Trump vs Biden 2020, Ultimate battle for the fate of our universe (pt 3)Read OP 01/11

randd1

eagle eye wrote: »

Ah come on. Joe is dealing with the Ukraine as VP and his son ends up on a gas board there.
If you don't think that stinks then you are very naive.

Did either of the Biden’s do anything that’s proven to be illegal for this to happen?

If not, and everything was done legally, what’s the actual problem?

Patrick2010

Haven’t read the whole thread but just read a tweet on Trumps Twitter page he retweeted from Qanon suggesting that Obama faked Bin Laden killing and he had the Seals killed afterwards.
When challenged he just said I’m just putting it out there, is that a man you’d vote for?

Graham

eagle eye wrote: »

No, not honest enough.

I've clearly stated I don't think Biden is anywhere near as corrupt as Trump.

I don't think it matters, although you do appear to agree with the sentiment that Trump is the worse option.

I think that's the basis for the Democrats current strong lead. Whoever they ran for President, Trump is the worse option.

osarusan

eagle eye wrote: »

Ah come on. Joe is dealing with the Ukraine as VP and his son ends up on a gas board there.
If you don't think that stinks then you are very naive.

Potential for corruption, sure. And maybe Burisma thought having Biden on board would help them out in some way. I can definitely see the logic to having those suspicions.

But there have been Ukranian investigations and US Republican investigations which have failed to dredge up any actual corruption.

Wiki tells me that when Biden was offered the position on the Burisma board, some of his partners were against it from a 'reputational risk' point of view.

And maybe that is what we are seeing here - even without evidence of actual impropriety, it just looks terrible and suspicious anyway.

Lolle06

osarusan wrote: »

Potential for corruption, sure. And maybe Burisma thought having Biden on board would help them out in some way. I can definitely see the logic to having those suspicions.

But there have been Ukranian investigations and US Republican investigations which have failed to dredge up any actual corruption.

Wiki tells me that when Biden was offered the position on the Burisma board, some of his partners were against it from a 'reputational risk' point of view.

And maybe that is what we are seeing here - even without evidence of actual impropriety, it just looks terrible and suspicious anyway.

I am guessing Biden and the Dem party knew that very well before Biden entered the presidential race and therefore have plenty of proof that nothing was done illegally.

Kermit.de.frog

Graham wrote: »

I don't think it matters, although you do appear to agree with the sentiment that Trump is the worse option.

I think that's the basis for the Democrats current strong lead. Whoever they ran for President, Trump is the worse option.

+1 It does not matter whether you are dem or republican. There are many republicans who won't vote democrat but know he can't be president, he is unfit. So they'll forego a vote. There are some who will switch for the first time against all their instincts just for stability and normalcy, common sense, basic decency.

That's why Trump will lose. His base which he plays to is nowhere near enough to carry him. He has alienated everyone else.

MoonUnit75

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

+1 It does not matter whether you are dem or republican. There are many republicans who won't vote democrat but know he can't be president, he is unfit. So they'll forego a vote. There are some who will switch for the first time against all their instincts just for stability and normalcy, common sense, basic decency.

That's why Trump will lose. His base which he plays to is nowhere near enough to carry him. He has alienated everyone else.

It’s definitely true that Biden could be a better president than Trump, but putting Harris in as president in waiting? Biden will be in his 80s soon. Even the Democrats rejected Harris way back, I actually think she’s just as unfit for the role as Trump.

hetuzozaho

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

It’s definitely true that Biden could be a better president than Trump, but putting Harris in as president in waiting? Biden will be in his 80s soon. Even the Democrats rejected Harris way back, I actually think she’s just as unfit for the role as Trump.

I'm not familiar with her really. Why would you deem her unfit for the role?

MoonUnit75

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

It’s definitely true that Biden could be a better president than Trump, but putting Harris in as president in waiting? Biden will be in his 80s soon. Even the Democrats rejected Harris way back, I actually think she’s just as unfit for the role as Trump.

Can you explain why she's unfit for it? I'd also suspect Biden will comfortably last the term but she'll run in 2024.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

stefanovich wrote: »

If you exclude California alone Trump won the popular vote.

HIllary total : 62,523,126
Trump total : 61,201,031

Hillary minus Cali : 62,523,126 - 5,589,936 = 56,933,190
Trump minus Cali : 61,201,031 - 3,021,095 = 58,179,936

Why would you exclude the most populous state in the union? Or any state?

Phoebas

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Why would you exclude the most populous state in the union? Or any state?

To make the pieces that don't fit, fit.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

jasper_Quinn wrote: »

Put my money where my mouth is, will any who think Biden will win do the same?

Ooh, €50! You just don’t give a fuck, do you?

Put £1,000 on Trump like I saw some guy do on Twitter and we might be somewhat intrigued.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

It’s definitely true that Biden could be a better president than Trump, but putting Harris in as president in waiting? Biden will be in his 80s soon. Even the Democrats rejected Harris way back, I actually think she’s just as unfit for the role as Trump.

Don’t know much about Harris. What makes her unfit in your opinion?

MadYaker

22 million have already voted according to NBC? That sounds mad, turnout could be the highest in decades. That’s probably not good for trump.

Skeetur

MadYaker wrote: »

22 million have already voted according to NBC? That sounds mad, turnout could be the highest in decades. That’s probably not good for trump.

Can you imagine how insufferable he'd be if he won a reelection after the largest turnout in decades? "I'm the most successful president in the history of the United States. Everybody says so. "

Cody montana

MadYaker wrote: »

22 million have already voted according to NBC? That sounds mad, turnout could be the highest in decades. That’s probably not good for trump.

I think people fear republican voter suppression.
Or they hate trump.

Kermit.de.frog

MadYaker wrote: »

22 million have already voted according to NBC? That sounds mad, turnout could be the highest in decades. That’s probably not good for trump.

It presents potentially another problem.

On election night Trump could be ahead in states that have not yet counted those ballots.

He could rile his base by suggesting he has won when in fact he hasn't. It could be days before the mail-ins are counted.

Then you'll get degenerate nonsense about non existent huge voter fraud.

Trump's child like mentality suggests he will take as many people down with him as he can including the voters and he'll be inciting them right to the election.

If he loses he'll stoke violence.

eagle eye

duploelabs wrote:

There's absolutely no verified proof of any fault. This isn't the conspiracy forum where one fills in the gaps from a patchwork of dodgy sources.

It's a fact that whole Joe Biden, as VP, was dealing with the Ukraine that his son got a highly paying job on a gas board.
It doesn't appear that he had any qualifications or experience to make this appointment look sound in any way.
Do you dispute any of the above.
Please start your answer with yes I dispute it or no I don't dispute it.

duploelabs wrote:

If you want to build the case go right ahead, but stating that Hunter was on the board of a company in a foreign country whilst Biden was VP and then asking for our opinion is just weird as we, like when you brought up Tara Reed the other week, have no idea how you're framing the question

I'm not asking anybody to build a case. I'm asking that given the information above, which is true, if you think that there's a stench off it.

eagle eye

ArmaniJeanss wrote:

A minor point, but the country is called Ukraine since independence. Putting 'The' in front of it is moderately offensive to Ukrainians, as it harks back to the nomenclature when it was a province of the USSR.

If a Ukrainian takes issue with it I'll apologise to them.

Phoebas

At worst the Hunter Biden thing is the energy company giving him a gig in the hopes that it would give them some indirect influence. That doesn't amount to corruption, especially not on Joe Biden's side, but it could probably have been used to tarnish Joe Biden's back story of coming from a modest upbringing in Scranton and working hard for what he earned.

It doesn't amount to much but the Republicans are massively overplaying it. The likes of Giuliani are trying to spin this into Hunter Biden as a 'bagman' for the Biden 'crime family' and this being the biggest political scandal in history.
Of course, no normal person is going to buy that line, and so they've squandered any bit of serious traction that might have got.

eagle eye

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote:

Put £1,000 on Trump like I saw some guy do on Twitter and we might be somewhat intrigued.

You put a £1000 on Biden and put up the proof here if you are such a big balls to call somebody else out like that.

stefanovich

MadYaker wrote: »

22 million have already voted according to NBC? That sounds mad, turnout could be the highest in decades. That’s probably not good for trump.

New voter registrations in Florida were largely GOP.

stefanovich

Phoebas wrote: »

At worst the Hunter Biden thing is the energy company giving him a gig in the hopes that it would give them some indirect influence. That doesn't amount to corruption, especially not on Joe Biden's side, but it could probably have been used to tarnish Joe Biden's back story of coming from a modest upbringing in Scranton and working hard for what he earned.

It doesn't amount to much but the Republicans are massively overplaying it. The likes of Giuliani are trying to spin this into Hunter Biden as a 'bagman' for the Biden 'crime family' and this being the biggest political scandal in history.
Of course, no normal person is going to buy that line, and so they've squandered any bit of serious traction that might have got.

I think it perfectly plausible that Joe used his position to enrich himself and his family. Am I not normal?

Phoebas

stefanovich wrote: »

I think it perfectly plausible that Joe used his position to enrich himself and his family. Am I not normal?

Given what we know of Joe Biden in his decades in public service, I don't think it's plausible that he would, at this late stage in life, start using the positions he holds corruptly for personal enrichment.

I think most normal people would need some strong evidence before finding that plausible. The rantings of Rudy Gulliani don't meet that bar.

MoonUnit75

Phoebas wrote: »

At worst the Hunter Biden thing is the energy company giving him a gig in the hopes that it would give them some indirect influence. That doesn't amount to corruption, especially not on Joe Biden's side, but it could probably have been used to tarnish Joe Biden's back story of coming from a modest upbringing in Scranton and working hard for what he earned.

It doesn't amount to much but the Republicans are massively overplaying it. The likes of Giuliani are trying to spin this into Hunter Biden as a 'bagman' for the Biden 'crime family' and this being the biggest political scandal in history.
Of course, no normal person is going to buy that line, and so they've squandered any bit of serious traction that might have got.

If one of the richest men in one of the most corrupt countries in the world has significant compromising information on the US president's son and perhaps even the president himself, you don't think this is a problem? Particularly given the tensions between Russia and Ukraine?

Biden's team have also not denied the laptop information is real and have restricted their comments on Biden meeting a representative of the oligarch in question to saying 'there is no official record of any shady meetings with Ukrainian companies being investigated in the UK for massive fraud'. They didn't explicitly say he never met him, just that they have nothing on the schedule for it.

In a way the Biden team should be glad the shady dirt is all coming out now.

Phoebas

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

If [....]

Of course.

eagle eye

A friend in the US just texted.
She has no political.affiliatiins but feels it's important to vote.
She said Trump has to go but doesn't like Biden either. She's considering voting for the Green Party.

I told her if she firmly believes that Trump has to go then vote for the perso most likely to make that happen.

Kermit.de.frog

Voting for third party is not voting against Trump. It's a wasted vote. Concerned republicans should vote for Biden and make it count.

MadYaker

stefanovich wrote: »

I think it perfectly plausible that Joe used his position to enrich himself and his family. Am I not normal?

Find me an American politician that’s been in the game as long as Biden and isn’t filthy stinking rich

Graham

stefanovich wrote: »

I think it perfectly plausible that Joe used his position to enrich himself and his family. Am I not normal?

Perfectly plausible that Hunter used his Fathers position for his own gain.

Not seeing how Hunter's father should be held to account for it.