and there can be no discussing middle ground with someone giving the benefit of the doubt to Neo-Nazis.


I read stances like these from 20th century history before. Usually those who promote these sorts of ideas end up seizing power and murdering millions of people and as a result ending in one party rule over a country. The bolshevik revolution and Mao in China come to mind.

Are you ready to call for re-education of millions of people by sending them to concentration camps? because it seems you are short of saying that.

I suggest you get to read the Gulag Archipelago, it can help you understand our past mistakes in history.
“It’s easy to confuse ‘what is’ with ‘what ought to be,’ especially when ‘what is’ has worked out in your favor.” Tyrion Lannister
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:24 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

But I don't mind the negative coverage as long as it is applied to both sides.
That's the thing.
People with half million followers are being banned without ever breaking twitter policy. Trump supporters obviously.
Youtube taking down videos of doctors talking about covid "because they are against WHO guidelines" yet WHO videos that there's no evidence of covid human to human transmission is still up.
Many conservative YT creators are being demonetized or banned white some seriously vile liberals are free to spread the hate.
That all looks exactly like having agenda.

You can't see that cause it fits yours.
Have I ever called you a name that somehow describes the narrative against the left? Yet you have no issue calling me a trump troll cause I have a different point of view.
Labeling, can be insulting to some, technically hate speech too and best part you don't know me and you are way off but so what right? Fits your boat and moderators don't care either.
Don't see a issue here? You think you are more righteous or special? You think your opinion is the only one? It is ok to censor others to reach your own goals?
If any of those are a yes then you are not a democrat. You just want authoritarian power.


You can't censor 100 left leaning youtube channels just to be fair because you had to had to ban 100 right leaning youtube channels for spreading hate speech. You can't force an editor to run a negative article against a democrat just because they ran a negative article about Trump just to keep things fair.

Trump and Trump supporters do more, for lack of a better word, 'bad' things. If they get more negative coverage, its not because of some media bias you are imagining, its because they deserve more negative coverage.

To directly answer your questions, yes, I absolutely think opposition to Trump is more righteous than support of Trump. I absolutely think it's OK for social media platforms to censor hate speech and I have no problem calling you a Trump Troll when you posts are all classic Trump trolling posts.

Am I a democrat? Yes. But do I want authoritarian power? Hell no! I badly miss the real republican party. I miss the real debate. I want to be able to see to highly educated politicians from opposite sides of the aisle lay out compelling arguments to support their case. The Trump GOP cannot do that. They are right-wing extremists and there can be no discussing middle ground with someone giving the benefit of the doubt to Neo-Nazis.


So you miss real debate but I quote: I absolutely think opposition to Trump is more righteous than support of Trump. I absolutely think it's OK for social media platforms to censor hate speech and I have no problem calling you a Trump Troll when you posts are all classic Trump trolling posts.

Perfect example of how to contradict yourself in one statement.
The reason you can't even see it is cause you do not know what a real debate is anymore.
You simply believe that your truth is the only truth hence calling other people trump trolls.


You missed the part where 'debate' with Trump is not real or honest debate. He lies about his positions, lies about his record and shouts over the top of the opposing voice. That's what I mean when I say that I miss real debate. Issues based and honest debate. Trump and hardcore Trump supporters are incapable of that.

Also, hate speech is not just one side of a well reasoned debate. Hate speech is just mindless, uneducated hate. It has no place in our society. If you really want to call be biased for being anti-hate speech, by all means go for it. I think that says a lot more about you than it does about me.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 8:35 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

You can't censor 100 left leaning youtube channels just to be fair because you had to had to ban 100 right leaning youtube channels for spreading hate speech. You can't force an editor to run a negative article against a democrat just because they ran a negative article about Trump just to keep things fair.

Trump and Trump supporters do more, for lack of a better word, 'bad' things. If they get more negative coverage, its not because of some media bias you are imagining, its because they deserve more negative coverage.

To directly answer your questions, yes, I absolutely think opposition to Trump is more righteous than support of Trump. I absolutely think it's OK for social media platforms to censor hate speech and I have no problem calling you a Trump Troll when you posts are all classic Trump trolling posts.

Am I a democrat? Yes. But do I want authoritarian power? Hell no! I badly miss the real republican party. I miss the real debate. I want to be able to see to highly educated politicians from opposite sides of the aisle lay out compelling arguments to support their case. The Trump GOP cannot do that. They are right-wing extremists and there can be no discussing middle ground with someone giving the benefit of the doubt to Neo-Nazis.


So you miss real debate but I quote: I absolutely think opposition to Trump is more righteous than support of Trump. I absolutely think it's OK for social media platforms to censor hate speech and I have no problem calling you a Trump Troll when you posts are all classic Trump trolling posts.

Perfect example of how to contradict yourself in one statement.
The reason you can't even see it is cause you do not know what a real debate is anymore.
You simply believe that your truth is the only truth hence calling other people trump trolls.


You missed the part where 'debate' with Trump is not real or honest debate. He lies about his positions, lies about his record and shouts over the top of the opposing voice. That's what I mean when I say that I miss real debate. Issues based and honest debate. Trump and hardcore Trump supporters are incapable of that.

Also, hate speech is not just one side of a well reasoned debate. Hate speech is just mindless, uneducated hate. It has no place in our society. If you really want to call be biased for being anti-hate speech, by all means go for it. I think that says a lot more about you than it does about me.


I am not Trump so your point is invalid. I don't shout over you and I don't insult you.
On the other hand calling somebody you disagree with as a trump troll sounds like mindless, uneducated hate.
By what you said you are not anti hate speech. You are kinda spreading it.

But I will agree with you on this though. Would be nice to talk to people without being labeled or insulted due to different views. Just like it was back in the day.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 10:23 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:

So you miss real debate but I quote: I absolutely think opposition to Trump is more righteous than support of Trump. I absolutely think it's OK for social media platforms to censor hate speech and I have no problem calling you a Trump Troll when you posts are all classic Trump trolling posts.

Perfect example of how to contradict yourself in one statement.
The reason you can't even see it is cause you do not know what a real debate is anymore.
You simply believe that your truth is the only truth hence calling other people trump trolls.


You missed the part where 'debate' with Trump is not real or honest debate. He lies about his positions, lies about his record and shouts over the top of the opposing voice. That's what I mean when I say that I miss real debate. Issues based and honest debate. Trump and hardcore Trump supporters are incapable of that.

Also, hate speech is not just one side of a well reasoned debate. Hate speech is just mindless, uneducated hate. It has no place in our society. If you really want to call be biased for being anti-hate speech, by all means go for it. I think that says a lot more about you than it does about me.


I am not Trump so your point is invalid. I don't shout over you and I don't insult you.
On the other hand calling somebody you disagree with as a trump troll sounds like mindless, uneducated hate.
By what you said you are not anti hate speech. You are kinda spreading it.

But I will agree with you on this though. Would be nice to talk to people without being labeled or insulted due to different views. Just like it was back in the day.


My point has nothing to do with you and everything to do with Trump. And there are lots of people I disagree with that aren't trolls. But you aren't interested in real debate. You were interested in hashing up Biden's sexual history until you realized that was a bad idea, then you wanted to bash the media for calling out Trump's crap. There is no honest debate there. You are just trying to drag Biden's name through the mud (because you disagree with his positions) and beat up on the media (because by and large they disagree with you). That's why I call you a Trump Troll. If you want to have a reasoned, level headed conversation with someone, you need to pick a reasonable topic.
 
apodino
Posts: 3749
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 10:48 pm

Bringing the thread back on topic, it seems Biden is providing talking points to his allies, which they are using. Now the NY Times and CNN are starting to raise the BS flag with the Biden press releases. It is still far from enough scrutiny but at least they are realizing that Biden is trying to misrepresent the NY Times report on this topic.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/29/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-new-york-times/index.html

On a related note, Ms. Reade refuses to go on Fox news to tell her story. She wants to go on CNN and MSNBC to tell her story. So far, neither network will ablidge. (It's obvious that she doesn't want to help Trump, which telling her story on Fox News would do, she wants Democrats to hear her story)

https://twitter.com/benyt/status/1255516332227006470

I have one theory as to what might be going on here. I can not seriously believe that the democratic establishment is not worried about the allegations. Here is the issue. Even though Bernie has suspended his campaign, he can always unsuspend it later. Since Biden mathematically has not clinched the required amount of delegates for the nomination, if the media outlets such as CNN and MSNBC gave this matter intense scrutiny and a lot of democrats start speaking out, when these other primaries do happen, the primary voters can simply switch their vote to Bernie, and Bernie could end up with the nomination. By continuing to prop up Biden with endorsement, and with Bernie still out, most of the primaries are meaningless and Biden will win them easily. Then Biden could be replaced at the convention by a less controversial figure, say Cuomo. They cant do this if Bernie has the delegates to win the nomination. (And they have made it clear that they will do everything to ensure Bernie is not the nominee). But I do think when it is mathematically impossible for Bernie to actually come from behind and win the nomination, then you will see Reade's allegations get a lot more scrutiny.

That being said, if Biden is the nominee and is still on the ballot in November, at the moment my vote will be for Justin Amash.
Last edited by apodino on Wed Apr 29, 2020 10:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 10:52 pm

2122M wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
2122M wrote:

You missed the part where 'debate' with Trump is not real or honest debate. He lies about his positions, lies about his record and shouts over the top of the opposing voice. That's what I mean when I say that I miss real debate. Issues based and honest debate. Trump and hardcore Trump supporters are incapable of that.

Also, hate speech is not just one side of a well reasoned debate. Hate speech is just mindless, uneducated hate. It has no place in our society. If you really want to call be biased for being anti-hate speech, by all means go for it. I think that says a lot more about you than it does about me.


I am not Trump so your point is invalid. I don't shout over you and I don't insult you.
On the other hand calling somebody you disagree with as a trump troll sounds like mindless, uneducated hate.
By what you said you are not anti hate speech. You are kinda spreading it.

But I will agree with you on this though. Would be nice to talk to people without being labeled or insulted due to different views. Just like it was back in the day.


My point has nothing to do with you and everything to do with Trump. And there are lots of people I disagree with that aren't trolls. But you aren't interested in real debate. You were interested in hashing up Biden's sexual history until you realized that was a bad idea, then you wanted to bash the media for calling out Trump's crap. There is no honest debate there. You are just trying to drag Biden's name through the mud (because you disagree with his positions) and beat up on the media (because by and large they disagree with you). That's why I call you a Trump Troll. If you want to have a reasoned, level headed conversation with someone, you need to pick a reasonable topic.


Maybe you should go and re read what I said.
You offered that they all should be investigated as a quick defection to what was said about Biden and I said I would love that to happen. Then you brought some family stuff and I said I agree bring it on. All of it to both of them.
Now you twist my words and pretend it’s my fault that there can’t be no debate.
Textbook trolling cause there’s absolutely no way to genuinely debate with you which I’m trying in every post.
 
NIKV69
Topic Author
Posts: 13316
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: Biden's follies

Wed Apr 29, 2020 11:35 pm

apodino wrote:
On a related note, Ms. Reade refuses to go on Fox news to tell her story. She wants to go on CNN and MSNBC to tell her story. So far, neither network will ablidge. (It's obvious that she doesn't want to help Trump, which telling her story on Fox News would do, she wants Democrats to hear her story)

https://twitter.com/benyt/status/1255516332227006470

I have one theory as to what might be going on here. I can not seriously believe that the democratic establishment is not worried about the allegations. Here is the issue. Even though Bernie has suspended his campaign, he can always unsuspend it later. Since Biden mathematically has not clinched the required amount of delegates for the nomination, if the media outlets such as CNN and MSNBC gave this matter intense scrutiny and a lot of democrats start speaking out, when these other primaries do happen, the primary voters can simply switch their vote to Bernie, and Bernie could end up with the nomination. By continuing to prop up Biden with endorsement, and with Bernie still out, most of the primaries are meaningless and Biden will win them easily. Then Biden could be replaced at the convention by a less controversial figure, say Cuomo. They cant do this if Bernie has the delegates to win the nomination. (And they have made it clear that they will do everything to ensure Bernie is not the nominee). But I do think when it is mathematically impossible for Bernie to actually come from behind and win the nomination, then you will see Reade's allegations get a lot more scrutiny.

That being said, if Biden is the nominee and is still on the ballot in November, at the moment my vote will be for Justin Amash.


Your source is a former buzzfeed I wouldn't place much in that. If her info was so great CNN would have her on nightly. It looks liker her allegation is corroborated and CNN wouldn't dare listen to her as their candidate is already seriously flawed.

As for Amash please vote for him as he takes votes from Biden. It was so comical to watch his interview this morning on MSNBC as they were incensed and kept asking him doesn't he realize he is helping Trump by running third party. LOL.

He is right many voters are not represented by either party and we need a third.
I am the Googlizer!!!
 
User avatar
WarRI1
Posts: 13716
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:51 am

Re: Biden's follies

Thu Apr 30, 2020 12:50 am

He is right many voters are not represented by either party and we need a third.

My goodness is not this country corrupted and screwed up enough with out introducing a third party in to the mix. I once thought that was a good idea myself, no more in this age of trump. We need clear decisive vote totals to keep trusting the system.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
 
2122M
Posts: 1303
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Biden's follies

Thu Apr 30, 2020 1:20 am

apodino wrote:
That being said, if Biden is the nominee and is still on the ballot in November, at the moment my vote will be for Justin Amash.


Let me get this right. You would vote for pro-choice, democratic socialist, medicare for all, green new deal advocating, gun-control advocate Sanders if he were on the ticket. Or you would vote for Cuomo, who is pro-choice, pro green new deal, pro-gun control, pro-obamacare. But if Biden is on the ticket, there is now way you you vote for him, even though he is pro-choice, pro-gun control, and pro saving the environment. Instead you would vote for pro-life, anti-environmental legislation, pro-gun, free market healthcare Amash.

That just doesn't make sense to me at all.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: casinterest, dobilan, nwadeicer, ThePointblank and 81 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos