2016 politics (Split from DOJ and FBI under attack)

[Raider5678]

45 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Can you imagine they would be pressuring the FBI to ignore Russia and just move on?

 

I can't imagine the Republicans doing so, but I can certainly imagine Democrats doing so.

[Phi for All]

5 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

I can't imagine the Republicans doing so, but I can certainly imagine Democrats doing so.

Your own bias aside, many Dems saw Hillary as a second choice over Sanders. If there was as much evidence of collusion as there is with Trump, I think the Dems would have been happy to boot her and go with Tim Kaine, and let him choose another VP (Sanders?). In fact, I'm extremely surprised the Republicans back such an odious man with obvious Putin ties when their own VP is like a GOP wet dream, a creationist conservative with a clean record and a hard stance against Russian interference. 

[Raider5678]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

Your own bias aside, many Dems saw Hillary as a second choice over Sanders. If there was as much evidence of collusion as there is with Trump, I think the Dems would have been happy to boot her and go with Tim Kaine, and let him choose another VP (Sanders?). In fact, I'm extremely surprised the Republicans back such an odious man with obvious Putin ties when their own VP is like a GOP wet dream, a creationist conservative with a clean record and a hard stance against Russian interference. 

1

Many Republicans saw Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, or Marco Rubio as the much more obvious choice above Donald Trump. I would have rathered Ben Carson personally.

But by god he was hammered by Democrats, so he dropped out.

 

 

 

Edited January 30, 2018 by Raider5678

[Phi for All]

42 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

I would have rathered Ben Carson personally.

But by god he was hammered by Democrats, so he dropped out.

Ben Carson was hammered by scientists who couldn't condone his anti-evolution stance, and historians who scoffed at his absurd Egyptian revisionism, and psychologists who labeled him a Dunning-Kruger test candidate. It was all those damned leftist, elitist intellectuals that probably influenced the Democrats to hammer on him also. 

[Raider5678]

52 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Ben Carson was hammered by scientists who couldn't condone his anti-evolution stance, and historians who scoffed at his absurd Egyptian revisionism, and psychologists who labeled him a Dunning-Kruger test candidate. It was all those damned leftist, elitist intellectuals that probably influenced the Democrats to hammer on him also. 

Virtually every Christian Republican has an anti-evolution stance.

His Egyptian revisionism was that the pyramids could have been grain silos, and he said then while telling some guy aliens did not build the pyramids. Very far fetched, but is it really that bad compared to trump? 

And are you serious? Are you telling my Trump doesn't suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect? I mean the guy thinks he's a reincarnation of freaking God, come on. 

 

In all due respects, I think he would have made a much better president then Trump.

[iNow]

Pretty low bar you’re setting for the people you’re choosing to lead us all. 

[StringJunky]

16 minutes ago, iNow said:

Pretty low bar you’re setting for the people you’re choosing to lead us all. 

A rock, a hard place, the devil or the deep blue sea are the choices. It's like that in British politics atm as well.

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

Virtually every Christian Republican has an anti-evolution stance.

We should keep people like this away from anything to do with legislating public education, if we want to move forward with the rest of the world. 

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

His Egyptian revisionism was that the pyramids could have been grain silos, and he said then while telling some guy aliens did not build the pyramids. Very far fetched, but is it really that bad compared to trump? 

And are you serious? Are you telling my Trump doesn't suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect? I mean the guy thinks he's a reincarnation of freaking God, come on. 

I wasn't comparing Carson to Trump. I was commenting on your preference for president.

[Raider5678]

14 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

We should keep people like this away from anything to do with legislating public education, if we want to move forward with the rest of the world. 

I wasn't comparing Carson to Trump. I was commenting on your preference for president.

My preference for president was that I'd rather Carson over Trump. To me, I was making a direct comparison. 

43 minutes ago, iNow said:

Pretty low bar you’re setting for the people you’re choosing to lead us all. 

At the moment, I feel like the bar's already pretty low. I could probably pick some random man from a crowd and he'd do better.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Raider5678

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

I could probably pick some random man from a crowd and he'd do better.

I suspect you’re correct, but of course “better” is subjective. 

Edited January 31, 2018 by iNow

[Raider5678]

15 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

We should keep people like this away from anything to do with legislating public education, if we want to move forward with the rest of the world. 

1

So me.

Just now, iNow said:

I suspect you’re correct, but of course “better” is subjective. 

True.

 

 

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

Virtually every Christian Republican has an anti-evolution stance.

I hope you mean politician. Because clearly that is not the case for republicans per se.

[Raider5678]

19 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I hope you mean politician. Because clearly that is not the case for republicans per se.

Christian Republican Politician, yes.

 

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

So me.

If you're anti-evolution, you're denying something that happens right in front of us, all the time. I'd rather you stick to some sort of private school to teach your Iron Age superstitions, and leave public schools for people who want to learn science.

And I think this is all on topic, since it speaks to critical thinking with regard to our government, and its institutions. If Christian Republicans demand their ignorance be protected, they should have NOTHING to do with public funding whatsoever. We have a separation of church and state, and it's generally considered a good thing.

[Raider5678]

23 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

If you're anti-evolution, you're denying something that happens right in front of us, all the time. I'd rather you stick to some sort of private school to teach your Iron Age superstitions, and leave public schools for people who want to learn science.

1

I never said to teach otherwise in schools.

And I wouldn't have schools teach the bible either.

They're both bad ideas.

24 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

If Christian Republicans demand their ignorance be protected, they should have NOTHING to do with public funding whatsoever. We have a separation of church and state, and it's generally considered a good thing.

 

Ultimately, regardless of what you believe, Freedom of Religion is a thing.

The government can pass no such law banning religious people from entering office if they are elected by the people.

 

Just because Obama believed in creation, or in your terms, iron age superstition, does not mean he did a terrible job with public funding.

Obama: You know, what I’ve said to them is that I believe that God created the universe and that the six days in the Bible may not be six days as we understand it, it may not be 24-hour days, and that’s what I believe. I know there’s always a debate between those who read the Bible literally and those who don’t, and that I think it’s a legitimate debate within the Christian community of which I’m a part. My belief is that the story that the Bible tells about God creating this magnificent Earth on which we live — that is essentially true, that is fundamentally true. Now, whether it happened exactly as we might understand it reading the text of the Bible. That, I don’t presume to know.

 

 

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

At the moment, I feel like the bar's already pretty low. I could probably pick some random man from a crowd and he'd do better.

Historically, when Americans realize the bar needs to be raised, they raise it a LOT. Bar-raising is not the time to be conservative. 

[swansont]

12 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

Many Republicans saw Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, or Marco Rubio as the much more obvious choice above Donald Trump. I would have rathered Ben Carson personally.

But by god he was hammered by Democrats, so he dropped out.

By the Democrats? I don't recall them wasting any time attacking GOP candidates during the primary. Why would they bother? Especially attacking one who was way back in the polls.