TrumPutinGate

#8,127
#8,127
lawgator1 said:
The divide within the Dem party right now is over what is important. As in the GOP, there are elements within the Dem party that have as their priority and want to emphasize social issues. Whereas, the mainstream of the party wants to make the core message one of economics.

The GOP has its wing of making everything about abortion or gay rights.

The Dem has its wing of wanting to make everything about racial minority or gay rights.

The GOP mainstream wants to downplay those issues, viewing them as divisive, and focus on lowering taxes and regulation on businesses and the wealthy with the notion it will cause massive growth, that will benefit everyone.

The Dem mainstream wants to downplay its social policy wings, also viewing them as needlessly divisive, and focus on tax cuts and a broader social safety net for the lower and middle classes, reasoning that the wealthy and big business have done just fine in the last 20 years, and what is needed to spur growth is middle class consumption demand.
Click to expand...

At this point, it's going beyond that. It appears there are more than a few grumblings the party that the leadership just isn't representative of them any longer. And they are looking for a change. Plus, you have the rank and file centrist Democrats that are shying away from the party over the social issues. They are being drowned out by the clamor of the extreme left wing at the moment.

Something has to give in the DNC if they are to survive. If (and it's early) they don't make up any ground in Congress in 2018, I'd look for a wholesale revolt against the "mainstream" party similar to the Tea Party movement in 2010. And you'll either have the party slip into the far left social issues or the "masses" start shutting down the extremist portion. But they aren't doing themselves any favors right now by continuing to allow the far left to do the "talking."
 
#8,128
#8,128
Velo Vol said:
Last week he tweeted the Russian meddling saga was a "HOAX." Now he's blaming Obama for not doing anything about it.

How many more examples do you need?
Click to expand...

And that has what to do with the fact all politicians lie, cheat and steal their way into office? And put on a fake face for the crowd even if it goes against their personal beliefs?
 
#8,129
#8,129
Look at this loser

DDQ6yTeV0AAwKWu.jpg:large
 
#8,130
#8,130
luthervol said:
I believe there was specific knowledge by some close to Trump. I believe Trump had general knowledge and probably just gave a knowing wink and a nod. I'm not sure what will constitute "collusion". If Trump had knowledge and did more to encourage than discourage, then it approaches collusion in my mind.
Click to expand...

You have to believe Hillary knew about it too given her connection to the administration and the collusion between her husband and Lynch no?

She was winking and nodding too thinking she was going to win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#8,131
#8,131
Velo Vol said:
There were Trump underlings who had relationships with Russian government before the campaign and who had undisclosed contacts after the election. Do I believe the back and forth stopped during the campaign?

No, I do not.
Click to expand...

still doesn't address the collusion angle - what were these contacts doing to assist and/or participate with Russia vis a vis the election meddling?

Have you seen a single bit of evidence that suggests this potential contact was connected to election meddling?
 
#8,132
#8,132
lawgator1 said:
The divide within the Dem party right now is over what is important. As in the GOP, there are elements within the Dem party that have as their priority and want to emphasize social issues. Whereas, the mainstream of the party wants to make the core message one of economics.

The GOP has its wing of making everything about abortion or gay rights.

The Dem has its wing of wanting to make everything about racial minority or gay rights.

The GOP mainstream wants to downplay those issues, viewing them as divisive, and focus on lowering taxes and regulation on businesses and the wealthy with the notion it will cause massive growth, that will benefit everyone.

The Dem mainstream wants to downplay its social policy wings, also viewing them as needlessly divisive, and focus on tax cuts and a broader social safety net for the lower and middle classes, reasoning that the wealthy and big business have done just fine in the last 20 years, and what is needed to spur growth is middle class consumption demand.
Click to expand...

The Dem mainstream wants to focus on tax cuts? The Dem mainstream isn't pushing identity politics or social justice?

I want some of what you are smoking.

Also, there is no Dem mainstream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#8,134
#8,134
volinbham said:
The Dem mainstream wants to focus on tax cuts? The Dem mainstream isn't pushing identity politics or social justice?

I want some of what you are smoking.

Also, there is no Dem mainstream.
Click to expand...

No, I think he is correct. The typical rank and file, old school Democrat doesn't care as much about social issues as they do economics. However, their voice gets drowned out by the ones clamoring for social justice/identity politics. Or the Antifa crowd (which in itself is a paradox). Or any number of 10% of issues that take up 90% of the party platform's time.

Sadly, this group is dwindling as the battle lines are drawn. And I'd bet you see more defect to either Indie status or even voting GOP in local/State elections. I'd even go so far as to count folks like CWV maybe even LG into this group. But so long as the social justice crowd has the loudest voice, or you get candidates like Hillary that tries to please everyone, they have no voice.
 
#8,135
#8,135
volinbham said:
You have to believe Hillary knew about it too given her connection to the administration and the collusion between her husband and Lynch no?

She was winking and nodding too thinking she was going to win.
Click to expand...

I believe she knew something at some point....vague enough?

What people knew, when they knew it, and how they reacted to the knowledge are parts of the big picture the investigations are hopefully putting together.

Her reactions to the Russian meddling were assuredly muted due to her thinking she was sure to win. Had she known the inconceivable was about to happen, she would have responded differently.
 
#8,141
#8,141
luthervol said:
I believe she knew something at some point....vague enough?

What people knew, when they knew it, and how they reacted to the knowledge are parts of the big picture the investigations are hopefully putting together.

Her reactions to the Russian meddling were assuredly muted due to her thinking she was sure to win. Had she known the inconceivable was about to happen, she would have responded differently.
Click to expand...

Had she been aware the DNC was actively working against Bernie Sanders or had she been aware that a CNN contributor would assist her campaign by feeding her debate questions, would she have responded differently?
 
#8,142
#8,142
Velo Vol said:
Why pick Paul Manafort out of all the options?
Click to expand...

Why pick Kellyanne Conway? It's not like Trump had a rolodex of political operatives to go with. Manafort had a reputation as a hard charging, go strong operative which fits Trump's mentality. Trump wanted an action guy rather than a wonk or strategist.

Hell half his team are people he saw as commentators on Fox News. He didn't have a political machine behind him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8,143
#8,143
volinbham said:
Why pick Kellyanne Conway? It's not like Trump had a rolodex of political operatives to go with. Manafort had a reputation as a hard charging, go strong operative which fits Trump's mentality. Trump wanted an action guy rather than a wonk or strategist.

Hell half his team are people he saw as commentators on Fox News. He didn't have a political machine behind him.
Click to expand...

VB, you should stop being so...so...so darn rational.
 
#8,144
#8,144
volinbham said:
100% sure Russia tried to interfere
60% sure it was to help Trump - official line from intelligence was "disrupt elections" and "cause people to question" the elections.

I'll reverse 3 and 4: I don't think Trump colluded and doubt his team did (at least not at his direction). Aware of interference? Hard to say. Was Hillary aware of interference? She had more of an inside line to the intelligence than Trump did.

Impact of the interference? Success - given they wanted to undermine confidence in the process they have succeeded and the investigation, the way the media has handled this, the targeted leaks and the actions of Democrats have assured that indeed people have less confidence in the process.

Did they change votes? Hard to say but if they did then it is more likely that they influenced Dems to not support Hillary than they did in getting people to support Trump. That's pretty interesting.
Click to expand...

More likely they hoped to influence TOWARD Bernie Sanders.

With a committed socialist running, one they could "work with", why the devil would they influence the election into a conservative Republican win? It seems to me far more likely, if they did indeed try to move votes from the Hildabeast, they hoped those votes would accrue in the Sanders socialist camp, not to other end of the political spectrum in Trump.
 
#8,145
#8,145
volinbham said:
LOL - another CNN story bites the dust. Haven't gone back to look but I'm guessing the original story was posted here as "one more example"...

http://thehill.com/media/339293-cnn-retracts-story-linking-trump-ally-scaramucci-to-russian-fund
Click to expand...


Is this the real life?
Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a landslide,
No escape from reality.

Scaramucci, Scaramucci, will you do the Fandango?
Thunderbolt and lightning,
Very, very frightening me.
(Galileo) Galileo.
(Galileo) Galileo,
Galileo Figaro
Magnifico-o-o-o-o.

Scaramucci, Scaramucci, will you do the Fandango?

Oh do it..Please do it.
Say you will, Scaramucci.
Dance for us Scaramucci.
We want someone, anyone else "On The Hill"!

MAMA! OH! MAMA!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#8,146
#8,146
Orangedogsrule said:
Is this the real life?
Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a landslide,
No escape from reality.

Scaramucci, Scaramucci, will you do the Fandango?
Thunderbolt and lightning,
Very, very frightening me.
(Galileo) Galileo.
(Galileo) Galileo,
Galileo Figaro
Magnifico-o-o-o-o.

Scaramucci, Scaramucci, will you do the Fandango?

Oh do it..Please do it.
Say you will, Scaramucci.
Dance for us Scaramucci.
We want someone, anyone else "On The Hill"!

MAMA! OH! MAMA!
Click to expand...
You're calling GCB you know? He's a big Freddie Mercury fan.
 
#8,150
#8,150
Septic said:
I don't see how anyone could think that FM was anything but a genius.
Click to expand...

He was an incredible singer and showman..... I didn't fully appreciate his talents in their heydays because of my age.... I liked their music but it wasn't until I got older that I realized just how good Queen really was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top