Donald Trump
Comments
-
Haha, don't even get me started. I think the American nomination process is absolutely ridiculous in any case, whichever party you're talking about. I think that seriously degrades the democratic process in and of itself. Why don't the parties just nominate and elect a leader themselves, and then let the public vote in a general election? It's so much simpler and it doesn't fuck with the heads and emotions of the population for months and months and months? The primaries are so stupid.mrussel1 said:
Of course they fucked up... BUT.. the convention happens after the primary votes. Weren't the Democrats lambasted for having a super delegate process (which could actually protect against this type of thing)? Imagine if Trump won a clear number of delegates to be nominated and the party elite refused to nominate him. That would be pretty messed up, from a democracy perspective.PJ_Soul said:
How about asking about it, and rejecting him as a nominee because he was totally unwilling to reveal anything about his finances and was actually cagey about it even back then? Seemed to me that EVERYONE else saw that as a massive red flag before the convention. In other words, the GOP fucked up big time by nominating him (duh, obviously), and this is only one of the many reasons why. I mean, everyone was discussing concerns about conflicts of interest from the moment he announced he was running... and the GOP just ignored it. It's so fucking stupid.mrussel1 said:
No, they couldn't vet him to the level that Mueller is investigating him. You need subpoena power since he runs private businesses.jeffbr said:
Great question. I assume it is because the RNC took Trump's disclosures at face value, not investing the time and resources to thoroughly vet him. They probably figured it would be a waste of time, because nobody thought Trump had a shot at the nomination. But I really have no idea.PJ_Soul said:
It begs the question: Why weren't ties that posed conflicts of interest like that thoroughly examined before Trump was nominated, so make sure that what is happening now wouldn't be necessary?jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
You know it's interesting because that's actually the way it worked until the 20's I believe. And then gradually states started having primaries, caucuses, etc. I think there was the feeling that the nomination process was corrupt. A "nominee" only needed to bribe the party elite to capture the delegates for each state. So the move to the primary system was seen as more democratic fundamentally.PJ_Soul said:
Haha, don't even get me started. I think the American nomination process is absolutely ridiculous in any case, whichever party you're talking about. I think that seriously degrades the democratic process in and of itself. Why don't the parties just nominate and elect a leader themselves, and then let the public vote in a general election? It's so much simpler and it doesn't fuck with the heads and emotions of the population for months and months and months? The primaries are so stupid.mrussel1 said:
Of course they fucked up... BUT.. the convention happens after the primary votes. Weren't the Democrats lambasted for having a super delegate process (which could actually protect against this type of thing)? Imagine if Trump won a clear number of delegates to be nominated and the party elite refused to nominate him. That would be pretty messed up, from a democracy perspective.PJ_Soul said:
How about asking about it, and rejecting him as a nominee because he was totally unwilling to reveal anything about his finances and was actually cagey about it even back then? Seemed to me that EVERYONE else saw that as a massive red flag before the convention. In other words, the GOP fucked up big time by nominating him (duh, obviously), and this is only one of the many reasons why. I mean, everyone was discussing concerns about conflicts of interest from the moment he announced he was running... and the GOP just ignored it. It's so fucking stupid.mrussel1 said:
No, they couldn't vet him to the level that Mueller is investigating him. You need subpoena power since he runs private businesses.jeffbr said:
Great question. I assume it is because the RNC took Trump's disclosures at face value, not investing the time and resources to thoroughly vet him. They probably figured it would be a waste of time, because nobody thought Trump had a shot at the nomination. But I really have no idea.PJ_Soul said:
It begs the question: Why weren't ties that posed conflicts of interest like that thoroughly examined before Trump was nominated, so make sure that what is happening now wouldn't be necessary?jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
The real issue is that 50% of the GOP didn't give a damn what Trump did. None of the scandals, the vulgarities, the scams moved votes from him one iota. All the candidates tried to sling mud but it didn't stick. In fact, it almost seems like the fact that he said "Fuck your rules, your manners" endeared him to the right.. that it was all a stick in the eye to what they saw as liberal mores. The far right lost sight of where the decency line actually was.0 -
Well then the citizens would hopefully not vote for a corrupt party leader, right? Of course, having a two party system isn't helping. When the citizens feel like they don't have enough options and feel like they are forced into choosing from only two options, that is also a problem. Anyway, this method is used in Canada and it works because the parties try to choose the leader most like to win a general election, and for the most part, they are smart enough to avoid electing a real corrupt fuck face for a leader because they have enough respect for the voting public to know the difference.mrussel1 said:
You know it's interesting because that's actually the way it worked until the 20's I believe. And then gradually states started having primaries, caucuses, etc. I think there was the feeling that the nomination process was corrupt. A "nominee" only needed to bribe the party elite to capture the delegates for each state. So the move to the primary system was seen as more democratic fundamentally.PJ_Soul said:
Haha, don't even get me started. I think the American nomination process is absolutely ridiculous in any case, whichever party you're talking about. I think that seriously degrades the democratic process in and of itself. Why don't the parties just nominate and elect a leader themselves, and then let the public vote in a general election? It's so much simpler and it doesn't fuck with the heads and emotions of the population for months and months and months? The primaries are so stupid.mrussel1 said:
Of course they fucked up... BUT.. the convention happens after the primary votes. Weren't the Democrats lambasted for having a super delegate process (which could actually protect against this type of thing)? Imagine if Trump won a clear number of delegates to be nominated and the party elite refused to nominate him. That would be pretty messed up, from a democracy perspective.PJ_Soul said:
How about asking about it, and rejecting him as a nominee because he was totally unwilling to reveal anything about his finances and was actually cagey about it even back then? Seemed to me that EVERYONE else saw that as a massive red flag before the convention. In other words, the GOP fucked up big time by nominating him (duh, obviously), and this is only one of the many reasons why. I mean, everyone was discussing concerns about conflicts of interest from the moment he announced he was running... and the GOP just ignored it. It's so fucking stupid.mrussel1 said:
No, they couldn't vet him to the level that Mueller is investigating him. You need subpoena power since he runs private businesses.jeffbr said:
Great question. I assume it is because the RNC took Trump's disclosures at face value, not investing the time and resources to thoroughly vet him. They probably figured it would be a waste of time, because nobody thought Trump had a shot at the nomination. But I really have no idea.PJ_Soul said:
It begs the question: Why weren't ties that posed conflicts of interest like that thoroughly examined before Trump was nominated, so make sure that what is happening now wouldn't be necessary?jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
The real issue is that 50% of the GOP didn't give a damn what Trump did. None of the scandals, the vulgarities, the scams moved votes from him one iota. All the candidates tried to sling mud but it didn't stick. In fact, it almost seems like the fact that he said "Fuck your rules, your manners" endeared him to the right.. that it was all a stick in the eye to what they saw as liberal mores. The far right lost sight of where the decency line actually was.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
Unless you're in Toronto...PJ_Soul said:
Well then the citizens would hopefully not vote for a corrupt party leader, right? Of course, having a two party system isn't helping. When the citizens feel like they don't have enough options and feel like they are forced into choosing from only two options, that is also a problem. Anyway, this method is used in Canada and it works because the parties try to choose the leader most like to win a general election, and for the most part, they are smart enough to avoid electing a real corrupt fuck face for a leader because they have enough respect for the voting public to know the difference.mrussel1 said:
You know it's interesting because that's actually the way it worked until the 20's I believe. And then gradually states started having primaries, caucuses, etc. I think there was the feeling that the nomination process was corrupt. A "nominee" only needed to bribe the party elite to capture the delegates for each state. So the move to the primary system was seen as more democratic fundamentally.PJ_Soul said:
Haha, don't even get me started. I think the American nomination process is absolutely ridiculous in any case, whichever party you're talking about. I think that seriously degrades the democratic process in and of itself. Why don't the parties just nominate and elect a leader themselves, and then let the public vote in a general election? It's so much simpler and it doesn't fuck with the heads and emotions of the population for months and months and months? The primaries are so stupid.mrussel1 said:
Of course they fucked up... BUT.. the convention happens after the primary votes. Weren't the Democrats lambasted for having a super delegate process (which could actually protect against this type of thing)? Imagine if Trump won a clear number of delegates to be nominated and the party elite refused to nominate him. That would be pretty messed up, from a democracy perspective.PJ_Soul said:
How about asking about it, and rejecting him as a nominee because he was totally unwilling to reveal anything about his finances and was actually cagey about it even back then? Seemed to me that EVERYONE else saw that as a massive red flag before the convention. In other words, the GOP fucked up big time by nominating him (duh, obviously), and this is only one of the many reasons why. I mean, everyone was discussing concerns about conflicts of interest from the moment he announced he was running... and the GOP just ignored it. It's so fucking stupid.mrussel1 said:
No, they couldn't vet him to the level that Mueller is investigating him. You need subpoena power since he runs private businesses.jeffbr said:
Great question. I assume it is because the RNC took Trump's disclosures at face value, not investing the time and resources to thoroughly vet him. They probably figured it would be a waste of time, because nobody thought Trump had a shot at the nomination. But I really have no idea.PJ_Soul said:
It begs the question: Why weren't ties that posed conflicts of interest like that thoroughly examined before Trump was nominated, so make sure that what is happening now wouldn't be necessary?jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
The real issue is that 50% of the GOP didn't give a damn what Trump did. None of the scandals, the vulgarities, the scams moved votes from him one iota. All the candidates tried to sling mud but it didn't stick. In fact, it almost seems like the fact that he said "Fuck your rules, your manners" endeared him to the right.. that it was all a stick in the eye to what they saw as liberal mores. The far right lost sight of where the decency line actually was.0 -
Municipal politics isn't the same as provincial or federal politics. People running for mayor or counsel are not affiliated to any party here in Canada. It's quite nice.mrussel1 said:
Unless you're in Toronto...PJ_Soul said:
Well then the citizens would hopefully not vote for a corrupt party leader, right? Of course, having a two party system isn't helping. When the citizens feel like they don't have enough options and feel like they are forced into choosing from only two options, that is also a problem. Anyway, this method is used in Canada and it works because the parties try to choose the leader most like to win a general election, and for the most part, they are smart enough to avoid electing a real corrupt fuck face for a leader because they have enough respect for the voting public to know the difference.mrussel1 said:
You know it's interesting because that's actually the way it worked until the 20's I believe. And then gradually states started having primaries, caucuses, etc. I think there was the feeling that the nomination process was corrupt. A "nominee" only needed to bribe the party elite to capture the delegates for each state. So the move to the primary system was seen as more democratic fundamentally.PJ_Soul said:
Haha, don't even get me started. I think the American nomination process is absolutely ridiculous in any case, whichever party you're talking about. I think that seriously degrades the democratic process in and of itself. Why don't the parties just nominate and elect a leader themselves, and then let the public vote in a general election? It's so much simpler and it doesn't fuck with the heads and emotions of the population for months and months and months? The primaries are so stupid.mrussel1 said:
Of course they fucked up... BUT.. the convention happens after the primary votes. Weren't the Democrats lambasted for having a super delegate process (which could actually protect against this type of thing)? Imagine if Trump won a clear number of delegates to be nominated and the party elite refused to nominate him. That would be pretty messed up, from a democracy perspective.PJ_Soul said:
How about asking about it, and rejecting him as a nominee because he was totally unwilling to reveal anything about his finances and was actually cagey about it even back then? Seemed to me that EVERYONE else saw that as a massive red flag before the convention. In other words, the GOP fucked up big time by nominating him (duh, obviously), and this is only one of the many reasons why. I mean, everyone was discussing concerns about conflicts of interest from the moment he announced he was running... and the GOP just ignored it. It's so fucking stupid.mrussel1 said:
No, they couldn't vet him to the level that Mueller is investigating him. You need subpoena power since he runs private businesses.jeffbr said:
Great question. I assume it is because the RNC took Trump's disclosures at face value, not investing the time and resources to thoroughly vet him. They probably figured it would be a waste of time, because nobody thought Trump had a shot at the nomination. But I really have no idea.PJ_Soul said:
It begs the question: Why weren't ties that posed conflicts of interest like that thoroughly examined before Trump was nominated, so make sure that what is happening now wouldn't be necessary?jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
The real issue is that 50% of the GOP didn't give a damn what Trump did. None of the scandals, the vulgarities, the scams moved votes from him one iota. All the candidates tried to sling mud but it didn't stick. In fact, it almost seems like the fact that he said "Fuck your rules, your manners" endeared him to the right.. that it was all a stick in the eye to what they saw as liberal mores. The far right lost sight of where the decency line actually was.0 -
I understand.. it was tongue in cheek about electing a fuck face.dignin said:
Municipal politics isn't the same as provincial or federal politics. People running for mayor or counsel are not affiliated to any party here in Canada. It's quite nice.mrussel1 said:
Unless you're in Toronto...PJ_Soul said:
Well then the citizens would hopefully not vote for a corrupt party leader, right? Of course, having a two party system isn't helping. When the citizens feel like they don't have enough options and feel like they are forced into choosing from only two options, that is also a problem. Anyway, this method is used in Canada and it works because the parties try to choose the leader most like to win a general election, and for the most part, they are smart enough to avoid electing a real corrupt fuck face for a leader because they have enough respect for the voting public to know the difference.mrussel1 said:
You know it's interesting because that's actually the way it worked until the 20's I believe. And then gradually states started having primaries, caucuses, etc. I think there was the feeling that the nomination process was corrupt. A "nominee" only needed to bribe the party elite to capture the delegates for each state. So the move to the primary system was seen as more democratic fundamentally.PJ_Soul said:
Haha, don't even get me started. I think the American nomination process is absolutely ridiculous in any case, whichever party you're talking about. I think that seriously degrades the democratic process in and of itself. Why don't the parties just nominate and elect a leader themselves, and then let the public vote in a general election? It's so much simpler and it doesn't fuck with the heads and emotions of the population for months and months and months? The primaries are so stupid.mrussel1 said:
Of course they fucked up... BUT.. the convention happens after the primary votes. Weren't the Democrats lambasted for having a super delegate process (which could actually protect against this type of thing)? Imagine if Trump won a clear number of delegates to be nominated and the party elite refused to nominate him. That would be pretty messed up, from a democracy perspective.PJ_Soul said:
How about asking about it, and rejecting him as a nominee because he was totally unwilling to reveal anything about his finances and was actually cagey about it even back then? Seemed to me that EVERYONE else saw that as a massive red flag before the convention. In other words, the GOP fucked up big time by nominating him (duh, obviously), and this is only one of the many reasons why. I mean, everyone was discussing concerns about conflicts of interest from the moment he announced he was running... and the GOP just ignored it. It's so fucking stupid.mrussel1 said:
No, they couldn't vet him to the level that Mueller is investigating him. You need subpoena power since he runs private businesses.jeffbr said:
Great question. I assume it is because the RNC took Trump's disclosures at face value, not investing the time and resources to thoroughly vet him. They probably figured it would be a waste of time, because nobody thought Trump had a shot at the nomination. But I really have no idea.PJ_Soul said:
It begs the question: Why weren't ties that posed conflicts of interest like that thoroughly examined before Trump was nominated, so make sure that what is happening now wouldn't be necessary?jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
The real issue is that 50% of the GOP didn't give a damn what Trump did. None of the scandals, the vulgarities, the scams moved votes from him one iota. All the candidates tried to sling mud but it didn't stick. In fact, it almost seems like the fact that he said "Fuck your rules, your manners" endeared him to the right.. that it was all a stick in the eye to what they saw as liberal mores. The far right lost sight of where the decency line actually was.0 -
They took 8 years of unjustified loathing and angst of Obama, along with about 6-10 years with Hillary in the crosshairs... drilled in repetition by mouth breathers like Rush and Hannity.... all of this followed the indefensible GW Bush disaster... So they hated "establishment". The first 'head to head' really was Jeb Bush. There was a parade of shit candidates for Republicans. A few decent ones were completely ignored and cast off. Another decent one, Kasich made it to the NFC Championship Game, but by then they went full "Reality Show" mode and Kasich and his darn sensible policies were too darn boring.mrussel1 said:
You know it's interesting because that's actually the way it worked until the 20's I believe. And then gradually states started having primaries, caucuses, etc. I think there was the feeling that the nomination process was corrupt. A "nominee" only needed to bribe the party elite to capture the delegates for each state. So the move to the primary system was seen as more democratic fundamentally.PJ_Soul said:
Haha, don't even get me started. I think the American nomination process is absolutely ridiculous in any case, whichever party you're talking about. I think that seriously degrades the democratic process in and of itself. Why don't the parties just nominate and elect a leader themselves, and then let the public vote in a general election? It's so much simpler and it doesn't fuck with the heads and emotions of the population for months and months and months? The primaries are so stupid.mrussel1 said:
Of course they fucked up... BUT.. the convention happens after the primary votes. Weren't the Democrats lambasted for having a super delegate process (which could actually protect against this type of thing)? Imagine if Trump won a clear number of delegates to be nominated and the party elite refused to nominate him. That would be pretty messed up, from a democracy perspective.PJ_Soul said:
How about asking about it, and rejecting him as a nominee because he was totally unwilling to reveal anything about his finances and was actually cagey about it even back then? Seemed to me that EVERYONE else saw that as a massive red flag before the convention. In other words, the GOP fucked up big time by nominating him (duh, obviously), and this is only one of the many reasons why. I mean, everyone was discussing concerns about conflicts of interest from the moment he announced he was running... and the GOP just ignored it. It's so fucking stupid.mrussel1 said:
No, they couldn't vet him to the level that Mueller is investigating him. You need subpoena power since he runs private businesses.jeffbr said:
Great question. I assume it is because the RNC took Trump's disclosures at face value, not investing the time and resources to thoroughly vet him. They probably figured it would be a waste of time, because nobody thought Trump had a shot at the nomination. But I really have no idea.PJ_Soul said:
It begs the question: Why weren't ties that posed conflicts of interest like that thoroughly examined before Trump was nominated, so make sure that what is happening now wouldn't be necessary?jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
The real issue is that 50% of the GOP didn't give a damn what Trump did. None of the scandals, the vulgarities, the scams moved votes from him one iota. All the candidates tried to sling mud but it didn't stick. In fact, it almost seems like the fact that he said "Fuck your rules, your manners" endeared him to the right.. that it was all a stick in the eye to what they saw as liberal mores. The far right lost sight of where the decency line actually was.
Add that in with those R's who would vote for.... well Donald Trump as long as he hinted that he was against Pro-Choice for abortion.
0 -
Got ya. We do elect fuck faces from time to time.mrussel1 said:
I understand.. it was tongue in cheek about electing a fuck face.dignin said:
Municipal politics isn't the same as provincial or federal politics. People running for mayor or counsel are not affiliated to any party here in Canada. It's quite nice.mrussel1 said:
Unless you're in Toronto...PJ_Soul said:
Well then the citizens would hopefully not vote for a corrupt party leader, right? Of course, having a two party system isn't helping. When the citizens feel like they don't have enough options and feel like they are forced into choosing from only two options, that is also a problem. Anyway, this method is used in Canada and it works because the parties try to choose the leader most like to win a general election, and for the most part, they are smart enough to avoid electing a real corrupt fuck face for a leader because they have enough respect for the voting public to know the difference.mrussel1 said:
You know it's interesting because that's actually the way it worked until the 20's I believe. And then gradually states started having primaries, caucuses, etc. I think there was the feeling that the nomination process was corrupt. A "nominee" only needed to bribe the party elite to capture the delegates for each state. So the move to the primary system was seen as more democratic fundamentally.PJ_Soul said:
Haha, don't even get me started. I think the American nomination process is absolutely ridiculous in any case, whichever party you're talking about. I think that seriously degrades the democratic process in and of itself. Why don't the parties just nominate and elect a leader themselves, and then let the public vote in a general election? It's so much simpler and it doesn't fuck with the heads and emotions of the population for months and months and months? The primaries are so stupid.mrussel1 said:
Of course they fucked up... BUT.. the convention happens after the primary votes. Weren't the Democrats lambasted for having a super delegate process (which could actually protect against this type of thing)? Imagine if Trump won a clear number of delegates to be nominated and the party elite refused to nominate him. That would be pretty messed up, from a democracy perspective.PJ_Soul said:
How about asking about it, and rejecting him as a nominee because he was totally unwilling to reveal anything about his finances and was actually cagey about it even back then? Seemed to me that EVERYONE else saw that as a massive red flag before the convention. In other words, the GOP fucked up big time by nominating him (duh, obviously), and this is only one of the many reasons why. I mean, everyone was discussing concerns about conflicts of interest from the moment he announced he was running... and the GOP just ignored it. It's so fucking stupid.mrussel1 said:
No, they couldn't vet him to the level that Mueller is investigating him. You need subpoena power since he runs private businesses.jeffbr said:
Great question. I assume it is because the RNC took Trump's disclosures at face value, not investing the time and resources to thoroughly vet him. They probably figured it would be a waste of time, because nobody thought Trump had a shot at the nomination. But I really have no idea.PJ_Soul said:
It begs the question: Why weren't ties that posed conflicts of interest like that thoroughly examined before Trump was nominated, so make sure that what is happening now wouldn't be necessary?jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
The real issue is that 50% of the GOP didn't give a damn what Trump did. None of the scandals, the vulgarities, the scams moved votes from him one iota. All the candidates tried to sling mud but it didn't stick. In fact, it almost seems like the fact that he said "Fuck your rules, your manners" endeared him to the right.. that it was all a stick in the eye to what they saw as liberal mores. The far right lost sight of where the decency line actually was.0 -
I can't think of any off hand that the US has elected...give me a few minutes though.dignin said:
Got ya. We do elect fuck faces from time to time.mrussel1 said:
I understand.. it was tongue in cheek about electing a fuck face.dignin said:
Municipal politics isn't the same as provincial or federal politics. People running for mayor or counsel are not affiliated to any party here in Canada. It's quite nice.mrussel1 said:
Unless you're in Toronto...PJ_Soul said:
Well then the citizens would hopefully not vote for a corrupt party leader, right? Of course, having a two party system isn't helping. When the citizens feel like they don't have enough options and feel like they are forced into choosing from only two options, that is also a problem. Anyway, this method is used in Canada and it works because the parties try to choose the leader most like to win a general election, and for the most part, they are smart enough to avoid electing a real corrupt fuck face for a leader because they have enough respect for the voting public to know the difference.mrussel1 said:
You know it's interesting because that's actually the way it worked until the 20's I believe. And then gradually states started having primaries, caucuses, etc. I think there was the feeling that the nomination process was corrupt. A "nominee" only needed to bribe the party elite to capture the delegates for each state. So the move to the primary system was seen as more democratic fundamentally.PJ_Soul said:
Haha, don't even get me started. I think the American nomination process is absolutely ridiculous in any case, whichever party you're talking about. I think that seriously degrades the democratic process in and of itself. Why don't the parties just nominate and elect a leader themselves, and then let the public vote in a general election? It's so much simpler and it doesn't fuck with the heads and emotions of the population for months and months and months? The primaries are so stupid.mrussel1 said:
Of course they fucked up... BUT.. the convention happens after the primary votes. Weren't the Democrats lambasted for having a super delegate process (which could actually protect against this type of thing)? Imagine if Trump won a clear number of delegates to be nominated and the party elite refused to nominate him. That would be pretty messed up, from a democracy perspective.PJ_Soul said:
How about asking about it, and rejecting him as a nominee because he was totally unwilling to reveal anything about his finances and was actually cagey about it even back then? Seemed to me that EVERYONE else saw that as a massive red flag before the convention. In other words, the GOP fucked up big time by nominating him (duh, obviously), and this is only one of the many reasons why. I mean, everyone was discussing concerns about conflicts of interest from the moment he announced he was running... and the GOP just ignored it. It's so fucking stupid.mrussel1 said:
No, they couldn't vet him to the level that Mueller is investigating him. You need subpoena power since he runs private businesses.jeffbr said:
Great question. I assume it is because the RNC took Trump's disclosures at face value, not investing the time and resources to thoroughly vet him. They probably figured it would be a waste of time, because nobody thought Trump had a shot at the nomination. But I really have no idea.PJ_Soul said:
It begs the question: Why weren't ties that posed conflicts of interest like that thoroughly examined before Trump was nominated, so make sure that what is happening now wouldn't be necessary?jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
The real issue is that 50% of the GOP didn't give a damn what Trump did. None of the scandals, the vulgarities, the scams moved votes from him one iota. All the candidates tried to sling mud but it didn't stick. In fact, it almost seems like the fact that he said "Fuck your rules, your manners" endeared him to the right.. that it was all a stick in the eye to what they saw as liberal mores. The far right lost sight of where the decency line actually was.0 -
Oh sure, every electoral system, no matter how good, is still going to let a few real fuck faces slip in. It is still politics after all. Plues, we're talking on a relative scale here, lol. A pretty good politician is probably still kind of a fuck face by normal civilian standards.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
That's the damn truth there... The bar is definitely lower.PJ_Soul said:Oh sure, every electoral system, no matter how good, is still going to let a few real fuck faces slip in. It is still politics after all. Plues, we're talking on a relative scale here, lol. A pretty good politician is probably still kind of a fuck face by normal civilian standards.0 -
Don't be sure. His 35% are voters who will walk through hell to vote for the guy. They're where the passion lies at the moment. It's personal to them. Pick off some independent percentage points with something like infrastructure and there's an easy path to victory.Halifax2TheMax said:
Trump's base of 35% won't win elections. What will be most telling is how many republican house candidates that run in non-gerrymandered republican districts and republican senate candidates have Trump stump for them.Gern Blansten said:
We'll soon see...but I think tRump may have made that statement so that his base will remain with him when he fires Mueller.Halifax2TheMax said:
Would anyone like to follow the money, from Russia with love and a PTAPE, all the way to impeachment? It's seems Mueller would like to. So much for those brilliantly disappearing headlines.jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
Why would Trump say that his businesses are off limits? Does he dictate the scope and breadth of independent investigations? Cornered rat indeed.
I think tRump is right that his base will stick with him. But I think he will lose major GOP support. I can't believe he has any now....but it would be very bad for him to fire Mueller.
The guy isn't savvy in politics, but he's developed a mindset in his base that would have them die before not voting for him again. Those are the types of voters you want in your corner.0 -
He'll be impeached or have resigned by then anyway.ledvedderman said:
Don't be sure. His 35% are voters who will walk through hell to vote for the guy. They're where the passion lies at the moment. It's personal to them. Pick off some independent percentage points with something like infrastructure and there's an easy path to victory.Halifax2TheMax said:
Trump's base of 35% won't win elections. What will be most telling is how many republican house candidates that run in non-gerrymandered republican districts and republican senate candidates have Trump stump for them.Gern Blansten said:
We'll soon see...but I think tRump may have made that statement so that his base will remain with him when he fires Mueller.Halifax2TheMax said:
Would anyone like to follow the money, from Russia with love and a PTAPE, all the way to impeachment? It's seems Mueller would like to. So much for those brilliantly disappearing headlines.jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
Why would Trump say that his businesses are off limits? Does he dictate the scope and breadth of independent investigations? Cornered rat indeed.
I think tRump is right that his base will stick with him. But I think he will lose major GOP support. I can't believe he has any now....but it would be very bad for him to fire Mueller.
The guy isn't savvy in politics, but he's developed a mindset in his base that would have them die before not voting for him again. Those are the types of voters you want in your corner.
www.myspace.com0 -
^^^
Oh, yeah, sure.....
This impeachment nothingburger is getting old.
0 -
LVDman you have a good point about the diehard supporters in his corner at the 35% level.
0 -
Not nearly as old as your posts.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:^^^
Oh, yeah, sure.....
This impeachment nothingburger is getting old.I LOVE MUSIC.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com0 -
^^^
It's true. All these nothingburgers are amounting to zip, zero, zilch nada. Who's hungry?
0 -
Yeah, not going to even go down that road.
Truly not worth it.
But, I'll be smiling and thinking of you when he's out of office.I LOVE MUSIC.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com0 -
^^^
Do you have a rough date?
0 -
You can't win with 35%ledvedderman said:
Don't be sure. His 35% are voters who will walk through hell to vote for the guy. They're where the passion lies at the moment. It's personal to them. Pick off some independent percentage points with something like infrastructure and there's an easy path to victory.Halifax2TheMax said:
Trump's base of 35% won't win elections. What will be most telling is how many republican house candidates that run in non-gerrymandered republican districts and republican senate candidates have Trump stump for them.Gern Blansten said:
We'll soon see...but I think tRump may have made that statement so that his base will remain with him when he fires Mueller.Halifax2TheMax said:
Would anyone like to follow the money, from Russia with love and a PTAPE, all the way to impeachment? It's seems Mueller would like to. So much for those brilliantly disappearing headlines.jeffbr said:Looks like Mueller isn't concerned with Trump's threats, and is taking a "wide-angle" approach to Trump's business dealings. Russia connections, shady business transactions, Deutsche Bank, here we go!Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
"The U.S. special counsel investigating possible ties between the Donald Trumpcampaign and Russia in last year’s election is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe.The president told the New York Times on Wednesday that any digging into matters beyond Russia would be out of bounds. Trump’s businesses have involved Russians for years, making the boundaries fuzzy so Special Counsel Robert Mueller appears to be taking a wide-angle approach to his two-month-old probe.
FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said."
Why would Trump say that his businesses are off limits? Does he dictate the scope and breadth of independent investigations? Cornered rat indeed.
I think tRump is right that his base will stick with him. But I think he will lose major GOP support. I can't believe he has any now....but it would be very bad for him to fire Mueller.
The guy isn't savvy in politics, but he's developed a mindset in his base that would have them die before not voting for him again. Those are the types of voters you want in your corner.09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help