• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
badlatitude

The GOP's Moral Rot is the Problem, Not Donald Trump Jr.

253 posts in this topic

11 minutes ago, SV Airlie said:

Isn't Alpo a kind of dog food?

I let that one slide. The whole cycle seemed to have him out of his element.

Besides, Trump has now decided to side with Russia and let the whole country go to shit and give it to Assad. Next is Turkey.

The ME meltdown will accelerate. It helps Russia since oil is a big part of its economy and federal budget. They want ME chaos.

So, the Aleppo thing is small.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, billy backstay said:

Was listening on NPR about people who still support the guy.  Some town in Ohio, where 62% voted for him, and they are all still in his camp and pleased with his efforts to date.  The country I grew up in has gone totally around the bend, it seems, in many places.  A country where manners, respect for others, and good taste are off the table forever now.

Only 45% of the morons think Don Jr. met with the Russians. And that's after Uday Trump tweeted the emails. 

Facts don't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Only 45% of the morons think Don Jr. met with the Russians. And that's after Uday Trump tweeted the emails. 

Facts don't matter.

If the question was posed like that the 45% are right. He met with a Russian, he did not meet with "the Russians".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dog said:

If the question was posed like that the 45% are right. He met with a Russian, he did not meet with "the Russians".

Tap dance, dog, tap dance

 

  1. Q23  Do you believe that Donald Trump Jr. had a meeting with a Russian lawyer about information that might be harmful to Hillary Clinton, or not? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Raz'r said:

Tap dance, dog, tap dance

 

  1. Q23  Do you believe that Donald Trump Jr. had a meeting with a Russian lawyer about information that might be harmful to Hillary Clinton, or not? 

Not a tap dance at all. "the Russians" implies the Russian government. However it is true that she purported to have information procured by the Russian government, so there is that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dog said:

Not a tap dance at all. "the Russians" implies the Russian government. However it is true that she purported to have information procured by the Russian government, so there is that.

oh, it's tap dancin' doggy style.

keep defending traitors and morons dog. The more you do, the deader the Republican party gets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dog said:

Not a tap dance at all. "the Russians" implies the Russian government. However it is true that she purported to have information procured by the Russian government, so there is that.

Dog - quick question for you:

 

Do you believe that Donald Trump Jr. had a meeting with a Russian lawyer about information that might be harmful to Hillary Clinton, or not? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Dog said:

If the question was posed like that the 45% are right. He met with a Russian, he did not meet with "the Russians".

There were more than one Russian at the meeting.  Someone isn't paying attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Spatial Ed said:

There were more than one Russian at the meeting.  Someone isn't paying attention.

I don't think Doggie can answer the question....

 

Dog - do you need a hint on the correct answer? You won't get it from Hannity....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Spatial Ed said:

There were more than one Russian at the meeting.  Someone isn't paying attention.

WOW, I'm shocked they're not paying attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

I don't think Doggie can answer the question....

 

Dog - do you need a hint on the correct answer? You won't get it from Hannity....

Dog can't seem to figure out the answer on his own. Anyone in class want to help?
 

To Restate the Question:

Do you believe that Donald Trump Jr. had a meeting with a Russian lawyer about information that might be harmful to Hillary Clinton, or not? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

To Restate the Question:

Do you believe that Donald Trump Jr. had a meeting with a Russian lawyer about information that might be harmful to Hillary Clinton, or not? 

 

If someone offers to sell you and bag of pot and you show up to buy it but they don't have any, you cannot be guilty of 'possession'.  You may be guilty of all kinds of other things but you're not guilty of possession - there is no pot.  That's the problem with that particular phrasing, knowing what we know now.  He appears to have gotten catfished.

So he's guilty of solicitation, but not actually doing the deed so to speak.

There's so many other things to get angry about, I just can't get it up for Don jr.  To me, this is a dumb story.  I know it's got traction.  I know people are clicking away.  It's Benghazi for the left.  Booyah!   And I know we have to have symmetry in our politics but blegh.   I'm just not feeling it.

 

Edit - one thing I would add.  Any republican that supports Trump and then starts whining bout 'evil Russians' is just being a hypocrite.  That you can't have nor do any of his supporters get to complain about 'dirty politics'. They were rolling in it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Not a tap dance at all. "the Russians" implies the Russian government. However it is true that she purported to have information procured by the Russian government, so there is that.

I think "the Russian government" implies the Russian government. 

In contrast, "the Russians" implies more than one person of Russian heritage. You know, plural.

There was nothing in the question about "the government".  You want it to imply that, but you are imagining things.

We apologize for your confusion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

If someone offers to sell you and bag of pot and you show up to buy it but they don't have any, you cannot be guilty of 'possession'.  You may be guilty of all kinds of other things but you're not guilty of possession - there is no pot.  That's the problem with that particular phrasing, knowing what we know now.  He appears to have gotten catfished.

Why the assumption nothing came of contacts with the Russians? It's damn weird - or just Trump incompetent? - to have your top 3 people appear in a meeting and have nothing come of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Why the assumption nothing came of contacts with the Russians?

Cause I can't see any of the eight of them keeping their mouth's shut this long :)  You could be right but my god they've not shown a lot of restraint thus far.

 

BTW:  This guy stole the avatar I stole!  I feel both honored and somehow violated!  I wonder if he reads PA?  

http://www.zerohedge.com/blogs/vince-lanci

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

 

If someone offers to sell you and bag of pot and you show up to buy it but they don't have any, you cannot be guilty of 'possession'.  You may be guilty of all kinds of other things but you're not guilty of possession - there is no pot.  That's the problem with that particular phrasing, knowing what we know now.  He appears to have gotten catfished.

So he's guilty of solicitation, but not actually doing the deed so to speak.

There's so many other things to get angry about, I just can't get it up for Don jr.  To me, this is a dumb story.  I know it's got traction.  I know people are clicking away.  It's Benghazi for the left.  Booyah!   And I know we have to have symmetry in our politics but blegh.   I'm just not feeling it.

 

Edit - one thing I would add.  Any republican that supports Trump and then starts whining bout 'evil Russians' is just being a hypocrite.  That you can't have nor do any of his supporters get to complain about 'dirty politics'. They were rolling in it.

 

that's not the answer to the question. It's a simple question. 45% of Trump supporters can't actually answer it factually, even though Trump Jr said he did it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, cmilliken said:

Cause I can't see any of the eight of them keeping their mouth's shut this long :)  You could be right but my god they've not shown a lot of restraint thus far.

 

BTW:  This guy stole the avatar I stole!  I feel both honored and somehow violated!  I wonder if he reads PA?  

http://www.zerohedge.com/blogs/vince-lanci

 

You do realize that the discussion about adoption is really a discussion about relaxing sanctions on Putin's buddies... You're smart enough to figure that out, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

You do realize that the discussion about adoption is really a discussion about relaxing sanctions on Putin's buddies... You're smart enough to figure that out, right?

I've read the cliff notes from the NY times https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/10/world/americas/kremlin-adoptions-sanctions-russia.html

I get it but it's a pretty tortured story.  The question I was responding too was 'how do you know they didn't get anything?" and my answer is I don't but if they had gotten something, it seems like that would have somehow leaked out.  Now, it's possible that, for example, the Russians agreed to send information to Asange if Trump agreed to rethink the whole sanctions thing and they just told Jr. to pass that message along?  That may be why Kushner left - plausible denial?  But there were so many people in that room.  Putin is KGB.  If this was all cloak and dagger, Putin-Sanctioned, why drag 8 people including this guy into the room?

 

rob-goldstone-a-man-with-cringeworthy-fa

 

Occam's razor on this one - Trump's people got catfished by some Russians running their own angle and tried to hide it - probably from papa himself - and screwed up the government forms because they're really don't have good foresight.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, billy backstay said:

Was listening on NPR about people who still support the guy.  Some town in Ohio, where 62% voted for him, and they are all still in his camp and pleased with his efforts to date.  The country I grew up in has gone totally around the bend, it seems, in many places.  A country where manners, respect for others, and good taste are off the table forever now.

A conservative relatively apolitical employee was complaining about all the Russia stuff in the news this week.   She wanted to know if anybody believed the Russia meeting really happened.    :wacko:    She is good at her job, just not picking Presidential candidates.    Insurance is rationing her husband treatment (defense industry), she sees no irony in that either.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cmilliken said:

 

If someone offers to sell you and bag of pot and you show up to buy it but they don't have any, you cannot be guilty of 'possession'.  You may be guilty of all kinds of other things but you're not guilty of possession - there is no pot.  That's the problem with that particular phrasing, knowing what we know now.  He appears to have gotten catfished.

So he's guilty of solicitation, but not actually doing the deed so to speak.

There's so many other things to get angry about, I just can't get it up for Don jr.  To me, this is a dumb story.  I know it's got traction.  I know people are clicking away.  It's Benghazi for the left.  Booyah!   And I know we have to have symmetry in our politics but blegh.   I'm just not feeling it.

 

Edit - one thing I would add.  Any republican that supports Trump and then starts whining bout 'evil Russians' is just being a hypocrite.  That you can't have nor do any of his supporters get to complain about 'dirty politics'. They were rolling in it.

 

There's some seriously advanced doggy stylin' going on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cmilliken said:

If someone offers to sell you and bag of pot and you show up to buy it but they don't have any, you cannot be guilty of 'possession'.  You may be guilty of all kinds of other things but you're not guilty of possession - there is no pot.  That's the problem with that particular phrasing, knowing what we know now.

No, when asked afterwards, he SAYS he wasn't able to buy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, austin1972 said:

I let that one slide. The whole cycle seemed to have him out of his element.

Besides, Trump has now decided to side with Russia and let the whole country go to shit and give it to Assad. Next is Turkey.

The ME meltdown will accelerate. It helps Russia since oil is a big part of its economy and federal budget. They want ME chaos.

So, the Aleppo thing is small.

I have no idea why people are giving him shit for bailing the fuck out of Hillary's stupid war in Syria. One of the only smart things he's done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Battlecheese said:

I have no idea why people are giving him shit for bailing the fuck out of Hillary's stupid war in Syria. One of the only smart things he's done.

Right action for the wrong reasons, but still better on this one issue then Hilliary would have been.   I agree with Cmilliken that America needs to limit ourselves to essential and concrete military missions with smart objectives and an exit strategy.   There's nothing but cat turds buried there, but it hurts my pride to back away just because Putin says it's his sandbox.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cmilliken said:

I've read the cliff notes from the NY times https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/10/world/americas/kremlin-adoptions-sanctions-russia.html

I get it but it's a pretty tortured story.  The question I was responding too was 'how do you know they didn't get anything?" and my answer is I don't but if they had gotten something, it seems like that would have somehow leaked out.  Now, it's possible that, for example, the Russians agreed to send information to Asange if Trump agreed to rethink the whole sanctions thing and they just told Jr. to pass that message along?  That may be why Kushner left - plausible denial?  But there were so many people in that room.  Putin is KGB.  If this was all cloak and dagger, Putin-Sanctioned, why drag 8 people including this guy into the room?

 

rob-goldstone-a-man-with-cringeworthy-fa

 

Occam's razor on this one - Trump's people got catfished by some Russians running their own angle and tried to hide it - probably from papa himself - and screwed up the government forms because they're really don't have good foresight.

 

Did Trump Jr meet with a Russian Lawyer hoping to get some dirt?

 

yes/no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Lark said:

Right action for the wrong reasons, but still better on this one issue then Hilliary would have been.   I agree with Cmilliken that America needs to limit ourselves to essential and concrete military missions with smart objectives and an exit strategy.   There's nothing but cat turds buried there, but it hurts my pride to back away just because Putin says it's his sandbox.   

Just because it hurts your pride doesn't mean it's wrong.

i can't see a real lot of face-saving ways of getting out myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Did Trump Jr meet with a Russian Lawyer hoping to get some dirt?

 

yes/no?

Absolutely :)

I have no doubt in my mind that is what he was trying to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cmilliken said:

Absolutely :)

I have no doubt in my mind that is what he was trying to do.

Nor his mind.  I Love It!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

I think "the Russian government" implies the Russian government. 

In contrast, "the Russians" implies more than one person of Russian heritage. You know, plural.

There was nothing in the question about "the government".  You want it to imply that, but you are imagining things.

We apologize for your confusion. 

If a person from another country has a meeting with you have they met with "the Americans"?

What was the wording in the question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Dog - quick question for you:

 

Do you believe that Donald Trump Jr. had a meeting with a Russian lawyer about information that might be harmful to Hillary Clinton, or not? 

 

Yes, he met with a Russian lawyer hoping to get dirt on Hillary. Is a meeting with a Russian citizen a meeting with the Russians? No tap dancing Raz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

when presented with Trump or Hillary you chose neither, that's support for Trump in our system.

How do you arrive at that conclusion?  Seriously, I am fascinated with understanding your logic train on this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Spatial Ed said:
19 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

GFY you specious cunt - and find a single post of mine in which you can claim I supported Trump.  You won't - so simply STFU. 

Hillary was worse.

We will never know, will we?  Had she run a better campaign and not been such a lying, self-absorbed and entitled cunt - we might be having a different discussion right now.  Hillary honestly has only herself to blame for trump being in power.  How she has not committed suicide for cocking up what should have been a gimme for her coronation is beyond me.  Pretty much anyone who could fog a mirror should have been able to beat a clown like trump.

But the fact that they were our two best candidates for preznit out of 300 million people is a bigger indictment of our political system and the American electorate.  THAT, imho, is what we should be focusing on, not about what trump is doing right now.  The fact that a shitshow like trumples can even be considered for the highest office in the land should give us some serious pause.

And in a twisted sort of way, yes, hillary would have been worse.  She would have likely been a somewhat boringly competent president.  But that's precisely why she would have been worse.  It would have been status quo and the American electorate would have been none the wiser or gave a shit about our continuing societal decay.  We needed a wake up call and that alarm going off right now is called Donald Trump.  Hopefully we won't just hit snooze.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were they your two best candidates or did your stupid primary process just kill off the better ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Battlecheese said:

Just because it hurts your pride doesn't mean it's wrong.

i can't see a real lot of face-saving ways of getting out myself.

I agree with this.  We should never have been involved in Syria in the first place.  We had ZERO national security interests there.  Nada.  Not our fight and in fact it would have served our national interests MORE to let Putin have this hot potato all to himself a while ago.  From my POV, he's more than welcome to deal with this shitshow.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shortforbob said:

Were they your two best candidates or did your stupid primary process just kill off the better ones?

Yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

If a person from another country has a meeting with you have they met with "the Americans"?

What was the wording in the question?

You're just being pedantic.

Here is a screen capture of page 34 from the poll (linked below) -

 

Screen Shot 2017-07-21 at 8.26.43 AM.png

Linky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Were they your two best candidates or did your stupid primary process just kill off the better ones?

Hillary's nimination was a well planned coronation orchestrated by the Democratic National Committee. Trump was the result of pure chaos. As to the Dems, apart from Sanders, better candidates never emerged. Republicans had way better candidates than Trump; John Kasich comes to mind. There aren't enough traditional republicans to beat democrat presidential candidates. The party has courted and absorbed the fringe, low information types and of course the "deplorables" in order to win. It's like herding cats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

You're just being pedantic.

Here is a screen capture of page 34 from the poll (linked below) -

 

Screen Shot 2017-07-21 at 8.26.43 AM.png

Linky.

Thank you , so the question was not posed in the terms Mismoyled Jiblet used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dog said:

Thank you , so the question was not posed in the terms Mismoyled Jiblet used.

No.  Instead of focusing on a word someone used in a paraphrasing, why not focus on the point behind his post.

Care to comment on the gist of the responses reflected in that poll?  That the majority of Republicans who responded do not believe, or are not sure, Junior met with the Russian lawyer?  Do keep in mind this poll was conducted AFTER Junior admitted the meeting happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

No.  Instead of focusing on a word someone used in a paraphrasing, why not focus on the point behind his post.

Care to comment on the gist of the responses reflected in that poll?  That the majority of Republicans who responded do not believe, or are not sure, Junior met with the Russian lawyer?  Do keep in mind this poll was conducted AFTER Junior admitted the meeting happened.

It's inexplicable to me how anyone familiar with the subject could believe he did not have that meeting. PPP however is hardly a disinterested  party so I wouldn't rule out some deception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dog said:

It's inexplicable to me how anyone familiar with the subject could believe he did not have that meeting. PPP however is hardly a disinterested  party so I wouldn't rule out some deception.

Was the wording in the question deceptive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Was the wording in the question deceptive?

No, but the sampling could be. There's lots of ways to skin a cat, these guys are masters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

No, but the sampling could be. There's lots of ways to skin a cat, these guys are masters.

So, you are just looking for a reason to dismiss the results.  Got it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bus Driver said:

So, you are just looking for a reason to dismiss the results.  Got it.

I take all shit like this with a grain of salt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:

I take all shit like this with a grain of salt.

Try taking it with a peg on your nose instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shortforbob said:

Try taking it with a peg on your nose instead.

Lap it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

We will never know, will we?  Had she run a better campaign and not been such a lying, self-absorbed and entitled cunt - we might be having a different discussion right now.  Hillary honestly has only herself to blame for trump being in power.  How she has not committed suicide for cocking up what should have been a gimme for her coronation is beyond me.  Pretty much anyone who could fog a mirror should have been able to beat a clown like trump.

But the fact that they were our two best candidates for preznit out of 300 million people is a bigger indictment of our political system and the American electorate.  THAT, imho, is what we should be focusing on, not about what trump is doing right now.  The fact that a shitshow like trumples can even be considered for the highest office in the land should give us some serious pause.

And in a twisted sort of way, yes, hillary would have been worse.  She would have likely been a somewhat boringly competent president.  But that's precisely why she would have been worse.  It would have been status quo and the American electorate would have been none the wiser or gave a shit about our continuing societal decay.  We needed a wake up call and that alarm going off right now is called Donald Trump.  Hopefully we won't just hit snooze.....

Trump also beat the Bush (vote for me, my family keeps getting us in wars and tanking the economy.   I'm a Republican dynasty), Cuomo, Christie, Kasich, Cruz, Carson and a shit load of other Republicans,   Boring competence is worse then Trump to your deconstructionist view?  Trump does care about our societal decay.    He's very aware of demographic shifts and seeks to take money from the rich,    He knows paying poor contractors is voluntary.    Trump is the alarm as a rising water on a ship is alarming.   He may not be the iceberg, but clearly he's part of the problem.   Removing keel plates to drain the icky bilge is not the usual solution.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

Yes, he met with a Russian lawyer hoping to get dirt on Hillary. Is a meeting with a Russian citizen a meeting with the Russians? No tap dancing Raz.

He didn't go to meet with a Russian citizen.

 

"Don

Hope all is well

Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.

I believe you are aware of the meeting – and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

Yes, he met with a Russian lawyer hoping to get dirt on Hillary. Is a meeting with a Russian citizen a meeting with the Russians? No tap dancing Raz.

BTW - That was the wording of the question - you danced and danced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Bus Driver said:
22 hours ago, Dog said:

No, but the sampling could be. There's lots of ways to skin a cat, these guys are masters.

So, you are just looking for a reason to dismiss the results.  Got it.

 

22 hours ago, Dog said:

I take all shit like this with a grain of salt.

Polls? I have not a lot of faith in polls. A recent US election substantiates my position with polls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0