• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

I caught a bit of the Donald's speech. He's going to give you everything you want. Save the economy, guns for everyone, LGBT equality, get rid of student loan debt (I thought that was Obama's gig), end world hunger, 2 chickens in every pot and a car in the driveway and the people at the convention ate it up like no other politician has made a bunch of empty promises before.
 
His speech was very dark. We're afraid of this and that and I alone can fix it - was what I heard. There was no theme of new opportunities. I heard nothing that was toned down or different than before. Talk loud and make accusations, but no substance of how to do those things. Hillary will kill us but I'll make us great is not a platform. Just like the rhetoric of Mitch McConnell stated the republicans main objective was to make Obama a one-term president when he was elected. November/January can't get here soon enough...just so this phase is over.
 
dvdneal said:
I caught a bit of the Donald's speech. He's going to give you everything you want. Save the economy, guns for everyone, LGBT equality, get rid of student loan debt (I thought that was Obama's gig), end world hunger, 2 chickens in every pot and a car in the driveway and the people at the convention ate it up like no other politician has made a bunch of empty promises before.
Click to expand...

And his are even more empty than most other politicians' promises, as he's laid out almost no policy plans on how he intends to get there.:r: Okay, he's hinted that he'll enact a lot of protectionist trade measures and stated explicitly he wants to build a wall.
 
Planit said:
His speech was very dark. We're afraid of this and that and I alone can fix it - was what I heard. There was no theme of new opportunities. I heard nothing that was toned down or different than before. Talk loud and make accusations, but no substance of how to do those things. Hillary will kill us but I'll make us great is not a platform. Just like the rhetoric of Mitch McConnell stated the republicans main objective was to make Obama a one-term president when he was elected. November/January can't get here soon enough...just so this phase is over.
Click to expand...

It was extremely dark. Probably the darkest speech I can recall within the confines of a Presidential campaign. I've thought it hyperbole when people have said Trump will bring an authoritarian dictatorship, but the language he continually uses is starkly similar to others that arose to authoritarian power via a democratic election. The GOP is in full echo chamber mode, refusing to acknowledge the threat he poses; even Cruz's comments weren't altruistic as he is simply trying to position himself for the future (his comments echoed similar fear-based sentiments, if you didn't notice).

"But he saw too that in America the struggle was befogged by the fact that the worst Fascists were they who disowned the word 'Fascism' and preached enslavement to Capitalism under the style of Constitutional and Traditional Native American Liberty... I just wish people wouldn't quote Lincoln or the Bibe, or hang out the flag or the cross, to cover up something that belongs more to the bank-book and the three golden balls."
- Sinclair Lewis (from It Can't Happen Here and Gideon Planish)

“When and if fascism comes to America it will not be labeled ‘made in Germany’; it will not be marked with a swastika; it will not even be called fascism; it will be called, of course, ‘Americanism.'”
- An uncredited New York Times reporter covering Halford E. Luccock in an article published September 12, 1938.
 
I watched a little bit of it. I think it was dark too, but that was to be expected. He wanted to show what happens when you elect the status quo.

The response today is about what I would expected. Those who don't like him hated the speech, those who do like him thought it was awesome. Overall, I still don't think I can vote for him. I know I can't vote for Hillary.

In the end, I think I am going to vote for a 3rd party and encourage as many other people from all sides do to the same. Granted the person who we vote for will not win the election, but it will send a message to the two major parties that they need to do a better job. And in a few years when the country is a total s&!# show, we will at least have the confidence knowing that we didn't vote that person into office.
 
michaelskis said:
In the end, I think I am going to vote for a 3rd party and encourage as many other people from all sides do to the same. Granted the person who we vote for will not win the election, but it will send a message to the two major parties that they need to do a better job. And in a few years when the country is a total s&!# show, we will at least have the confidence knowing that we didn't vote that person into office.
Click to expand...

I used to be big into the 4x4 scene and have been on a local forum for many years. I don't venture there much anymore because the folks in that group are all right wing lunatics. There is currently a post up there "Trump or Hillary" and I am blown away to see the group is primarily undecided or Johnson fans. It's weird because there are no Trump or Hillary answers there yet, and it's at nearly 50 replies. The majority are undecided with the rest going for Johnson. Some are concerned that a Johnson vote will end up with the same result as Perot in '92, but it was pointed out how different the political field is now with such a huge social media scene.

Trumps use of the term "Law and Order" really kind of scared me.
 
michaelskis said:
In the end, I think I am going to vote for a 3rd party and encourage as many other people from all sides do to the same. Granted the person who we vote for will not win the election, but it will send a message to the two major parties that they need to do a better job. And in a few years when the country is a total s&!# show, we will at least have the confidence knowing that we didn't vote that person into office.
Click to expand...

Taking off my admittedly liberal hat, I have a strong desire for there to be at least two or more competitive parties. Trump is contributing to the demise of one as a competitive threat. I think that is bad for the country.

I do not believe a vote for Gary Johnson is wasted, even if it creates a Perot-like situation. People forget that Perot was a little bit of an enigma and his second run attempt did some long-term damage to third parties. I think even when Johnson loses, he has ignited enough "stick-to-it" that it results in one of two things:
  • the Libertarian Party actually begins to gain some steam with someone at the helm that doesn't come off like a wack job. Slightly moderating on a few issues could make them a huge threat in 2020.
  • the GOP, in the post-Trump aftermath, recognizes that Johnson's platform is remarkably similar to what the GOP once claimed to stand for, and adjusts to bring them back into the fold.

In addition, even if he fails to secure any electoral votes, if he performs well enough in the popular vote it could mean federal election funding in 2020. With a punch-drunk GOP following a Trump loss to Clinton, this could be an opportunity for a 3rd party to build momentum without imploding around a micromanaging Perot that failed to allow a true party to develop with the Reform Party.
 
With the leaked DNC emails bashing Bernie and being pro-Hilary right from the start, I have to ask everyone, what would it take for you to vote for a 3rd party instead of Hillary Clinton. I am not going to promote Trump because I don't think he will do a good job if elected, and as corrupt as Hillary is, I think the system will be rigged to give her the Whitehouse regardless of who people vote for.
 
AG74683 said:
How do you contribute to poll numbers to get Johnson into the debates?
Click to expand...

Not just Johnson, but the Green Party candidate, but any candidate that is in the ballot in all 50 states. Show the people that there is a choice!




Sad thing is too many sheeple are going to whine about it because they are going to claim that only the top two should be there.




Baaaaaa Hillary Baaaaaa Trump Baaaaa
 
Trigger warning: Drunk posting here....

I think its time we put the Union to bed and split up America. the Northeast will remain America but with free healthcare, the south and most of the midwest (excluding MI, IL and MN which will go to Canada) will become the oft theorized JESUSLAND and will be ruled by Trump and Alex Jones. the West Coast will become the Western Socialist Bloc (with SoCal going back to Mexico).

Texas will be its own Republic and the Southwest will be a Libertarian Confederacy ruled by the eternal TRON PAUL.
 
Meh... I'm not really concerned about the DNC emails. So an organization that Sanders wasn't a part of for years would rather see Clinton, who was a long standing and very prominent member, win? Scandalous! :r:
 
WSU MUP Student said:
Meh... I'm not really concerned about the DNC emails. So an organization that Sanders wasn't a part of for years would rather see Clinton, who was a long standing and very prominent member, win? Scandalous! :r:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with WSU MUP Alumni. Bernie did form a barnacle on the Democratic hull to get where he was going after being independent for such a long time. I'm not bothered by the emails, and I voted for Bernie.:h:
 
WSU MUP Student said:
Meh... I'm not really concerned about the DNC emails. So an organization that Sanders wasn't a part of for years would rather see Clinton, who was a long standing and very prominent member, win? Scandalous! :r:
Click to expand...

Pretty much sums up my take on the "issue" too. Can't say I'm very surprised.
 
WSU MUP Student said:
Meh... I'm not really concerned about the DNC emails. So an organization that Sanders wasn't a part of for years would rather see Clinton, who was a long standing and very prominent member, win? Scandalous! :r:
Click to expand...

To be expected? Yes. But the language of the emails is pretty shocking. There's also several new ones out that indicate the DNC together with Hillary are planning to put top contributors into specific positions. This is blatantly illegal. Of course this should be common knowledge that this stuff probably happens, but for it to be exposed to the general(ly uneducated) public is pretty bad. The Trump campaign will feast on that one. Damage control results in Wasserman Shultz resigning, although it's more of a promotion for her than anything.

It fascinates me that Trump manhandled the GOP when he was clearly a thorn in their side. I assume something similar was happening behind the scenes with the GOP yet somehow they failed to unseat Trump. I guess it has to do with their other candidates being crap, but still. I wonder if a Trump led White House will work to at least investigate these emails as far as putting contributors into specific positions. That should be interesting.
 
Last edited:
michaelskis said:
With the leaked DNC emails bashing Bernie and being pro-Hilary right from the start, I have to ask everyone, what would it take for you to vote for a 3rd party instead of Hillary Clinton. I am not going to promote Trump because I don't think he will do a good job if elected, and as corrupt as Hillary is, I think the system will be rigged to give her the Whitehouse regardless of who people vote for.
Click to expand...

My issue is that Ii don't really agree with either of the third (third and fourth?) parties' platforms either. The Tim Kaine pick as VP helped boost Hillary's image a lot for me, but she still has a lot of issues going against her. If I'm voting based on my policy positions, it'll either be Hillary or I'll write-in someone.

That said, I do support the rise of the third parties. I think there need to be challengers to make the major parties assess where they stand as far as representing everyday Americans, and potentially re-establish the party philosophies or replace one or both parties. If I voted third party, though, it would be a protest vote and not actually a vote in support of the third party platform.
 
gtpeach said:
My issue is that Ii don't really agree with either of the third (third and fourth?) parties' platforms either. The Tim Kaine pick as VP helped boost Hillary's image a lot for me, but she still has a lot of issues going against her. If I'm voting based on my policy positions, it'll either be Hillary or I'll write-in someone.

That said, I do support the rise of the third parties. I think there need to be challengers to make the major parties assess where they stand as far as representing everyday Americans, and potentially re-establish the party philosophies or replace one or both parties. If I voted third party, though, it would be a protest vote and not actually a vote in support of the third party platform.
Click to expand...

I'm very much the same way.

What is influencing me to some degree is that I live in Texas, a very red state where my vote doesn't really matter much. I'm going to keep a close eye on polling data here simply because there are some VERY conservative members of my family that are refusing to vote for Trump and may sit out the election (which would be a first). If that's a pattern in other families, Texas could actually start its slow walk toward purple this election cycle. If that is the case, then I'll probably cast my vote for Hillary. If it looks like the GOP will still have a fairly dominant win, then I'll cast a protest vote for Gary Johnson in an effort to help some third party... any third party... gain better access to federal election funding & debates in the future even if I disagree with the platform.

I will not vote for Jill Stein. I think she is a kook.

I will do anything I can to keep Trump out. People talk about Hillary being crooked & dishonest. They need to take a good, hard look at the actions Trump has taken over the course of his career before teeing off on Hillary.
 
Suburb Repairman said:
I will do anything I can to keep Trump out. People talk about Hillary being crooked & dishonest. They need to take a good, hard look at the actions Trump has taken over the course of his career before teeing off on Hillary.
Click to expand...

Let's see, Hillary, a politician, which equates to some amount of deals that aren't all on the up and up. Politicians are at least supposed to help people.
Trump, a business man, which equates to the same thing, but in business you are out to make money and screw the little guy. Look at the record of bankruptcies and remember that even though it's normal business practice, a lot of small businesses took a hit because the man couldn't honor his debts.

That's not to say a businessman wouldn't make a good president, but I can't think of the last one who did it. Even Reagan, an actor, went through a governor's office first.

Speaking of men honoring debts, how many man card violations has Trump picked up? Not honoring a debt, hitting on your own daughter, the comb over hairdo, the spray tan, and I'll bet he gets regular manicures.
Although scoring with the models does restore a lot of that.

SR, do what your "great" senator said and vote with your conscience. :D
 
AG74683 said:
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-dnc-hack-could-be-misinformation-from-russian-spies-1784252633

Well that is certainly interesting.
Click to expand...

Tin Foil Hats anyone?




On a side note, I find it ironic that Hillary Clinton is against building a wall on the US border, but the DNC has put up a miles long fence to enclose the convention to keep protesters away. Also how DWS was booed off stage, but has found a place working for the Clinton campaign.


I also find it interesting that all the people who were open carrying weapons in Cleveland and there were no issues.
 
gtpeach said:
I'd classify this as an anti-conspiracy theory! I'm going to be skeptical until a source I've heard about before makes the argument. :)
Click to expand...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/25/politics/democratic-convention-dnc-emails-russia/

I don't think there's any conspiracy here, the hack literally came from Russian soil. There is no if's and's or but's about it. Whether the attack came as a directive directly from Putin himself is another matter entirely, and one that will probably never be answered. A Trump presidency bodes much better for Russia than a Clinton one does for sure, especially if Trump's words concerning the NATO/Russia aggression are truthful.

It appears that at least in part, some of the documents released in the leak were either edited partially, or wholly created by the hackers. Nonetheless, the most damaging documents are definitely straight from high ranking DNC members.
 
I did say it was an ANTI-conspiracy theory. :) I will now believe you, though. I'm scared to ask what else could possibly happen before November!!!
 
michaelskis said:
I also find it interesting that all the people who were open carrying weapons in Cleveland and there were no issues.
Click to expand...

You gotta rile 'em up first. If everyone at the convention agrees with them then they ain't gonna pull out the guns and start shooting. Go in there and burn a flag or tell them abortions should be free for all men and see what happens. :lmao:
 
dvdneal said:
You gotta rile 'em up first. If everyone at the convention agrees with them then they ain't gonna pull out the guns and start shooting. Go in there and burn a flag or tell them abortions should be free for all men and see what happens. :lmao:
Click to expand...

You mean like this:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...test-republican-national-convention/87357036/





Sounds like the Wikileaks guy says that they have information and documents that will lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, but noted get it is unlikely that she will get prosecuted as long as long as the FBI is afraid of the Clintons.
 
So what did everyone think of Bernie's speech? I did not watch it but I am curious to hear what other people thought of it. Do you think it is enough to get Clinton elected?
 
michaelskis said:
So what did everyone think of Bernie's speech? I did not watch it but I am curious to hear what other people thought of it. Do you think it is enough to get Clinton elected?
Click to expand...

I didn't watch it. I haven't seen a single second of the DNC so far. It's weird because I watched a good portion of the RNC, and while I consider myself a centrist and don't really care for either party, I probably agree with the views of the Dems more often than the GOP.

I honestly couldn't care less about the DNC now. While I can admit that Clinton's views more closely align with mine than Trump, nothing they can say or do will convince me to cast a vote for her. Bernie rolled over and played dead, which is against every single thing he's stood for since he first became Mayor of Burlington. He has absolutely no reason to continue to play ball with the Democratic Party, yet for whatever reason he decided it would be best to shun his supporters and support a candidate he's said over and over is not fit for the Presidency. I'm disgusted, quite frankly, that I bought into the Sanders movement and I even donated to the cause (not much, but still). I didn't support some of his views, but I supported him as a candidate because up until this campaign, he stayed true to his word and he was honest and hard working. Now he just looks like another typical politician.

I get it. I know that he feels that his failure to endorse Clinton would have the potential to lead voters to move towards Trump. I feel that he's accomplished the exact opposite.
 
Last edited:
I watched maybe 15 minutes of the DNC total last night. I caught a good chunk of Michelle Obama's speech and some smaller pieces from Sanders and an immigration activist Astrid Silva (I had no idea who she was before her speech though) and maybe about a minute or two from Warren.

I only saw about 15 to 20 minutes a night from the RNC but from what I saw last night, the speakers at the DNC were in general about 10x more upbeat and optimistic than just about anybody who spoke at the RNC. Even Bernie Sanders who very often comes off as "angry old man" to me, even when he's saying positive things, seemed more positive than all the doom and gloom that was on display at the RNC.
 
Well, last night's speech is a world different than what she said in 2008:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN1qZMBE9Gc
 
She said that during the primary race, though. So the circumstances are much different. I understand that it's still contradictory, but I think you also have to put some of it into context. Like when Trump said that unemployment increased when Tim Kaine was Governor. Sure, that's true. He was also governor from 2006 to 2010. Unemployment increased pretty much everywhere during that time period.

I didn't see Bernie's speech. I fell asleep while he was still thanking the crowds for cheering for him. :) But I loved Cory Booker and Michelle Obama. Cory Booker was especially classy. I don't know if y'all saw any of his quotes in response to Trump tweeting out that if Cory Booker is the future of the Democratic party, then there's not much of a future for it. Cory Booker just said that he had nothing but love for Trump and would be praying for him, but he didn't want him to be president. I thought it was a very positive way to handle what could've turned into a twitter-war.
 
gtpeach said:
She said that during the primary race, though. So the circumstances are much different.
Click to expand...

I am calling a massive BS on your your response. She said it and she meant it. It is just an example of how the political establishment works. You try to prove that the other person is a worthless piece of garbage until a given moment when you don't have anything else to lose, then you love them unconditionally and sign their application to become a saint in hopes of getting something out of it in the future.

At least Ted Cruz had the balls to tell it like it was.

gtpeach said:
I understand that it's still contradictory, but I think you also have to put some of it into context. Like when Trump said that unemployment increased when Tim Kaine was Governor. Sure, that's true. He was also governor from 2006 to 2010. Unemployment increased pretty much everywhere during that time period.
Click to expand...

As for Trump, I have zero love for him and think that he would be only slightly better than Hillary... but not good enough for me to vote for and not good enough to run this country.
 
^^^Mrs. Obama had a subtle dig in 2008. She kicked the racist, fear mongering, homophobic, divisive conservative ass up and down the street last night.

BTW, I was under the impression that Southern Gentlemen never yell at Southern Ladies, and especially not over politics. I guess I'm just a stupid Yankee, what the heck do I know.
 
I think in this case, it sounds like our underlying political leanings are influencing the degree to which we think Michelle's previous comments was a big deal. In the scheme of things, I personally don't think it is. You obviously do. And that's that.
 
Gedunker said:
^^^Mrs. Obama had a subtle dig in 2008. She kicked the racist, fear mongering, homophobic, divisive conservative ass up and down the street last night.

BTW, I was under the impression that Southern Gentlemen never yell at Southern Ladies, and especially not over politics. I guess I'm just a stupid Yankee, what the heck do I know.
Click to expand...

I read MO's speech last night, and there were parts of it that were terrific... but when she says things like "I trust Hillary to lead this country because I have seen her lifelong dedication to our nation's children. Not just her own daughter, who she has raised to perfection, but every child who needs a champion..."

Raised her child to perfection? Give me a break... She was correct in the things that she wanted for this country, but I highly doubt that Hillary or Tump will be able to do that.


*I am still a stupid yankee too... just enjoying living in a foreign land of BBQ and warm winters. :D


gtpeach said:
I think in this case, it sounds like our underlying political leanings are influencing the degree to which we think Michelle's previous comments was a big deal. In the scheme of things, I personally don't think it is. You obviously do. And that's that.
Click to expand...

Do I think that it is a big deal? Only in the context of how messed up politics and it raises the question of how trustworthy any of these people are at telling the truth regarding what they believe.

As I pointed out before. I will not vote for either Trump or Hillary so it is not about parties here. It is about the future of this county and bring about the question of what the hell are we doing electing either of these people to what many agree is the most power elected position on the planet.
 
That's the issue with the party system. During the primaries, candidates try to convince voters that the people running against them are incompetent. And then once the primaries are over, whoever loses is expected to endorse the winner. So you'll always end up with those kinds of contradictions as long as there are party systems.

There are advantages to the party system, but it's certainly not perfect and creates its own challenges.
 
michaelskis said:
As I pointed out before. I will not vote for either Trump or Hillary so it is not about parties here. It is about the future of this county and bring about the question of what the hell are we doing electing either of these people to what many agree is the most power elected position on the planet.
Click to expand...

I think this is the best thing that's come out of this election. From your posts I can gather that you and I have vastly different political views, yet we both agree that we aren't voting for either of these dummies! We are definitely not alone!
 
michaelskis said:
I am calling a massive BS on your your response. She said it and she meant it. It is just an example of how the political establishment works. You try to prove that the other person is a worthless piece of garbage until a given moment when you don't have anything else to lose, then you love them unconditionally and sign their application to become a saint in hopes of getting something out of it in the future.
Click to expand...

I've always found the primary/election process fascinating on the name calling. You bash every other candidate in your own party as inexperienced, weak on this or that, and whatever it takes to get the nomination. When you don't get it then you start saying how great they are and start bashing the other party like none of the earlier mud slinging ever happened.
 
AG74683 said:
I think this is the best thing that's come out of this election. From your posts I can gather that you and I have vastly different political views, yet we both agree that we aren't voting for either of these dummies! We are definitely not alone!
Click to expand...

No... we are not alone. :alien:
 
Good to know the slaves that built the White House were well fed. Bill O'Riley is an idiot. :not:
 
michaelskis said:
This is bound to get political so I figure I will just post this here.

It is horrible that Freddie Gray died and that he suffered such horrible injuries that caused his death. But to what level are the police responsible for that death.

From what I understand based on several sources, Freddie was not cooperative with officers, was thrashing around when they put him into the van, and did not buckle him because they feared for their safety. Yes, they should have buckled him. There is no question about that. According to other passenger, the driver did not drive erratically or anything, but Freddy was throwing himself around the van, and based on the medical report, it was speculated that these movements that caused the injuries.

I think at best, they should be charged with involuntary manslaughter, but not murder 2.
Click to expand...

All remaining charges dropped

Prosecutors dropped all remaining charges against three Baltimore police officers accused in the arrest and death of Freddie Gray in a downtown courtroom on Wednesday morning, concluding one of the most high-profile criminal cases in Baltimore history.

The startling move was an apparent acknowledgement of the unlikelihood of a conviction following the acquittals of three other officers on similar and more serious charges by Circuit Judge Barry G. Williams, who was expected to preside over the remaining trials as well.

It also means the office of Baltimore State's Attorney Marilyn J. Mosby will secure no convictions in the case after more than a year of dogged fighting, against increasingly heavy odds, to hold someone criminally accountable in Gray's death.
Click to expand...
 
Mosby is a disgrace. The cases were lost when she stood on the steps announcing the charges and said "I have heard your call". Just because people riot on the streets doesn't mean you bring charges. You ascertain the facts as best you can at that time and let them lead you where they will. I hope she is disbarred.

Do the officers have some accountability? Yeah, sure they do, a guy died in their custody. But was it criminal? A much higher burden to prove. And ole Freddie didn't exactly help his health with his actions. These guys will all be fired and looking for work unless their suit against Mosby gets them some big bucks.

She also today bemoaned that the defendants didn't have to have a jury trial. Hey Marilyn, that's like Law School 101, you get to choose. So if you don't like that little right that we enjoy maybe you shouldn't have gone into law in the first place.
 
Y'all see this? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras during a press conference. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

I'm even angrier (well, maybe not, but just as angry) at his dismissive treatment of the reporter.
 
gtpeach said:
Y'all see this? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras during a press conference. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

I'm even angrier (well, maybe not, but just as angry) at his dismissive treatment of the reporter.
Click to expand...

Treason is not a word to be thrown around lightly, but those comments are treasonous as they encourage international espionage against the United States.

I can't even get mad about the treatment of the reporter anymore. I've just come to expect that from him. Trump is a bad human.
 
Suburb Repairman said:
Treason is not a word to be thrown around lightly, but those comments are treasonous as they encourage international espionage against the United States.

I can't even get mad about the treatment of the reporter anymore. I've just come to expect that from him. Trump is a bad human.
Click to expand...

Here's the youtube of the press release. His statement starts around the 12:30 mark. I just had to actually hear it for myself to really believe it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFG5vBg45qs
 
Suburb Repairman said:
Treason is not a word to be thrown around lightly, but those comments are treasonous as they encourage international espionage against the United States.

I can't even get mad about the treatment of the reporter anymore. I've just come to expect that from him. Trump is a bad human.
Click to expand...

I dunno, I see it as more of a joke to be honest. I mean I sort of chuckled a little bit when he said it. Is it correct form to say something like that? Absolutely not, but he doesn't care about that.

The funny part is that the impetus behind the hack was most likely to work to discredit Hilary so Trump actually gets elected. Putin doesn't respect him now, and won't respect him even if he wins the election. For him to say "he will respect me" is a farce.

At what point does he speak to the reporter? I can't believe this thing lasted for 60 minutes.
 
IMO, His comments encouraging (or at the very least, condoning) Russian espionage combined with his refusal to promise military back-up to NATO allies if they were to be invaded by Russia make him probably the absolute worst candidate in terms of foreign policy that a major party has put forward in a few generations.

Combining all of that with the fact that he insisted that the RNC remove from their platform the condemnation of Russia's invasion and takeover of the Crimea and reassertion that the region in fact belongs to the Ukraine, seriously make me wonder where his allegiance lies.
 
AG74683 said:
At what point does he speak to the reporter? I can't believe this thing lasted for 60 minutes.
Click to expand...

I didn't watch it all the way through since I am actually at work and am already way too distracted by this to be doing what I should be. Several sources just cited it as being later in the press conference. I may try to find it tonight, but I'm sure it'll be addressed at the DNC.

Even if he intended it to be a joke, it crosses the line about what things are appropriate to joke about. At the least, it shows that he doesn't have the respect to treat serious issues seriously. At the worst, it's treason.

I'm not in any kind of mood to give him any benefit of the doubt. If he has the audacity to publicly say that and think it could just be swept under the rug, then there is no way to know what he is actually planning on doing when there aren't dozens of cameras following him around.
 
WSU MUP Student said:
IMO, His comments encouraging (or at the very least, condoning) Russian espionage combined with his refusal to promise military back-up to NATO allies if they were to be invaded by Russia make him probably the absolute worst candidate in terms of foreign policy that a major party has put forward in a few generations.

Combining all of that with the fact that he insisted that the RNC remove from their platform the condemnation of Russia's invasion and takeover of the Crimea and reassertion that the region in fact belongs to the Ukraine, seriously make me wonder where his allegiance lies.
Click to expand...

Sorry AG, but this is not a joke anymore. WSU's posts serves in part to illustrate why. I cannot laugh at him or even with him. The guy has a pattern now of bowing admiration to Russia. He has wanton disregard of the Constitution. He has no filter. He has no respect for a free press or freedom of speech in general. No sense of human rights. No indication of even human decency. I question where his fundamental loyalties are at this point.
 
Back
Top