Recruiting Forum Off Topic Thread III

[Volbucky]

Well one of us is blind for sure...

I wouldn’t know what to reply back either if I were you.

 

[Geaux_Vols]

I clicked it but it wouldn’t let me read it because I’m not a subscriber. Nor will I ever subscribe to them.

Linking N.Y. Times articles has zero stance though. They hate him and have always pushed the Democrat agenda.

I could link Fox articles against Billary and Obama but that wouldn’tbe useful either.

weird, im not either but i can read it. it doesn't matter if they hate him or not if they are citing documentation of his corruption. if you gave me some fox article reporting on hillary's death squads or obama's birth certificate or whatever, i would at least read it and then attempt to lay out facts to prove to you how its wrong.

 

[Volbucky]

weird, im not either but i can read it. it doesn't matter if they hate him or not if they are citing documentation of his corruption. if you gave me some fox article reporting on hillary's death squads or obama's birth certificate or whatever, i would at least read it and then attempt to lay out facts to prove to you how its wrong.

 

[Geaux_Vols]

View attachment 269090

huh. weird

i know the subject matter isn't something you agree with, but its a shame more people can't see that article if only for the really amazing multi-media stuff do they do in it. disregard subject matter entirely, and its pretty visually stimulating. worthy of a Pulitzer, imo. they did another article about maduro's killing of drug kingpins in Venezuela that had equally visually impressive presentations.

 

[GoBigOrange86]

Who were our choices in 2016?

Trump
Hillary
The Tiger King
Bernie Sanders
Etc
Etc
Etc

I would have voted for The Tiger King over Hillary...or Bernie for that matter.

It is amazing when you think about it. Trump and Hillary had the highest unfavorables by far and both were the ones who got nominated. The election pitted the most unpopular nominees ever from each respective party against each other. It's enough to make one think the way we nominate candidates is ridiculous.

 

[Devo182]

Lol like I think Biden is a viable candidate. There you go assuming since I take a credible shot at Trump I must be voting democrat. Stop the brainwashing!

Been saying this for awhile...here on VN if you take a dig at the color yellow, then people will jump to you loving green. Almost impossible to make a particular statement without someone taking it tangentially and blowing it up into something that was never said. It's amazing.

 

[GoBigOrange86]

Been saying this for awhile...here on VN if you take a dig at the color yellow, then people will jump to you loving green. Almost impossible to make a particular statement without someone taking it tangentially and blowing it up into something that was never said. It's amazing.

oh wow so you mention yellow and green but don't even bring up blue? Disgusting. You must hate blue.

 

[Devo182]

Listen, politics aside. He's just not a leader. I really dgaf about business acumen right now. We simply need someone who can take an effective plan and implement it. IOW, unprecedented steps to stop this stupid bs, so people wont die.

The mentality of business people and public servants are very far apart. The 2 positions have different interests. One is maximizing shareholder wealth by focusing on those clients with the highest lifetime wealth value. Public servants are servants of all, and sometimes moreso of those that are the worst off.

Now, great leaders can lead in a variety of ways. But that is the skill that is needed, not business acumen. The government is not a business.

 

[Crazy Ivan]

Been saying this for awhile...here on VN if you take a dig at the color yellow, then people will jump to you loving green. Almost impossible to make a particular statement without someone taking it tangentially and blowing it up into something that was never said. It's amazing.

You're way over-analyzing it. Biden is the likely challenger to Trump in November, so if someone says they will not vote for Trump, the natural assumption would be they will vote for Biden, unless, of course, they plan to throw away their vote on a 3rd party candidate, which admittedly I have done a couple of times (Perot '92 and Paul '08).

 

[bignewt]

You're way over-analyzing it. Biden is the likely challenger to Trump in November, so if someone says they will not vote for Trump, the natural assumption would be they will vote for Biden, unless, of course, they plan to throw away their vote on a 3rd party candidate, which admittedly I have done a couple of times (Perot '92 and Paul '08).

Which I will continue to do as the two parties send out complete human trash as choices. You can say I am throwing my vote away and I can say you are destroying our country by voting for sheer ineptitude.

 

[GoBigOrange86]

You're way over-analyzing it. Biden is the likely challenger to Trump in November, so if someone says they will not vote for Trump, the natural assumption would be they will vote for Biden, unless, of course, they plan to throw away their vote on a 3rd party candidate, which admittedly I have done a couple of times (Perot '92 and Paul '08).

Or not vote, which I'm strongly considering.

 

[InVOLuntary]

There you go assuming he is a Clinton supporter because he bashes Trump!

#guilty
#theyallshouldbeinjail
#vincefoster

Hes's a confessed liberal

 

[InVOLuntary]

oh its not limited to his many, many bankruptcies, his campaign is also stiffing a handful of cities that are requesting reimbursement for proving security for his presidential rallies. its not just "a thing that happens", its how he conducts business. and it sucks.

Unpaid bills pile up in Trump rallies’ wake

the trump org has been documented inflating their earnings for at least a decade now, no way to know trumps actual net worth because he won't release his tax returns.

Trump's net worth is far less than he claims, Trump Organization revenue suggests

its funny how all criticism of trumps real-time transgressions are summarily dismissed as TDS, but you guys are still on about Hillary, who hasn't been relevant for 3 years now lol. would that be HDS?

I told you I do't like Trump. I'm just not so blinded by hate that I can acknowledge his business prowess. One thing I do see is fault in both. You can't.

 

[Geaux_Vols]

Hes's a confessed liberal

i voted for clinton out of necessity, not necessarily enthusiasm.

 

[Geaux_Vols]

I told you I do't like Trump. I'm just not so blinded by hate that I can acknowledge his business prowess. One thing I do see is fault in both. You can't.

what im trying to tell you is that his business prowess is built on lying to people and cheating, well beyond the scope of normal "business is business". i don't care if you like him or not, i'm telling you your premise is fundamentally challenged.

 

[bignewt]

whew fun in here today! I even got out about 2000 words on the new novel! #coffeerocks

 

[Devo182]

There is consistency in DC.

They consistently screw the American people. Doesn't matter which party is in power. If we go to a three party system, it will only add a third choice for the American people to be screwed by.

The system itself isn't bad. It's the people in the system that have ruined it. Libertarians (in DC) right now...are nothing more than people who couldn't get their agendas pushed in one of the other parties. Party hopping to get what you want has become the norm in DC.

Jmo, but I take a bit of an opposite view of system vs people. The system shapes and corrupts the people. We have been cycling politicians for centuries and still complain. So, it ain't the people from then or from now, I would suggest. I don't think they are inherently corrupt or misguided. Do all these people suddenly become corrupt and lose sight when they land in DC? I think our system is skewed to voting in wealthy candidates and they become even more intertwined with wealth and power players once there. Then with no term limits, they go on and on based on name and familiarity, with never having to get back to the real world.

People say "drain the swamp", but who do they think will fill those positions if the system is still the same?

People still funded and beholden to big money backers and lobbyists. Still gaining votes with multimillion dollar campaigns (is this really necessary in the digitial age?). Still debating with a limited, curated set of "worthy candidates" and with 20 second soundbites. How about lengthy talks over issues? Why are we accepting dumbed down, formulaic "debates"?

 

[GoBigOrange86]

Jmo, but I take a bit of an opposite view of system vs people. The system shapes and corrupts the people. We have been cycling politicians for centuries and still complain. So, it ain't the people from then or from now, I would suggest. I don't think they are inherently corrupt or misguided. Do all these people suddenly become corrupt and lose sight when they land in DC? I think our system is skewed to voting in wealthy candidates and they become even more intertwined with wealth and power players once there. Then with no term limits, they go on and on based on name and familiarity, with never having to get back to the real world.

People say "drain the swamp", but who do they think will fill those positions if the system is still the same?

People still funded and beholden to big money backers and lobbyists. Still gaining votes with multimillion dollar campaigns (is this really necessary in the digitial age?). Still debating with a limited, curated set of "worthy candidates" and with 20 second soundbites. How about lengthy talks over issues? Why are we accepting dumbed down, formulaic "debates"?

I'm not sure it's the system that shapes and corrupts per se, though I do believe it plays a role. I think the bigger problem is the kind of person who is attracted to a political career.

It's also questionable how beholden they are to lobbyists. Lobbyists are an important part of the system, but they are probably more influenced by elected officials than the other way around.

 

[BaldBiker]

Jmo, but I take a bit of an opposite view of system vs people. The system shapes and corrupts the people. We have been cycling politicians for centuries and still complain. So, it ain't the people from then or from now, I would suggest. I don't think they are inherently corrupt or misguided. Do all these people suddenly become corrupt and lose sight when they land in DC? I think our system is skewed to voting in wealthy candidates and they become even more intertwined with wealth and power players once there. Then with no term limits, they go on and on based on name and familiarity, with never having to get back to the real world.

People say "drain the swamp", but who do they think will fill those positions if the system is still the same?

People still funded and beholden to big money backers and lobbyists. Still gaining votes with multimillion dollar campaigns (is this really necessary in the digitial age?). Still debating with a limited, curated set of "worthy candidates" and with 20 second soundbites. How about lengthy talks over issues? Why are we accepting dumbed down, formulaic "debates"?

Good argument.

 

[Weezer]

Congressional term limits. We need them. Nothing corrupts like lifelong politicians that know they can get away with anything.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

oh wow so you mention yellow and green but don't even bring up blue? Disgusting. You must hate blue.

This is racism in its purest form.

 

[Devo182]

It is amazing when you think about it. Trump and Hillary had the highest unfavorables by far and both were the ones who got nominated. The election pitted the most unpopular nominees ever from each respective party against each other. It's enough to make one think the way we nominate candidates is ridiculous.

Name recognition trumps all. It is crazy.

During my lifetime:

Reagan
Reagan
Bush
Clinton
Clinton
Bush
Bush
Obama
Obama
Trump

Out of all these, Obama in 2008 was probably the only one not well known nationally.

 

[GoBigOrange86]

Congressional term limits. We need them. Nothing corrupts like lifelong politicians that know they can get away with anything.

I used to be on board with this but now I'm not so sure. There are a lot of negative consequences of term limits we don't think about. It would, for example, empower bureaucrats and interest groups even more than they already are.

 

[Devo182]

I'm not sure it's the system that shapes and corrupts per se, though I do believe it plays a role. I think the bigger problem is the kind of person who is attracted to a political career.

It's also questionable how beholden they are to lobbyists. Lobbyists are an important part of the system, but they are probably more influenced by elected officials than the other way around.

If this is true, then we have no control over it, right? We can't decide who runs. We can only control how long they are in office and the system that is around them. If we change the system, then maybe those inclined to have negative intentions will be less likely to run.

I'm not sure what kind of people these are though. I've only met local politicians and they are a diferent breed.

 

[IPleadInsanity]

what im trying to tell you is that his business prowess is built on lying to people and cheating, well beyond the scope of normal "business is business". i don't care if you like him or not, i'm telling you your premise is fundamentally challenged.

All politicians lie and cheat so that is an unusual argument. I am really tired of these type debates, my lying cheating politician is better than your lying cheating politician. When we finally figure out that its them against us things will begin to change. There is only 1 side, our side.