 |
 |
Stop the Steal!
Thread Rating:
| November 23rd, 2020 at 9:31:10 PM permalink | |
| rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 189 Posts: 18764 |
Do you want me to be more considerate? I've been aware for a long time that there is advice for making less egregious and more palatable conversation. It's just not what I concern myself with. I blame myself if I ignore a fact just because I don't like the person who is delivering it, or their way of expressing it. Everyone should be thankful if they are getting facts regardless of the poor delivery or messenger. If they're not getting facts, then they should be angry at someone or something who is doing that. No reason to be polite to constant liars even if they are polite to you. But it's just what I follow for myself. You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |
| November 24th, 2020 at 2:16:57 AM permalink | |
| OnceDear Member since: Nov 21, 2017 Threads: 11 Posts: 1510 | Hi RXWine. No. I wasn't dropping a hint. It's just something I stumbled on while looking at Business Insider. I'm not sure the softly softly advice of that article would be of any value in the context of hostile discussions between polar opposite members here. I have absolutely no solution for trying to fix broken perceptions or values. |
| November 24th, 2020 at 3:21:33 AM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18213 |
No, he is being rated by pundits. Historians cannot rate a POTUS until they have been gone at least a decade. I gave you a list of his accomplishments. Your rating it "I HATE HIM, HE IS MEAN!"
Accepted the results? We still hear RUSSIARUSSIARUSSIS! Obama has been anything but gracious. He is the first POTUS to speak against his successor in public. The President is a fink. |
| November 24th, 2020 at 8:21:14 AM permalink | |
| Gandler Member since: Aug 15, 2019 Threads: 27 Posts: 4256 |
Well I don't like him and I think that he has a poor attitude I have no issue admitting that. As for the achievements you listed several that are not regarded as achievements (and are at best subjective). The booming economy he inherited from Obama. He is simply not rated well by the few sources we have. And, I doubt in the coming years when more sources rate him, that will change. So far the ratings have been pretty consistent (42-44). Obama also has only a few sources (though more than Trump), he is consistently rated in the teens (12-18). Young Bush is consistently in the 30s (with some outliers in the 20s), and Father Bush is consistently in the high teens- low 20s. Regardless of your party, I don't think any rational person can predict Trump will get a good rating. For comparison Ulysses S Grant, (a Great General), but almost always regarded as a terrible President Though he ranks in the mid 30s, and even was aware of his unpopularity, leaving with the message, "“Mistakes have been made, as all can see and I admit" (I don't Trump would have such class). Probably the most consistent ranking is Truman (almost always number 7 with some few ranking him at 6 or 8). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_presidents_of_the_United_States#Scholar_survey_results The point is, it is safe to assume Trump will be ranked in the red (bottom quarter), and very likely bottom 2-3. He will probably be in the running with Buchannan, a 1-term President who was corrupt, used bribes, and extortion and was the last President to support slavery (and said that States should not leave the Union, but the Federal government should be powerless to stop them), so well done! (He also stood by his decisions until his death and refused to accept any wrongdoings, ring any bells?)
Yes, because there was valid reason to think that Russia attempted to influence the election (which they did). The election results were still valid. Obama immediately, began the transition process. Clinton conceded in less than 24 hours. Trump still has not conceded... There is no comparison. |
| November 24th, 2020 at 8:34:26 AM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18213 |
What "valid reason" was there other than liberals claiming it? The President is a fink. |
| November 24th, 2020 at 8:42:37 AM permalink | |
| Gandler Member since: Aug 15, 2019 Threads: 27 Posts: 4256 |
The Senate (Remember R controlled) Intelligence Committee for one: II. (U) FINDINGS 1. (U), The Committee found, that the IRA sought to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election by harming Hillary Clinton's chances of success and supporting Donald Trump at the direction of the Kremlin. (U) The Committee found that the IRA' s :lnformation warfare campaign was broad in scope and entailed objectives beyond the result of the 2016 presidential election. Further, the Committee's analysis of the IRA's activities on social media supports the key judgments of the January 6, 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, "Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections," that "Russia's, goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton,· and harm her electability and potential presidency."5 However, where the Intelligence Community assessed that the Russian government "aspired to help President-elect Trump's election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him," the Committee found that IRA social media activity was overtly and almost invariably supportive of then-candidate Trump, and to the detriment .of Secretary Clinton's campaign.6 · https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume2.pdf And, every other U.S. Intelligence Agency for another.... Russia did attempt to influence the election, if you don't agree with that you are simply not acknowledge what our Intelligence Agencies have said..... You can argue what impact this had on the actual voters, but you cannot deny their attempted influence.... |
| November 24th, 2020 at 8:53:22 AM permalink | |
| OnceDear Member since: Nov 21, 2017 Threads: 11 Posts: 1510 | If he doesn't agree with that, he's in what he would consider to be good company. trump chose not to believe his own agencies, but he believed Putin. I guess that means AZD believed Putin over those US institutions too? |
| November 24th, 2020 at 9:25:05 AM permalink | |
| rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 189 Posts: 18764 |
If the head of your government said he believed Putin over his own intelligence agencies how would your country react? You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |
| November 24th, 2020 at 9:53:02 AM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18213 |
Oh, please. Nations try to influence EVERY election. Just with Trump the liberals screamed RUSSIARUSSIARUISSIA! Are you going to accept that China influenced the 2020 election? The President is a fink. |
| November 24th, 2020 at 10:03:51 AM permalink | |
| OnceDear Member since: Nov 21, 2017 Threads: 11 Posts: 1510 | He would be torn to shreds in our parliament, where he is obliged to appear weekly for Prime Ministers Questions. The opposition party would shred him first, but his own parties back benchers would make him explain himself too. The public would be outraged and would protest through their members of parliament and through peaceful protests on the street. There would likely be a 'vote of no confidence' in the leader, or his party, leading to early dismissal. Our PM leads from within parliament. He doesn't rule from without. We don't elect our PM, we elect the leading party and that party elect him and can replace him. Both our incumbent party and our opposition parties work for this country first, with much common ground. Imperfect, but different to your system. |