Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The biased Media vs Trump!

Options
1…3031333536…51

Comments

  • Options
    #962
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    8-10 wrote: »
    Amerika wrote: »
    It Trump wins or loses, he s still right, the election is rigged. Look at the illegal coordination of efforts between Clinton s campaign and PAC s. Or the disgraced Democrat who was forced to resign, and in the pay of the Democratic National Committee and a very frequent visitor to the Obama White House, boasted on tape of disrupting Trump rallies by bought and staged violence. He also boasted of busing non-resident voters into Ohio to affect the vote count, and of other dirty tricks which seem to be longstanding practice for Democrats. And the Justice Department and media remains silent on the matter as apparently to them voting fraud is an act of pride rather than a crime... as long as it helps your preferred candidate. And why not, one of the media's own was caught boasting to a presidential candidate s team that she new of debate questions in advance and disclosed them to the team. Other 'journalists' seek permission and approval before printing stories or allow the campaign to warp their stories into a fashion that is favorable to Clinton. The mainstream is guilty of attempting to influence the direction of the election. And the DOJ who should be insuring the election is not rigged, actually participates in the election rigging.

    And who here believes that if Hillary Clinton loses the election after the email disclosures from WikiLeaks, she won t be yelling from the rooftops that the election was rigged by the Russians?

    Apologies but I'm only now getting to this reply to my post. Wanted to follow up because I think you missed my question in your reply - I wasn't questioning it being rigged at all:

    If, as we are concluding from your post, the election is rigged, and we conclude that Trump is clearly winning in the polls by his own admissions last night, then my question was what benefit is it to him to continue to shout about the election that he is likely to win being rigged?

    I just don't understand the logic of claiming that a race you are winning is likely invalid? Surely that's inviting everybody to protest after you win?
    Dang... I put out all that great stuff for nothing? ;):)

    Your actual question is easily answered. The first part is hope. Both candidates in a presidential election will always proclaim they're going to win... Up until the point they are forced to concede. The second part is reality. The election is rigged for Hillary.


  • Options
    #963
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    It's opinion Amerika, not reality or fact.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #964
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Trump actually just challenged Joe Biden to a fist fight - not in those exact words but pretty much to the effect.

    Will probably be scheduling the fight for a Pay-Per-View on his new Trump TV station :pac:


  • Options
    #965
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    K-9 wrote: »
    It's opinion Amerika, not reality or fact.
    Fine, then just about every comment here is opinion, K-9. Elizabeth Warren said the election was rigged, Bernie Sanders said the election was rigged, and now Donald Trump says the election is rigged. But now since Donald Trump says it's rigged, the mainstream media ignores what Warren and Sanders have said. I laid out the reasons why in my response to 8-10. To ignore it is to ignore reality.

    http://www.allsides.com/news/2016-10-24-0753/opinion-trump%E2%80%99s-right-%E2%80%93-system-rigged-and-we-don%E2%80%99t-owe-it-our-default
    　
    And the FBI investigation into Clinton's dirty server is making it more and more evident that the decision not to recommend charges was politically motivated to get Hillary elected... more evidence of a rigged election.

    'The political organization of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, an influential Democrat with longstanding ties to Bill and Hillary Clinton, gave nearly $500,000 to the election campaign of the wife of an official at the Federal Bureau of Investigation who later helped oversee the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s email use.'

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-ally-aids-campaign-of-fbi-officials-wife-1477266114


  • Options
    #966
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Overheal wrote: »
    No the gun show purchasing rate was the stat I asked for. Your reskinned yahoo answers page didn't cover that in any form.
    Assuming it's either,

    High: are you then suggesting we definitely should close such a gaping loophole? Or

    Low: are you agreeing that, 'since it's statistically insignificant,' etc, why not just close the loophole and end the debate on said loophole?

    :)

    The best information I can find is from 1994 that shows only 3.9% of firearm purchases are made at gun shows. I doubt the numbers are much different today. If you can find more updated data I would be interested to read the stats.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-stale-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/01/20/e42ec050-629a-11e2-b05a-605528f6b712_blog.html

    The gun show loophole is a myth. The vast majority of people selling guns at gun shows are licensed dealers who must perform a background check. The only people allowed to sell guns at gun shows without doing background checks are individuals selling a very few number of guns like a widow selling her dead husbands collection. But the cost of purchasing a table at a gun show is cost prohibited for most of these type of people who only have a few guns to sell. Overheal, have you ever been to a gun show? I've been to several and have yet to find someone selling firearms that wasn't a dealer. Go to one! Tell me if you find someone willing to sell you a firearm without a background check. Good luck with that.
    http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/facts-about-gun-shows


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #967
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    Trump actually just challenged Joe Biden to a fist fight - not in those exact words but pretty much to the effect.

    Will probably be scheduling the fight for a Pay-Per-View on his new Trump TV station :pac:
    Didn't Biden start things by claiming he wanted to kick Trump's A$$ behind the gym?
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/big-tough-guy-joe-biden-threatens-trump-violence-behind-gym-video/


  • Options
    #968
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Amerika wrote: »
    Didn't Biden start things by claiming he wanted to kick Trump's A$$ behind the gym?
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/big-tough-guy-joe-biden-threatens-trump-violence-behind-gym-video/

    Yeah probably but isn't it a bit juvenile to challenge a 70 year old to a fist-fight?

    Kinda sums Trump up though!


  • Options
    #969
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,411 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Amerika wrote: »
    The best information I can find is from 1994 that shows only 3.9% of firearm purchases are made at gun shows. I doubt the numbers are much different today. If you can find more updated data I would be interested to read the stats.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-stale-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/01/20/e42ec050-629a-11e2-b05a-605528f6b712_blog.html

    The gun show loophole is a myth. The vast majority of people selling guns at gun shows are licensed dealers who must perform a background check. The only people allowed to sell guns at gun shows without doing background checks are individuals selling a very few number of guns like a widow selling her dead husbands collection. But the cost of purchasing a table at a gun show is cost prohibited for most of these type of people who only have a few guns to sell. Overheal, have you ever been to a gun show? I've been to several and have yet to find someone selling firearms that wasn't a dealer. Go to one! Tell me if you find someone willing to sell you a firearm without a background check. Good luck with that.
    http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/facts-about-gun-shows

    I have already supplied an exposé from CNN that shows exactly that: acquiring multiple weapons without identification at gun shows in one weekend.

    It's not even that you move goalposts you just refuse to acknowledge when there's been a point scored


  • Options
    #970
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    LOL. Trump is 70, Biden is 73. I'd pay to see that grudge match. :)


  • Options
    #971
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Amerika wrote: »
    LOL. Trump is 70, Biden is 73. I'd pay to see that grudge match. :)

    Both fairly big dudes could get interesting! MMA rules.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #972
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Overheal wrote: »
    Amerika wrote: »
    The best information I can find is from 1994 that shows only 3.9% of firearm purchases are made at gun shows. I doubt the numbers are much different today. If you can find more updated data I would be interested to read the stats.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-stale-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/01/20/e42ec050-629a-11e2-b05a-605528f6b712_blog.html

    The gun show loophole is a myth. The vast majority of people selling guns at gun shows are licensed dealers who must perform a background check. The only people allowed to sell guns at gun shows without doing background checks are individuals selling a very few number of guns like a widow selling her dead husbands collection. But the cost of purchasing a table at a gun show is cost prohibited for most of these type of people who only have a few guns to sell. Overheal, have you ever been to a gun show? I've been to several and have yet to find someone selling firearms that wasn't a dealer. Go to one! Tell me if you find someone willing to sell you a firearm without a background check. Good luck with that.
    http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/facts-about-gun-shows

    I have already supplied an expos from CNN that shows exactly that: acquiring multiple weapons without identification at gun shows in one weekend.

    It's not even that you move goalposts you just refuse to acknowledge when there's been a point scored
    So the seller in the video broke the law? And your contention is more laws would stop people from breaking the law? That is crazy thought.

    What I know is a casual seller does not need to preform a background check, but there are very few casual sellers. THE GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE IS A MYTH.

    http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/07/7-gun-control-myths-that-just-wont-die/


  • Options
    #973
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,411 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Again, since you've clearly sprayed your turf under the heading "it doesn't happen" then what is the problem with closing the loophole? If nobody does it, if so few people do it, how is it a burden to law abiding citizens?


  • Options
    #974
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Overheal wrote: »
    Again, since you've clearly sprayed your turf under the heading "it doesn't happen" then what is the problem with closing the loophole? If nobody does it, if so few people do it, how is it a burden to law abiding citizens?
    We already have far too many gun regulations. How about instead of imposing more, we remove some that infringe upon our 2A rights?


  • Options
    #975
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,411 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Amerika wrote: »
    We already have far too many gun regulations. How about instead of imposing more, we remove some that infringe upon our 2A rights?

    Ah but surely this one regulation getting passed would be politically advantageous? Some bipartisan action to improve congressional approval ratings. Anyway, I'm not hearing a great argument put forth against closing the loophole. Just cries of regulations.


  • Options
    #976
    Carcharodon
    Registered Users Posts: 3,975 ✭✭✭Carcharodon


    Amerika wrote: »
    Overheal wrote: »
    No the gun show purchasing rate was the stat I asked for. Your reskinned yahoo answers page didn't cover that in any form.
    Assuming it's either,

    High: are you then suggesting we definitely should close such a gaping loophole? Or

    Low: are you agreeing that, 'since it's statistically insignificant,' etc, why not just close the loophole and end the debate on said loophole?

    :)

    The best information I can find is from 1994 that shows only 3.9% of firearm purchases are made at gun shows. I doubt the numbers are much different today. If you can find more updated data I would be interested to read the stats.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-stale-claim-that-40-percent-of-gun-sales-lack-background-checks/2013/01/20/e42ec050-629a-11e2-b05a-605528f6b712_blog.html

    The gun show loophole is a myth. The vast majority of people selling guns at gun shows are licensed dealers who must perform a background check. The only people allowed to sell guns at gun shows without doing background checks are individuals selling a very few number of guns like a widow selling her dead husbands collection. But the cost of purchasing a table at a gun show is cost prohibited for most of these type of people who only have a few guns to sell. Overheal, have you ever been to a gun show? I've been to several and have yet to find someone selling firearms that wasn't a dealer. Go to one! Tell me if you find someone willing to sell you a firearm without a background check. Good luck with that.
    http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/facts-about-gun-shows
    I went to one in forth worth not so long ago, no interest in guns but interested in the whole dynamic of gun shows and the mindset of some of the people.
    I found everyone extremely nice but somewhat misguided from my point of view, I had some interesting discussions with some of the people at the stands and from what I understood, I could of purchased a gun that day with just my drivers license, I may be wrong but it seemed like a really simple process


  • Options
    #977
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Amerika wrote: »
    We already have far too many gun regulations. How about instead of imposing more, we remove some that infringe upon our 2A rights?

    If the loophole is a "myth" then how can it's removal infringe anyone's rights?


  • Options
    #978
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Have attended gun shows in WA state, one of the easiest states to purchase a gun. There were people there directly selling guns from collections, etc. No background check necessary but you could have it done at the show if you wanted, should you purchase from an individual not a dealer.

    Personally sold some firearms prior to moving, insisted that the purchaser had valid concealed carry permit and registered the sale with the state once completed.

    I think, though, this arc of the discussion should move elsewhere it's not a media vs. Trump thing. In Trump news, apparently he's officially, finally, permanently not raising money for the GOP any more in this cycle. What an amazing campaign he's run to destroy the GOP.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/10/25/republican_nominee_has_given_up_fundraising_for_the_ticket_and_party_he.html


  • Options
    #979
    20Cent
    Registered Users Posts: 8,938 ✭✭✭20Cent


    What exactly is HC proposing that worries the gun people so much?
    The same was said about Obama he was going to take away the guns don't think he did anything about guns.


  • Options
    #980
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,525 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Amerika wrote: »
    We already have far too many gun regulations. How about instead of imposing more, we remove some that infringe upon our 2A rights?

    By what metric are there "far too many gun regulations?"

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #981
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,354 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    If Powell and Rice won't vote for him, that should be enough for genuine conservatives and republican party members. Two very respected people in politics.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #982
    brickmauser
    Registered Users Posts: 403 ✭✭brickmauser


    Tippfella2C wrote: »
    Anybody want Trump to win, simply to beat the haters, the biased tv show hosts in America trying to ruin his campaign, the biased news stations all against him! Say what you like about him, the guy tells it like it is according to him.. he doesn't sugarcoat. Much of what he says too, is true and right, but too many people are on a bandwagon against him, not willing to agree, just to conform with others. Hilary Clinton is corrupt... yet the media let's her have a pass on that .. the email scandals for one thing.. Fox news has trumps side, but not sure if any others do . Way too many people on the bandwagon.. Trump says a lot of things that are corrrect

    Trump is an incompetent buffoon.
    His incompetence is more important than his buffoonery.
    I would actually forgive his loud mouth antics if he actually had a record of substance.
    Sadly he doesn't.
    If anyone else was running Hillary would be losing.
    Hillary is absolutely the most corrupt person to every run for the office of President.
    Period.
    American democracy - what is left of it - is truly in a sad and perilous state.
    Under Hillary imperialism will be ramped up and the power of money will be enshrined forever more.
    We are in the days of the fall of the Republic and the rise of the Empire


  • Options
    #983
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,354 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    It now seems Newt Gingrich doesn't accept Fox News as fair reporting. We are really gone off the scale here.


  • Options
    #984
    Trent Houseboat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,116 ✭✭✭Trent Houseboat


    Water John wrote:
    It now seems Newt Gingrich doesn't accept Fox News as fair reporting
    In fairness that's the truest thing he's said in a long time.

    No one in their right mind could consider the station who gave Sarah Palin a show as fair and balanced.


  • Options
    #985
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Water John wrote: »
    It now seems Newt Gingrich doesn't accept Fox News as fair reporting. We are really gone off the scale here.

    Not really, Newt Gingrich is a slimey toad and laughing stock even among many republicans at this stage in his career. He'll say anything for attention, he's just not as good at doing so as Trump, both to his chagrin and ironically, to his benefit.


  • Options
    #986
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Overheal wrote: »
    Ah but surely this one regulation getting passed would be politically advantageous? Some bipartisan action to improve congressional approval ratings. Anyway, I'm not hearing a great argument put forth against closing the loophole. Just cries of regulations.

    So you want our politicians to take away citizen's rights because it would be politically advantageous? That is dangerous talk. I believe you hear what you want to hear. As you grow older you will gain wisdom. And with that wisdom you will discover a right not fought for will soon be lost.


  • Options
    #987
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Carcharodon wrote: »
    I went to one in forth worth not so long ago, no interest in guns but interested in the whole dynamic of gun shows and the mindset of some of the people.
    I found everyone extremely nice but somewhat misguided from my point of view, I had some interesting discussions with some of the people at the stands and from what I understood, I could of purchased a gun that day with just my drivers license, I may be wrong but it seemed like a really simple process

    You very well could have walked out with a firearm, depending on what type you planned on purchasing. But it isn’t as simple as just having a driver’s license. That driver’s license must have photo identification on it, not something like a learner’s permit. Also you must fill out a detailed application which would include your social security number. The seller then would have to perform an online background check provided by the FBI.

    The recently leaked emails indicate Hillary Clinton’s resolve to illegitimately use executive authority to attack gun rights. Clinton would obviously work to take away people’s rights under the second amendment.


  • Options
    #988
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,322 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    Newt Gingrich always reminded me of Hank's father from King of the Hill.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r14rozZDzrM


  • Options
    #989
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,354 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    'As you grow older, you gain wisdom' Quote. Not in Donald's case.


  • Options
    #990
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Amerika wrote: »
    So you want our politicians to take away citizen's rights because it would be politically advantageous? That is dangerous talk. I believe you hear what you want to hear. As you grow older you will gain wisdom. And with that wisdom you will discover a right not fought for will soon be lost.

    Ironic coming dorm someone eager to curtail the right to vote - perhaps the most defining citizens right in any modern democracy.

    As for the second part, I remember mods asking people to attack the post and not the poster. Surely that applies both ways, right? Because I fail to see what that in any way has to do with overheals post, other than claiming he is young, naive and ultimately stupid.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #991
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    By what metric are there "far too many gun regulations?"

    We have something like 20,000 different gun laws across the nation comprising federal laws, state laws, and municipal laws. How’s that for a metric?

    I do not carry a gun in my car on a regular basis, and I do not have a carry permit, yet (but I will if Hillary becomes president). So in my state if I want to transport a firearm I must put the firearm in one section of the car, preferably the trunk, and carry the ammunition in a completely different part of the car and nowhere near the firearm. But municipalities have gone about creating their own gun laws. If I have a gun in the car and travel through one of these municipalities (nothing is posted, and I am required to know the gun laws of each and every individual municipality) I can be arrested. I work on the border of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. If I have a gun in the car and there is an accident on last exit of the PA interstate and am forced to continue into NJ, I can be arrested.

    Here are a couple of local stories for your reading enjoyment, and to give credence to that metric...

    http://www.policestateusa.com/2013/justice-for-brian-aitken/

    http://hotair.com/archives/2015/02/17/new-jersey-man-facing-ten-years-in-prison-for-possession-of-300-yr-old-flintlock-pistol/comment-page-1/

    http://www.philly.com/philly/news/new_jersey/20150403_Christie_pardons_Phila__mom_snagged_by_N_J__gun_law.html


Advertisement