Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Given the agenda of Fox News, I suspect is has not been chutzpah, but simply him being the man best qualified (especially in character) for a Fox "pundit".
Weeks ago, I posted that, since only one person (Trump) knows how there could be fraud in the election, Trump will be the only one who may commit fraud.
Now we see how this fraud should be done:
I'm not sure. Trump has shifted the republicans to the right. more than 40% for a person that has no scruples to call Nazis as good fellows, and tells lies over lies about centrist being leftists (and even communists), lied about the economy, climate change and other themes, 40% for such a person shows he has succeeded to influence the minds of many people and so deeply influenced the general opinion. Comparable (not in size of effect, but in principle) to Bush who convinced many US people that there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and the "9-11"-event.
Much of Trump's agenda will survive him, and the odds are not low that a person with less narcissism but more fanaticism for an ideology may win the 2024 election. Somewhat like Trump, but a bit more like Hitler.
Let's pray the development will be otherwise. Polarization has started well before Trump, you can't expect it will vanish in just two or three years.
That is the last thing that the Biden group are interested in. I noticed that Joe did incorporate that pledge into some of his campaign commercials, but that was just for appearance's sake. Ronald Reagan, George HW Bush, and George W Bush all made serious attempts at cooperation with the other party...and had their heads handed back to them in response. So don't expect something different this time, especially not after four years of non-stop and savage vilification of the President by them.Sometimes there is a need for bypartisan actions to get things done. I hope to see a restoration of that.
What Trump will now do with his last 2 months of power is what terrifies me.
And so the cover-up for the fraud begins.
Much like claiming that Antifa's months of rioting is actually the doing of imaginary "Right wing" groups.
Or that the President didn't act soon enough to address the threat of Covid, when the fact is that he was condemned as a racist for stopping tens of thousands of people from flying into the USA from countries where the virus was raging.
Still, the claim that Trump is engaged in election fraud because he's the victim of it is genuinely funny. Or would be...if this were not such an important matter.
That is the last thing that the Biden group are interested in. I noticed that Joe did incorporate that pledge into some of his campaign commercials, but that was just for appearance's sake. Ronald Reagan, George HW Bush, and George W Bush all made serious attempts at cooperation with the other party...and had their heads handed back to them in response. So don't expect something different this time, especially not after four years of non-stop and savage vilification of the President by them.
Hey, if he loses, you can shelve that act. It won't be needed anymore.
Well, we're not sure of that either. When a phony ballot is counted, it's usually a straight party ballot, so that means that the Republican Senators in NC, GA, AK, and maybe a few others are still not safe, although they were thought to be so, on election night.They have a Republican senate which means they cannot do any real damage.
Well, we're not sure of that either. When a phony ballot is counted, it's usually a straight party ballot, so that means that the Republican Senators in NC, GA, AK, and maybe a few others are still not safe, although they were thought to be so, on election night.
That's your choice, I guess.I do not believe these ballots are phony.
Yes, but what's your point?The test will be the courts where this claim is made and then thrown out. But look at Maine who elected Biden and a Republican senator for example. People voted against Trump but remained true to their senators.
That's your choice, I guess.
Yes, but what's your point?
As I said, phony ballots usually are straight partyline ballots. That requires the voter to make only a single mark, not to take the time to vote on each of perhaps a hundred different candidates down the line, judges, referendum issues, and so on.Your choice, on your ballot separated senate and presidential vote. Why do you assume all who voted against Trump also opposed Republican senator?
As I said, phony ballots usually are straight partyline ballots. That requires the voter to make only a single mark, not to take the time to vote on each of perhaps a hundred different candidates down the line, judges, referendum issues, and so on.
If and when this is the case, the vote for president also automatically casts a vote for Senator and every other candidate of that party.
You said in response to look at Maine where Senator Collins apparently won but Biden carried the state (most of it, to be correct. Trump won one congressional district and its electoral voter). But this doesn't disprove my point.
Most of these Senatorial races are very close, so only a few thousand votes determine the winner. It could be that Sen. Collins would have won by a bigger margin if everything was on the up and up. Or it may be that Maine isn't a state that was involved in vote fraud like others were.
Or there is no voter fraud.
Well, certainly. If there were no voter fraud, we wouldn't be having this discussion. But you wanted to know why I wrote what I did about how such fraud works and why it involves more than just the votes for President.
Would the losing one be the one to fill the unexpired term?It looks like the Republicans might lose one senator in Georgia, if I have understood the system properly, quite decisively, but keep the other.
Hmm. I had heard otherwise.Alaska is a shoe in.
Probably, but they have a week to work on it!North Carolina is the worry but it seems probable the Republicans will have a narrow victory there.
There's no hung Senate. The VP will cast the tie-breaking votes.So that would give the Republicans a 51 - 49 majority in senate. So not sure Republicans should really be that worried right now about senate. The worst case is a hung senate.
Explain the fraud, please.And so the cover-up for the fraud begins.
I recently read the claim that some rioting done by right wing groups was actually done by leftists ...Much like claiming that Antifa's months of rioting is actually the doing of imaginary "Right wing" groups.
As you can see, just closing the border did not much help. Research has shown the virus has probably arrived in Italy when the Chinese doctor who had the suspicion of a new, dangerous virus was admonished by the officials not to spread fake news. And fact is the virus reached USA prior to shutdown of international flights.Or that the President didn't act soon enough to address the threat of Covid, when the fact is that he was condemned as a racist for stopping tens of thousands of people from flying into the USA from countries where the virus was raging.
"Just as racist"? In His book "Mein Kampf" Hitler draw a distinction between irrational and rational antisemitism (his terms, not mine). "Irrational" antisemitism is what will enter your mid when you here the word antisemitism: people rioting, killing some Jews, set a synagogue aflame ... and then the riot dies out, and the "problem" is still there, for most of the Jews have survived the pogrom. He recommended "rational" antisemitism. i.e. exterminating the Jewish race "as humane as possible".The German media is obviously a little sensitive about the right wing but they forget that the Nazis were defeated by people, just as racist, and with empires of coloured people under their rule.
Sometimes it takes the Antifa to break fascism. If you doubt this sentence, learn about the origin of the word "antifa".Sometimes it takes one to break one.
As a businessman he did. And equating Mexicans with criminals is racist propaganda. So he based at least his words on racism when he was president.But unlike the Nazis he has never based his actions on race,
I did not say the republicans are Nazis. Almost all of the 38% who voted for Hitler in 1932 were no Nazis in 1928. They were discontent with democracy (and had reasons, like a series of scandals), more or less antisemitic, often monarchists. Hitler took over ground prepared by others.Think you underestimate the religious element of the Republican party. They are not that shallow. The formula of God, guns and greed does not work for Germans but remains potent in the USA. That does not make them Nazis, it makes them raw, also think their ideas about God are often distorted. God loves poor people for instance.
Only about half of them, this is so alarming.Trump has no honour and is completely self serving. which is one reason the American people have fired him from his job.
If he could, he would certainly start a coup d'etat. But this is out of possibility (at least I hope so).What Trump will now do with his last 2 months of power is what terrifies me.
"Just as racist"? In His book "Mein Kampf" Hitler draw a distinction between irrational and rational antisemitism (his terms, not mine). "Irrational" antisemitism is what will enter your mid when you here the word antisemitism: people rioting, killing some Jews, set a synagogue aflame ... and then the riot dies out, and the "problem" is still there, for most of the Jews have survived the pogrom. He recommended "rational" antisemitism. i.e. exterminating the Jewish race "as humane as possible".
Sometimes it takes the Antifa to break fascism. If you doubt this sentence, learn about the origin of the word "antifa".
As a businessman he did. And equating Mexicans with criminals is racist propaganda. So he based at least his words on racism when he was president.
I did not say the republicans are Nazis. Almost all of the 38% who voted for Hitler in 1932 were no Nazis in 1928. They were discontent with democracy (and had reasons, like a series of scandals), more or less antisemitic, often monarchists. Hitler took over ground prepared by others.
My last remarks was: Hitler was less self-centered as Trump (though seeing oneself as the center of a movement that will save the nation or even the world is self-centered).
Only about half of them, this is so alarming.
If he could, he would certainly start a coup d'etat. But this is out of possibility (at least I hope so).
EDIT: Typos
This is going off-topic. I made clear that Hitler's racism is worse than the racism of, say, the Ku-Klux-Clan. You can perceive differences between different shades of racism and therefore say, e.g., that the Ku-Klux-Clan was worse than the ordinary racist British colonialist. We agree on that.Hitler was systematic in his racism.
He did nothing good for Blacks or Hispanics as a group. Of course, he reduced tariffs, which was appreciated by some Blacks and Hispanics who so paid less taxes. Or maybe the religious background influenced some Blacks or Hispanics to vote them.Trump actually did some good there and blacks and hispanics voted for him in larger numbers because of that.
Oh, I did not mean they are racist, I only compared the violence.Antifacists are not racists,
I don't know the US situation, in Europe the Antifa is quite strong enough to do violence. It is almost usual (at least in Germany) that a somewhat leftist peaceful demonstration in the very end (when the bulk of participants already went home) gets violent. Kind of what happened with some rather peaceful BLM protests in the USA. In German news magazines there were videos of a militant black group that marched there to "protect" - it seems they are not that unorganized in the USA.but could not organize their way out of a wet paper bag. They are not a viable force to pit against a racist country like the Chinese for example.
I can't see any selfish end for refusing to rent flats to black families.Using racism for selfish ends is different from being racist. Trump is primarily out for himself.
You lost me. As to small majority: yes, of course. But as to racism and "secure the country": I can't recall any example where racism has secured anything else than a unjust society. And what do you want to tell about China in that context?A small well motivated minority can do a lot of damage, but racism today, in a racially mixed America is not a strong enough force to secure the country. China is a different story.
That's too simplistic. I once found a book with details of the very start of Hitler' political career. I recall a report of one speech he made in a rather obscure club (some police informant wrote it), it was about the treaty of Brest-Litowsk and the treaty of Versailles. While the presentation of Brest-Litowsk was somewhat biased, the criticism of Versailles was simply true (it is hard to add another point to a treaty unjust in almost every respect).He saw Germany as a tool for his will and his vision of world domination.
I know what you mean. But on the other hand, republicans (and to some degree, also Democrats in the US) are blind to the sin of Sodom - no, not what is usually called such, but what the Bible names so.Europeans are not morally superior. Their smug secularism and liberal immorality is a problem.
Yes, it is hard to say which is worse, US or European deviation from God's way. For some times, I voted for a green party which was also pro-life - it never got a chance to enter a parliament.You just have to weigh the balance each election choice.
Heard on CNN: The gap between Trump votes and Senate Rep votes show that the Reps are better off when they get rid of Trump altogether.I think some Republicans will be relieved to see the back of him even though they have benefited from his dynamism and astute political mind. He has fired a lot of really good people and marginalised many more. He was an earthquake that needed to happen in 2016 but no longer.
He did nothing good for Blacks or Hispanics as a group. Of course, he reduced tariffs, which was appreciated by some Blacks and Hispanics who so paid less taxes. Or maybe the religious background influenced some Blacks or Hispanics to vote them.
AFAIK, there is only one sub-group of Hispanics with a pro-Trump majority: Ex-Cubans and their descendants in Florida. Trump managed it to persuade them that Biden was somewhat pro-communist and voting for him would end up in a communist government in the USA. Well, if I were convinced that a candidate is like that, and I have only one alternative to him, I almost certainly will vote for the other guy (unless he is a fascist as bad as a communist).
Oh, I did not mean they are racist, I only compared the violence.
I don't know the US situation, in Europe the Antifa is quite strong enough to do violence. It is almost usual (at least in Germany) that a somewhat leftist peaceful demonstration in the very end (when the bulk of participants already went home) gets violent. Kind of what happened with some rather peaceful BLM protests in the USA. In German news magazines there were videos of a militant black group that marched there to "protect" - it seems they are not that unorganized in the USA.
I can't see any selfish end for refusing to rent flats to black families.
According to some documentations I saw on German TV, the self-centered world view of Trump is a product of the education by his parents. His father ad some affinities to the Nazis (before USA entered WW II), and the superiority of the white race somehow narrowed down to superiority of the Trump family: it is in his genes that Trump is superior in all respects to ordinary humans, he is the person that cannot lose.
You lost me. As to small majority: yes, of course. But as to racism and "secure the country": I can't recall any example where racism has secured anything else than a unjust society. And what do you want to tell about China in that context?
I know what you mean. But on the other hand, republicans (and to some degree, also Democrats in the US) are blind to the sin of Sodom - no, not what is usually called such, but what the Bible names so.
A policy which takes Deut 15:4,11 or James 5:1-6 and (the many other passages that speak about wealth) seriously would be called "socialism" by virtually all Republicans - and if you read Rev 11:18 and think about environment issues or climate change, you perceive a huge "immorality" in the Republican program. I could add some more points in which God is definitely "liberal" or even "socialist" (at least in the US coordinates).
Yes, it is hard to say which is worse, US or European deviation from God's way. For some times, I voted for a green party which was also pro-life - it never got a chance to enter a parliament.
Heard on CNN: The gap between Trump votes and Senate Rep votes show that the Reps are better off when they get rid of Trump altogether.
One way to reconcile the country would be reducing the amount of gerrymandering and other tricks used to prevent the "wrong" people from voting. According to what I see in German TV, such things were predominantly done by Republicans.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?