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.
A third party vote is absolutely not a wasted vote because when my grandchild asked me if I voted for either one of these 'train wrecks in slow motion' I'll be able to say no baby I didn't, it was obvious they were on the wrong tracks from the very beginning.
Hillary. She's still awful, but less awful than DrumpfWhich candidate do you think is less awful?
Although I can't vote for either one I don't want Trump to have the nuclear codes. Thank God he's finally sunk his own ship.Hillary. She's still awful, but less awful than Drumpf
Then you must not understand how nuclear authorization works.....the prez can't fire them whenever he wants.......Although I can't vote for either one I don't want Trump to have the nuclear codes. Thank God he's finally sunk his own ship.
Straw man... I didn't say he can fire them whenever he wants. Imposing your own statements within another's post is not a honest approach to healthy dialogue.Then you must not understand how nuclear authorization works.....the prez can't fire them whenever he wants.......
Yet "Hillary will start WWIII" is the scary meme du jourThen you must not understand how nuclear authorization works.....the prez can't fire them whenever he wants.......
That has about as much to do with Obama as the rise of America as the largest producer of fossil fuels has had to do with Obama.I'm pro life, and that's why I don't agree with Clinton on close to 100% of the issues. I do recognize that abortions have dropped significantly under Obama, however, and think that a continuation of such a drop is a good thing.
That is what you were implying, if not then you might want to be clear in your wording.....Straw man... I didn't say he can fire them whenever he wants. Imposing your own statements within another's post is not a honest approach to healthy dialogue.
I don't believe either one would start WWIII; that is just scare mongering from both camps. I do believe hrc might over react to a miltary situation in an effort to prove she is not a "weak woman". Trump....I dont know. Sometimes you can use that to your advantage to keep an adversary guessing. Iran knew Jimmy Carter was weak and would do little to rescue the hostages they took. With Reagan, he was an unknown and they were not willing to take the chance that he might hit them very,very hard so they caved.Yet "Hillary will start WWIII" is the scary meme du jour
I mostly agree.I don't believe either one would start WWIII; that is just scare mongering from both camps. I do believe hrc might over react to a miltary situation in an effort to prove she is not a "weak woman". Trump....I dont know. Sometimes you can use that to your advantage to keep an adversary guessing. Iran knew Jimmy Carter was weak and would do little to rescue the hostages they took. With Reagan, he was an unknown and they were not willing to take the chance that he might hit them very,very hard so they caved.
I don't believe either one would start WWIII; that is just scare mongering from both camps. I do believe hrc might over react to a miltary situation in an effort to prove she is not a "weak woman". Trump....I dont know. Sometimes you can use that to your advantage to keep an adversary guessing. Iran knew Jimmy Carter was weak and would do little to rescue the hostages they took. With Reagan, he was an unknown and they were not willing to take the chance that he might hit them very,very hard so they caved.
Absolutely not. You assumed were you should of asked. That's the evolution of dialogue. There's no such thing as an exhaustive post were it might cover any and all assumptions of others or it's up to interpretation. No the reader has the responsibility to ask were there own assumptions might arise as the conversation continues.That is what you were implying, if not then you might want to be clear in your wording.....
Or to write in such a way that asking for clarification is not necessary.......Absolutely not. You assumed were you should of asked. That's the evolution of dialogue. There's no such thing as an exhaustive post were it might cover any and all assumptions of others or it's up to interpretation. No the reader has the responsibility to ask were there own assumptions might arise as the conversation continues.
That was covered the in the post you just tagged but didn't bother to address as written anyway.Or to write in such a way that asking for clarification is not necessary.......
So if the president has nothing to do with abortion rates, then we shouldn't care about what a president believes about abortion.That has about as much to do with Obama as the rise of America as the largest producer of fossil fuels has had to do with Obama.
Not quite....Teddy Roosevelt liked to talk about the Presidency as being a "bully pulpit'; a position that when the president spoke peopole actually listened and in more extreme cases verbally "beat the public over the head" to push them in a desired direction.if the president has nothing to do with abortion rates, then we shouldn't care about what a president believes about abortion.
Not quite....Teddy Roosevelt liked to talk about the Presidency as being a "bully pulpit'; a position that when the president spoke peopole actually listened and in more extreme cases verbally "beat the public over the head" to push them in a desired direction.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bully_pulpit
Bully pulpit
This article is about the turn of phrase. For the comic book, see Tales From the Bully Pulpit. For the game company, see Bully Pulpit Games.
A bully pulpit is a conspicuous position that provides an opportunity to speak out and be listened to.
This term was coined by President Theodore Roosevelt, who referred to the White House as a "bully pulpit", by which he meant a terrific platform from which to advocate an agenda. Roosevelt used the word bully as an adjective meaning "superb" or "wonderful", a more common usage in his time than it is today. Another expression which survives from this era is "bully for you", synonymous with "good for you".
Do you have any evidence that he used his 'bully pulpit' to reduce abortions? If so, I am happy to give him credit due......So do you take that to mean Obama dies deserve at least a bit of credit for the decline in abortions during his time as president?
I think he used his bully pulpit to do the things that reduced abortions, like making it easier to access birth control.Do you have any evidence that he used his 'bully pulpit' to reduce abortions? If so, I am happy to give him credit due......