US Election 2020

[Tero]

Oh oh! Not a good sign for Sanders!
https://www.axios.com/marianne-williams ... cf79f.html

[Cunt]

I don't know why that's such a bad thing...

She sounded kind of decent (so not at all right for politics, of course)

[Joe]

I doubt enough people know who she is for it to matter.

[Tyrannical]

And then there's that corona beer virus from China Trump tried to stop... but Democrats something something.

[Hermit]

Did he do what he was asked with regards to illegal immigration? Are the numbers improving, for those who voted for him?

It looks like he did...but my sources are not mainstream, so you might have a different view.

Oh, Daggles, where are your links to figures, and an analysis based on them, in support to what it looks like to you? Yes, I do look at mainstream sources. Would you object to data provided by the United States Border Patrol?

I have generated a graph using their figures, and it looks like border apprehensions have risen from 21 thousand in 1960 to a peak of 1.64 million in 2000, dropped to 447 thousand in 2010 and more or less plateaued in the 300 to 400 thousand range until 2018. In 2019 the number shot up to 851 thousand again.



You could argue that there is not even a rough correlation between undocumented border crossers who succeed and those who get apprehended, but until you come up with verifiable data, there is no reason for rejecting such correlation.

Now looking at the data, we can clearly see that the drop in apprehension preceded the Trump presidency by a number of years, as did the plateauing of it. It's not my bias that makes me reject the assertion that Trump did what he was asked with regards to illegal immigration. It's the data. You can check them yourself here.

In order to forestall another one of your misinterpretations of what I wrote, I don't blame Trump for the increasing number of undocumented border crossers in 2017, 2018 and 2019 any more than I would praise or blame previous Presidents for the changes between 1960 and 2017. Those changes are clearly way too massive to attribute them to Presidential policies or the state of the border.

Who was the first US Presidential candidate to support gay marriage before being elected? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't done by Obama.

I am sorry to see you resorted to cherry picking. (The following comments are copied from Wikipedia's summary of what Trump said and did about same sex marriage.)

• In 2000, Trump stated his belief that "marriage is between a man and a woman".

• In June 2015, when asked about the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling in which the Supreme Court guaranteed the right to same-sex marriage nationwide, he said he personally supported "traditional marriage". He added: "I would have preferred states, you know, making the decision and I let that be known. But they made the decision ... So, at a certain point you have to be realistic about it.

• Later, in the run up to the Iowa caucuses on February 1, 2016, Trump said that if elected he would strongly consider appointing Supreme Court justices who would overturn Obergefell. When asked if gay couples should be able access the same benefits as married couples, Trump said his "attitude on it has not been fully formed". The Advocate, an American LGBT-interest magazine, characterized Trump's proposed Supreme Court nominees as "LGBT-unfriendly", noting that "not all have ruled in LGBT rights cases, but those who have are largely unsympathetic, and some have the backing of anti-LGBT activists.

• In early 2016 he maintained his support for appointing conservative judges, saying he would consider Supreme Court justices in favor of overturning the Obergefell decision and leaving the legalization of same-sex marriage up to the states.

• In November 2016, shortly after the presidential election, Trump told Lesley Stahl on 60 Minutes his personal view on same-sex marriage was "irrelevant" and that he was "fine with" same-sex marriage, stating that the issue was "settled" in the Obergefell decision.

So, you can see that Trump's words in support for same sex marriage is not consistent over time, and his actions in regard to it are, on balance, hostile.

I noticed you immediately looked for some reason to say that the good work wasn't Trump, and avoided mentioning the high-profile sex-trafficker arrests (Epstein being a most prominent one)

Huh? I clicked on the link you provided, then followed a couple of links that link led to. What I looked for was information, plain and simple. The fact that you don't like what I found is not my problem.

Saying I "immediately looked for some reason to say that the good work wasn't Trump" is a shabby reaction to my report of what I found. It would have been quite acceptable that my bias defeated my attempt at doing an objective analysis, provided you could marshal the necessary facts to argue that this is what happened, but that is not what you did. You imputed that my bias motivated my search for information rather than that it misled me. That, as I said, is quite shabby of you. An attempt at producing a cogent rebuttal of my analysis would have been better.

Now to Jeffrey Epstein: He was not caught as a result of Trump's work. His undoing was the work of an investigative journalist named Julie Brown. She stumbled on Epstein's continued sex crimes almost by accident. When Trump nominated Alexander Acosta to be secretary of labor in 2017, she decided to have a look at his background. Among the first things she discovered was that when Acosta was a United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, he brokered, then approved a scandalously lenient and much criticised deal for Epstein's 2008 federal sex-trafficking charges. It was the journalist whose investigation then discovered and identified about 80 of Epstein’s alleged victims. If it were not for Julie Brown, Epstein would not have been caught. You can follow up on the story here and here. After reading those brief accounts I am sure you won't need my help to find more detailed articles on how Epstein got caught.

I should point out that my main point was that of all the people here who pretend to be thoughtful about politics, they ALL seem to fail completely to fairly assess Trump.

"pretend to be thoughtful"? Please...

It's similar to the BoJo situation...he won an absolute LANDSLIDE, and people are still trying to pretend he isn't what the people wanted.

Once again, no links, no numbers, no facts. Had you looked them up, you would have discovered that the UK's general election constituted nowhere near a landslide win for Boris Johnson or the Tory Party. While the Tories did win a massive 48 additional seats in the House of Commons, it did so on the basis of a miserly increase of 1.2% of the popular vote compared to the previous election. A 1.2% increase is not a landslide victory in anyone's language. Also, the Tories won 56% of the seats with only 43.6% of the votes. That's the First Past The Post voting system for you. Again not the mark of a landslide victory.

So yeah, pick apart any Trump accomplishments. It makes your arguments around politics much clearer to anyone with a balanced view.

Stop bitching, Daggles. I was hoping our discussion would resile from such behaviour. You can make it so. Or I'll just abandon the attempt. The ball is in your court.

[rainbow]

In order to forestall another one of your misinterpretations of what I wrote, I don't blame Trump for the increasing number of undocumented border crossers in 2017, 2018 and 2019 ...

Yebbut hotel rooms don't clean themselves, do they?

[Cunt]

Stop bitching, Daggles. I was hoping our discussion would resile from such behaviour. You can make it so. Or I'll just abandon the attempt. The ball is in your court.

Your links lead to paywalls, but there probably wasn't anything good.

What bitching? I pointed out a few ways, that you are incapable of being fair about his situation.

That 'ts:dr' bit you posted proves it pretty clearly. (I skimmed, only saw TDS on display)

If you want numbers, go find them. If you can't find anything to say positive about Trump, then it shows you are clearly one-sided. You found that an anti-Trump org said he was against gays, but the quoted words sound like exactly what was described. Both by the Trump-supporter who initially made the claim, and you (the anti-Trump view)

VERY clearly. His actions against countries criminalizing homosexual behaviour, while having one of his 'Top Gays' in a key position, could be seen as 'good for the gay community'. I've heard gays SAY so. You don't have to be a gay to appreciate it, but I think you HAVE to have TDS to blind yourself to it. I'm confident you can find an org, opinion writer or such who does find it anti-gay.

You mention Epstein, but not why Amy R. was not interviewed, nor why ABC wasn't followed-up with regarding her leaked tape. There may be something to the reporter you mention, but did she follow up on that? ABC's Amy (Robichar?) was on tape saying she had the whole story, and that ABC spiked it. (Disney owns ABC, right? Kids are safe there though, right?)

You can't see anything he does as good, you certainly can't say so if you do. With a record like that, it means that Steven Crowder is a LOT more convincing than you, and he also happens to be funny.

If you ever do get thoughtful about it (rather than sounding like a broken-record of TDS) then it might again be worth reading your longer posts. Until then, I can summarize for anyone who wants to skip it...

'Orange Man Bad'.

[Seabass]

[Cunt]

Jiggly tuna shaped like a cake?

Sounds like he has something against eating cheap, or pre-chewed meats.

[Tero]

Onion had Biden moving by: inertia.

Onion Sanders:
Bernie Sanders

Childhood Hero: Social Security

Political Career: Mayor of Burlington, VT; President of Sovereign State of Burlington; Supreme Leader of Independent Republic of Bernard

Best-Selling Album: Bernie Sanders Live At Budokan

Biggest Strength: Would virtually lock down Vermont for Democrats

Biggest Weakness: Radical views could make him bigger risk in general election than moderate winners Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Al Gore

Guilty Pleasure: Ayn Rand

Greatest Liability: Keen awareness that at 78, he may only have five or six more shots at presidency

How He Plans To Pay For Medicare For All: With money

[Cunt]

How He Plans To Pay For Medicare For All: With money

lol

[Tero]

Sanders is going to win this election! Hillary didn't do so well. Sanders is a lot more like Trump: he has a penis.

Trump on the other hand, the penis has become a liability. All democrat and independent women hate him now.

Simple!

[pErvinalia]

I want to see Bernie give it a go. I've got no idea if it would be close (polls suggest it would) or whether it would be a rout by Trump. But it's worth the try. I think he can actually win it.

[Tero]

Bernie or a democrat will get Michigan

Wisconsin is still too close. With a smaller urban/black/latino population, it's been conservative on and off.

[JimC]

If Sanders wins (which I consider unlikely, but grant that it's possible) you might actually see a right-wing coup attempt, to save America from godless communism...