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
2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)
Options
Comments
-
Join Date:Posts: 14816
lawrencesummers wrote: »Biden is unable to hold it together coherently when he is reading off script. Its sad to say that Trump might actually look good debating him. It will be carnage.Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »Have you actually ever watched a Trump press conference? He has a script and the moment he looks away from.it he comes out with nothing but absolute stupidity.
Go back and watch the 2015 debates with Clinton , he was a rambling shambles even then.
No Puppet.. No puppet , you're the puppet.
He debates like a child
And any of his recent unscripted interviews or Pressers have been an incoherent shambles..
Try reading a transcript of any of them, they are just appalling..0 -
Go back and watch the 2015 debates with Clinton , he was a rambling shambles even then.
No Puppet.. No puppet , you're the puppet.
He debates like a child
And any of his recent unscripted interviews or Pressers have been an incoherent shambles..
Try reading a transcript of any of them, they are just appalling..
Up against Biden he'll appear a genius of oratory.0 -
This really isn't great timing, what with the daily press conferences and Q&A sessions that are already doing him massive harm.
Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/21/senate-intel-report-confirms-russia-aimed-to-help-trump-in-2016-198171
"Tuesday's bipartisan report, from a panel chaired by North Carolina Republican Richard Burr, undercuts Trump's years of efforts to portray allegations of Kremlin assistance to his campaign as a "hoax," driven by Democrats and a “deep state” embedded within the government bureaucracy."0 -
Carfacemandog wrote: »This really isn't great timing, what with the daily press conferences and Q&A sessions that are already doing him massive harm.
Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/21/senate-intel-report-confirms-russia-aimed-to-help-trump-in-2016-198171
"Tuesday's bipartisan report, from a panel chaired by North Carolina Republican Richard Burr, undercuts Trump's years of efforts to portray allegations of Kremlin assistance to his campaign as a "hoax," driven by Democrats and a “deep state” embedded within the government bureaucracy."
I’ll see your Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016, and raise you a Newly Declassified Evidence: Russia Didn't Try to Help Elect Trump in 2016.Evidence recently declassified by DNI Richard Grenell and Attorney General Barr revealed that as early as July 2016 British intelligence operative and FBI informant Christopher Steele was involved in an FBI investigation of Trump. The same evidence showed that the FBI was repeatedly warned that Steele was susceptible to Russia disinformation and that U.S. intelligence had "concluded some of his Hillary Clinton-funded dossier’s claims about Trump were false information planted by Moscow’s intelligence services."
- - - -
Experts agreed that efforts by Russia to provide false negative information about Trump to Christopher Steele "undercut the notion that Moscow was trying to defeat Clinton and help Trump."
It has become widely accepted that Russia's hacking of DNC emails meant that they were trying to help then-candidate Trump win in 2016, but this newly declassified information supports the other theory—that Russia was simply trying to sow division and election discord in the United States.
https://pjmedia.com/trending/newly-declassified-evidence-russia-didnt-try-to-help-elect-trump-in-2016/You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
lawrencesummers wrote: »Biden is unable to hold it together coherently when he is reading off script. Its sad to say that Trump might actually look good debating him. It will be carnage.
Again parroting the same sh!t. Only morons genuinely believe this stuff. Trump supporters are immune to logic and reason.
Polls not looking good for trump https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/
With a recession on the horizon how is he going to turn that around?0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Again parroting the same sh!t. Only morons genuinely believe this stuff. Trump supporters are immune to logic and reason.
Polls not looking good for trump https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/
With a recession on the horizon how is he going to turn that around?
I really can’t say it again.
I’m not a trump fan.
Just because I think Biden is a terrible candidate doesn’t make me a trump supporter.
Is it really that hard to grasp that concept?0 -
Go back and watch the 2015 debates with Clinton , he was a rambling shambles even then.
No Puppet.. No puppet , you're the puppet.
He debates like a child
And any of his recent unscripted interviews or Pressers have been an incoherent shambles..
Try reading a transcript of any of them, they are just appalling..
Time will tell who comes off the better, but I’m sorry to say that I think Trump will as terrible as he Biden appears to have Public speaking wherewithal of a derelict house.0 -
-
If coherent public speaking was a prerequisite to win the White House, Trump wouldn't be in there.
When he goes off script he sounds like he has an acute brain injury.
Again, America elected a multi failed business man, who raw dogs porn stars and sexually assaults women because "they let him".
It's hilarious how the bar has suddenly been raised back up.
The bar is gone, Trump and the GOP fúcked it out the window.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
I laughed at the "source" because it a loon conspiracy site.
Hardly surprising you are the way you are if that is what you will your head with.
Bias much?
It’s very reputable!
“Overall, we rate PJ Media to be Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of propaganda and conspiracies as well as numerous failed fact checks.“
At LEAST he’s not quoting/plagiarising the White House again0 -
Cody montana wrote: »Bias much?
It’s very reputable!
At LEAST he’s not quoting/plagiarising the White House again.
“Overall, we rate PJ Media to be Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of propaganda and conspiracies as well as numerous failed fact checks.“
it certainly has a reputation.0 -
-
duploelabs wrote: »You're still to respond to those points. You said you're too busy earlier, yet you're still able to post rhetorical jibberish
So cmon then... Address them
- Against death penalty
Irrelevant, individual states decide death penalty
- Against Private Prisons
Will he give back the donations private prisons have given the Dem party? This is nonsense, he’s not going to be able to cancel contracts and in power there is a lot more money to be had in political contributions from private prison owners. Neither will they have the money to buy or build new prisons.
- Against for-profit charter schools,
So what, he’s not going to do anything about it.
- For campaign finance reform
Sure he is, but he’s not going to change it when the donations start coming his way if he gets elected.
- Tax corporations and wealthy to pay for infrastructure
If you believe this is going to happen in any constructive way then your very naive
- Raise corporate taxes
Something that may well cost jobs. Nice move joe.
- Better social safety net
With no details on how.
- Better global relations and trade
As critical as anyone wants to be of Trump, he has brought in some good trade deals for the US, and better global relations wouldn’t take much, you couldn’t actually have a lower level to start from. The only way is up here
- Less discrimination based on LGBT or race
This is just sad. His target isn’t to eliminate it, it’s just to improve it. Says a lot really.
- More efficient and compassionate refugee / asylum immigration
Wouldn’t take much, couldn’t be worse.
- Better response to disasters / emergencies
Wouldn’t take much. Couldn’t be worse
- Less stupid things that causing worry
What in the name of FAWWK is this doing in a political manifesto. Is he going to go house to house brining in the clothes off the line if rain is due, or help unemployed people with their CV’s???
- More progressive judges
Sure, he’s gonna retrain them is it? Or send them on a course or something? What a joke of a thing to say.
- Respect for rule of law
- Respect for government traditions and institutions
Sure, how?
- Expert-driven policymaking
I’m sure the current administration claims their policymaking is expert driven, what Joe is saying is that he will bring in his own experts.
- Accuracy as a constraint on government communications
Yea, because when the other party gets in they will be balanced about everything. Sure.
- No more favoritism of conservative media, no more propaganda relationship between the White House and Fox News
Good for you joe, you won’t have a relationship with Fox News. That’s a shock.
- No more saying ****ty things about political opponents and disfavored demographic groups
Great. But quickly followed by 2 ****ty things about political opponent.
- President no longer watches 4 hours of Fox News every day or goes golfing multiple times a week
- President no longer spends hundreds of millions of dollars on near-weekly vacations
Not only are these points lacking substance, costings,, evidence or concrete targets they are ranging from the simplistic to the absurd, and his website is as vague about these as well.
He’s a ****ing terrible candidate.0 -
-
Yeah, that's not what it said at all. Hence the 'lol' response from someone else for using pjmedia a few posts up.I’ll see your Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016, and raise you a Newly Declassified Evidence: Russia Didn't Try to Help Elect Trump in 2016.
https://pjmedia.com/trending/newly-declassified-evidence-russia-didnt-try-to-help-elect-trump-in-2016/
What happened here is that William Barr - the guy who got his role by writing a long letter to Trump about how he would defend him no matter what, then completely misrepresented and lied about the Mueller report, then lied about claiming he didn't know if Mueller had issue with it (Mueller had written to him explicitly about that, and had said as much in front of the Senate) - declassified info from Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report which noted errors and omissions in warrants for Carter Page who was an advisor to Trump.
What else did Horowitz find in his report your article refers to? That those warrants were still fully justified, and the FBI had more than enough evidence to begin investigations based on all the additional information they had provided.. Basically, you saw and raised me absolutely nothing.
Horowitz has also shot out at Trump for firing investigator general Michael Atkinson for refusing to cover up the Ukraine whistleblower scandal for which he has since been impeached, and several republican senators openly admitted he outright broke the law in doing so.
Meanwhile, a bipartisan senate investigation has today unanimously found that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election to help Trump, just as the Mueller report itself did.0 -
No, I attack CNN for who the sham media organization they are... no posting of links necessary. If anything I usually attack the post and if I do attack the source I give reasons behind it... Unlike the majority of my stalkers here.Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »Wem
You often attack "the source" when people post a link to CNN!
Actually... go ahead and find where I DID attack CNN for someone's post. Good luck with that Kemosabe. As usual I highly doubt you'll find something and just move on to the next worthless accusation against me.You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
The Horowitz report was worthless. He didn’t have investigative powers and could only make a conclusion based on what the scumballs he interviewed told him. Hey... That’s our story and we’re sticking to it.Carfacemandog wrote: »Yeah, that's not what it said at all. Hence the 'lol' response from someone else for using pjmedia a few posts up.
What happened here is that William Barr - the guy who got his role by writing a long letter to Trump about how he would defend him no matter what, then completely misrepresented and lied about the Mueller report, then lied about claiming he didn't know if Mueller had issue with it (Mueller had written to him explicitly about that, and had said as much in front of the Senate) - declassified info from Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report which noted errors and omissions in warrants for Carter Page who was an advisor to Trump.
What else did Horowitz find in his report your article refers to? That those warrants were still fully justified, and the FBI had more than enough evidence to begin investigations based on all the additional information they had provided.. Basically, you saw and raised me absolutely nothing.
Horowitz has also shot out at Trump for firing investigator general Michael Atkinson for refusing to cover up the Ukraine whistleblower scandal for which he has since been impeached, and several republican senators openly admitted he outright broke the law in doing so.
Meanwhile, a bipartisan senate investigation has today unanimously found that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election to help Trump, just as the Mueller report itself did.
It would be as if someone ‘investigator’ asked Himmler, Goebbels, Goering, and Hess about the persecution of the Jews before and during the war. And they all said there was no such thing. So the ‘investigator’ concludes there was no persecution of the Jews all those lovely Nazis did nothing wrong. Somehow, I think you’d believe it.You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
No, I attack CNN for who the sham media organization they are... no posting of links necessary. If anything I usually attack the post and if I do attack the source I give reasons behind it... Unlike the majority of my stalkers here.
Actually... go ahead and find where I DID attack CNN for someone's post. Good luck with that Kemosabe. As usual I highly doubt you'll find something and just move on to the next worthless accusation against me.
Oh Obtuse, you're entirely incapable of accepting the fact that the commander in chief does nothing. He's only started doing press conferences because he can no longer do rallies. He's handled this crisis atrociously, I feel like it will take a year or even longer to realise the extent of how many unnecessary deaths have occurred.
In the months to come, you will point at the WHO(who may have failed to some extent) and China(Similar). But you'll be incapable of pointing at POTUS who was warned. Who actively diminished the severity of the crisis and still does to some extent. He is not guiding anyone, he is given undue confidence to the average citizen. His staff actively tried to warn him but he actively avoided them.
This is a crisis that will be remembered throughout the century. The likes of the UK and US will be remembered as nations that elected morons/entertainers. As a result, they ended up with incompetent leaders that endangered the public. They became more obsessed with ratings and popularity. It's utterly bleak.
You or Pete will respond with jabs at the democrats and the likes. An endless performance while being entirely incapable of admitting fault. I say this as a person with family members who have been directly affected in the US.0 -
Advertisement
-
lawrencesummers wrote: »- Against death penalty
Irrelevant, individual states decide death penalty
- Against Private Prisons
Will he give back the donations private prisons have given the Dem party? This is nonsense, he’s not going to be able to cancel contracts and in power there is a lot more money to be had in political contributions from private prison owners. Neither will they have the money to buy or build new prisons.
- Against for-profit charter schools,
So what, he’s not going to do anything about it.
- For campaign finance reform
Sure he is, but he’s not going to change it when the donations start coming his way if he gets elected.
- Tax corporations and wealthy to pay for infrastructure
If you believe this is going to happen in any constructive way then your very naive
- Raise corporate taxes
Something that may well cost jobs. Nice move joe.
- Better social safety net
With no details on how.
- Better global relations and trade
As critical as anyone wants to be of Trump, he has brought in some good trade deals for the US, and better global relations wouldn’t take much, you couldn’t actually have a lower level to start from. The only way is up here
- Less discrimination based on LGBT or race
This is just sad. His target isn’t to eliminate it, it’s just to improve it. Says a lot really.
- More efficient and compassionate refugee / asylum immigration
Wouldn’t take much, couldn’t be worse.
- Better response to disasters / emergencies
Wouldn’t take much. Couldn’t be worse
- Less stupid things that causing worry
What in the name of FAWWK is this doing in a political manifesto. Is he going to go house to house brining in the clothes off the line if rain is due, or help unemployed people with their CV’s???
- More progressive judges
Sure, he’s gonna retrain them is it? Or send them on a course or something? What a joke of a thing to say.
- Respect for rule of law
- Respect for government traditions and institutions
Sure, how?
- Expert-driven policymaking
I’m sure the current administration claims their policymaking is expert driven, what Joe is saying is that he will bring in his own experts.
- Accuracy as a constraint on government communications
Yea, because when the other party gets in they will be balanced about everything. Sure.
- No more favoritism of conservative media, no more propaganda relationship between the White House and Fox News
Good for you joe, you won’t have a relationship with Fox News. That’s a shock.
- No more saying ****ty things about political opponents and disfavored demographic groups
Great. But quickly followed by 2 ****ty things about political opponent.
- President no longer watches 4 hours of Fox News every day or goes golfing multiple times a week
- President no longer spends hundreds of millions of dollars on near-weekly vacations
Not only are these points lacking substance, costings,, evidence or concrete targets they are ranging from the simplistic to the absurd, and his website is as vague about these as well.
He’s a ****ing terrible candidate.
I'll take on a few points.
Less discrimination based on LGBT or race
This is just sad. His target isn’t to eliminate it, it’s just to improve it. Says a lot really.
You will never eliminate discrimination, why do you find less discrimination to be sad?
Trump banned Trans people from the military, pushed for his justice department to make it legal for LGBT people to be fired for being gay, banned people from Muslim countries and called other African countries ****holes, called Mexicans rapists, called people who chanted "Jews will not replace us" as very fine people.
- Tax corporations and wealthy to pay for infrastructure
If you believe this is going to happen in any constructive way then your very naive
Why?
Tax the wealthy, more money comes in.
The Trump tax cut pushed the deficit towards a trillion.
Trump has completely failed on infrastructure.
Last time he banged his hand on the table and stormed out of a meeting with Nancy Pelosi.
More progressive judges
Sure, he’s gonna retrain them is it? Or send them on a course or something? What a joke of a thing to say.
Erm, he's going to nominate them, as opposed to Mitch and Trumps conservative judges who are trying to take rights away from people.
You actually haven't made a single valid point.
"So what" and "Wouldn't take much" is not a counter argument.
BTW, your bias is very passionate.0 -
Just because the reality isn't to your liking doesn't stop it from being the reality.The Horowitz report was worthless. He didn’t have investigative powers and could only make a conclusion based on what the scumballs he interviewed told him. Hey... That’s our story and we’re sticking to it.
It would be as if someone ‘investigator’ asked Himmler, Goebbels, Goering, and Hess about the persecution of the Jews before and during the war. And they all said there was no such thing. So the ‘investigator’ concludes there was no persecution of the Jews all those lovely Nazis did nothing wrong. Somehow, I think you’d believe it.
Trying to compare them to nazis just shows you have no argument to come back with, and is deeply ironic as the neo nazis in America, 'very fine people' that they are, make no secret of the fact that they are indeed hardcore supporters of Donald Trump.0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »Oh Obtuse, you're entirely incapable of accepting the fact that the commander in chief does nothing. He's only started doing press conferences because he can no longer do rallies. He's handled this crisis atrociously, I feel like it will take a year or even longer to realise the extent of how many unnecessary deaths have occurred.
In the months to come, you will point at the WHO(who may have failed to some extent) and China(Similar). But you'll be incapable of pointing at POTUS who was warned. Who actively diminished the severity of the crisis and still does to some extent. He is not guiding anyone, he is given undue confidence to the average citizen. His staff actively tried to warn him but he actively avoided them.
This is a crisis that will be remembered throughout the century. The likes of the UK and US will be remembered as nations that elected morons/entertainers. As a result, they ended up with incompetent leaders that endangered the public. They became more obsessed with ratings and popularity. It's utterly bleak.
You or Pete will respond with jabs at the democrats and the likes. An endless performance while being entirely incapable of admitting fault. I say this as a person with family members who have been directly affected in the US.
I once also got one of those phony diplomas in a box of Cracker Jack that noted "Congrats, you is now a psychologist." But I was smart enough to throw it away for the useless piece of paper it was, and not use it as an accreditation allowing me to psychoanalyse someone.You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
-
At least Biden is capable of answering questions at a press conference.
Also, is that the same Horowitz report that was supposed to exonerate trump?0 -
Cody montana wrote: »I'll take on a few points.
Less discrimination based on LGBT or race
This is just sad. His target isn’t to eliminate it, it’s just to improve it. Says a lot really.
You will never eliminate discrimination, why do you find less discrimination to be sad?
Trump banned Trans people from the military, pushed for his justice department to make it legal for LGBT people to be fired for being gay, banned people from Muslim countries and called other African countries ****holes, called Mexicans rapists, called people who chanted "Jews will not replace us" as very fine people.
- Tax corporations and wealthy to pay for infrastructure
If you believe this is going to happen in any constructive way then your very naive
Why?
Tax the wealthy, more money comes in.
The Trump tax cut pushed the deficit towards a trillion.
Trump has completely failed on infrastructure.
Last time he banged his hand on the table and stormed out of a meeting with Nancy Pelosi.
More progressive judges
Sure, he’s gonna retrain them is it? Or send them on a course or something? What a joke of a thing to say.
Erm, he's going to nominate them, as opposed to Mitch and Trumps conservative judges who are trying to take rights away from people.
You actually haven't made a single valid point.
"So what" and "Wouldn't take much" is not a counter argument.
BTW, your bias is very passionate.
Again another poster who can’t differentiate between a persons opinion of a Singular candidate. Ones standing on the candidate is not mutually exclusive. I look at Biden from a critical point of view and To me he is a terrible candidate who hasn’t got the ability to turn the all important swing voters in his favour.
What I think of Biden has nothing to do with Donald. A lot of people think that Trump And Biden are opposites, that if you view one as evil the other must be good, and that’s simply not true. I just view them as individual candidates and Biden is a terrible candidate. it’s actually even sadder that the dems can’t come up with a better candidate to take on the many weaknesses that Trump has.
Bidens best hope of election unfortunately is that the USA gets Infinatley worse to the point of looting, food shortages, nationwide marshal law, and a tenfold increase in Covid deaths making Trump eventually run out of people to blame because the stock exchange hasn’t been affected greatly and the unemployed numbers will shrink when restrictions are lifted. That’s a while away though.0 -
At least Biden is capable of answering questions at a press conference.
Also, is that the same Horowitz report that was supposed to exonerate trump?
As long as those questions don’t go outside asking what his favourite color is then it should be fine.
https://youtu.be/oihV9yrZRHg0 -
lawrencesummers wrote: »As long as those questions don’t go outside asking what his favourite color is then it should be fine.
https://youtu.be/oihV9yrZRHg
Random 15 minute youtube video?
How about telling us what the pertinent part is or what point to skip to?0 -
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »Random 15 minute youtube video?
How about telling us what the pertinent part is or what point to skip to?
No. Watch it all because his incoherent nonsense and inability to talk effectively is visible across the entire video. There is one point that’s horrendous, but if I posted that limited clip people would be cribbing that i only posted a portion of the video.
He is an utterly terrible speaker.0 -
Advertisement
-
lawrencesummers wrote: »No. Watch it all because his incoherent nonsense and inability to talk effectively is visible across the entire video. There is one point that’s horrendous, but if I posted that limited clip people would be cribbing that i only posted a portion of the video.
He is an utterly terrible speaker.
In work, no time to waste 15 minutes watching it. If you can't describe what's so terrible then it's not worth posting it.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement