Senate Intel backs assessment of Russian election meddling
UsedToWait wrote: » This passed me by until now, and not sure if it was mentioned here.Trump reportedly threw Starbursts on a table before Germany's Angela Merkel at the G7 summit and said, 'Don't say I never give you anything' I realise this is a forum for serious political discussion, but.. I mean.. I can't even..
Christy42 wrote: » Why do the democrats have to be united but the Republicans can be divided and no one cares? I have never gotten why they are held to different standards.
RIGOLO wrote: » Christy42 wrote: » Why do the democrats have to be united but the Republicans can be divided and no one cares? I have never gotten why they are held to different standards. They fought like cats and dogs over healthcare. Nothing budging and their end agreement was to simply not mention the subject. A large proportion of the party opposed Trump's immigration zero tolerance policy. Some agreement was found as Trump was forced to back down. A large proportion of the party was and is opposed to Trump starting the trade war with a large proportion of the world. It is understood that the party leadership only stick with Trump to get stuff like Ryan's tax bill through and would happily dump him for a more moderate if the situation could be handled politically. The administration has suffered massive turnover partially due to wrong doing and illegalities that have plagued this administration but also because of differences of opinion and people not being able to work together. Theres no double standards. When Republicans had their internal strife when Trump first appeared on the scene in 2015 there was plenty coverage. Republicans and conservatives were pretty open and mature about having this division and it was let play out and run its course as all things do. The only double standards are that when Reps were divided they worked their way thru it and their conservatives supporters debated the issue and chose a direction for the party , plus they were comfortable and mature enough to accept outsiders pointing out the divisions. Sometimes its good to LISTEN to external viewpoints of your opponents , you can learn alot from them. The difference with the Dems is they show no sign of working thru their divisions, partly because the first step to resolution is to admit you have a problem, and the Dems aint done that much yet, and also anyone outside the camp who points out they have some internal strife is labeled . The reason its important for Democrats to be united at this moment in time is because of their current position with mid-terms and a looming 2020. Internal divisions is a far different issue when you have POTUS , and both the House and Senate majoritys , than when your scrambling around to flip some seats.
Christy42 wrote: » Why do the democrats have to be united but the Republicans can be divided and no one cares? I have never gotten why they are held to different standards. They fought like cats and dogs over healthcare. Nothing budging and their end agreement was to simply not mention the subject. A large proportion of the party opposed Trump's immigration zero tolerance policy. Some agreement was found as Trump was forced to back down. A large proportion of the party was and is opposed to Trump starting the trade war with a large proportion of the world. It is understood that the party leadership only stick with Trump to get stuff like Ryan's tax bill through and would happily dump him for a more moderate if the situation could be handled politically. The administration has suffered massive turnover partially due to wrong doing and illegalities that have plagued this administration but also because of differences of opinion and people not being able to work together.
RIGOLO wrote: » Theres no double standards. When Republicans had their internal strife when Trump first appeared on the scene in 2015 there was plenty coverage. Republicans and conservatives were pretty open and mature about having this division and it was let play out and run its course as all things do. The only double standards are that when Reps were divided they worked their way thru it and their conservatives supporters debated the issue and chose a direction for the party , plus they were comfortable and mature enough to accept outsiders pointing out the divisions. Sometimes its good to LISTEN to external viewpoints of your opponents , you can learn alot from them. The difference with the Dems is they show no sign of working thru their divisions, partly because the first step to resolution is to admit you have a problem, and the Dems aint done that much yet, and also anyone outside the camp who points out they have some internal strife is labeled . The reason its important for Democrats to be united at this moment in time is because of their current position with mid-terms and a looming 2020. Internal divisions is a far different issue when you have POTUS , and both the House and Senate majoritys , than when your scrambling around to flip some seats.
mcmoustache wrote: » I wonder if he'll be able to say a few words without feeling compelled to attack the media?
everlast75 wrote: » Looks like he was shamed into doing the right thing...https://twitter.com/markknoller/status/1014111217114337281
everlast75 wrote: » In more "how much lower can this administration go" news, you will recall that DTJ said at a rally last week that the press were the enemy of the people. He whipped up his crowd up, as he does, to a state where they were shouting at reporters. Then, there was a shooting at the news outlet in Maryland. 5 journalists died. One could be forgiven into thinking at first blush that this attack was as a result of the latest and most direct in a long line of incendary comments made by him at the press. It transpires however, that he was not the cause in this instance. After the shooting at the news outlet, he changed his tune to a more conciliatory one and said "'Journalists should be free from fear of being violently attacked". You might be stunned into thinking that perhaps he has learned to treat them more humanly. But no.... a couple of days later and he is back to being his sh1tty self...https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1014028608711614464
StringerBell wrote: » oscarBravo wrote: » Is it, though? There's this perception that the abolition of ICE somehow means throwing the borders open, or not screening immigrants, or whatever - but ICE didn't exist before 2002, and was introduced along with the Department of Homeland Security. It basically pulled various immigration and customs functions from existing government departments and agencies into an agency established under counter-terrorism law. There's a lot about ICE to be critical of, including the fact that it's the only law enforcement agency with a quota for the minimum number of people it's required to keep in detention at any time, currently standing at 34,000, at a cost of $2 billion a year. Think about that for a second: ICE is required by law to keep 34,000 people locked up. Are the calls for its abolition really so misguided? I'm on the mobile so I can come back with a detailed anwer when the sun goes down but short answer, yes! It really is misguided to be divisive so close to the mid terms when party unity in getting people out to vote is so important and not give the other side a simple message to rouse their own, better at getting out to vote anyway, base. Recognise the flaws and change ICE? Sure, and go seek a mandate to to do, the majority of the country I am certain would get behind some Reformation particularly due to the shambles happening at the border.....Abolish however just gives ammo to the other side and divives your own party as we are seeing. You say it's just a perception that it means opening the borders and I agree but are we learning nothing with regard to how important perception is to the American voters? Are we really to believe this is not simple simple annon fodder for Republicans to run on now as evidence that the Democrats want open borders and all the rhetoric that goes with that? Even if they want to just go full on party wide abolish ICE it would be better though still not the right play imo, at least it would be a unified front to get behind. It's not enough to be right anymore, you have to sell it too.
oscarBravo wrote: » Is it, though? There's this perception that the abolition of ICE somehow means throwing the borders open, or not screening immigrants, or whatever - but ICE didn't exist before 2002, and was introduced along with the Department of Homeland Security. It basically pulled various immigration and customs functions from existing government departments and agencies into an agency established under counter-terrorism law. There's a lot about ICE to be critical of, including the fact that it's the only law enforcement agency with a quota for the minimum number of people it's required to keep in detention at any time, currently standing at 34,000, at a cost of $2 billion a year. Think about that for a second: ICE is required by law to keep 34,000 people locked up. Are the calls for its abolition really so misguided?
oscarBravo wrote: » Manic Moran wrote: » An interesting angle about how the other side does it as well.https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-democrats-suppress-the-vote/ Not excusing it by any means, just observing that both sides have interests in gaming the system. Would you agree that all efforts by either party to disenfranchise supporters of the other party should be unreservedly condemned and quashed?
Manic Moran wrote: » An interesting angle about how the other side does it as well.https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-democrats-suppress-the-vote/ Not excusing it by any means, just observing that both sides have interests in gaming the system.
Captain Obvious wrote: » ICE is tainted now, much like the RUC was. Changing it and revamping it makes sense.
RIGOLO wrote: » What incompetancy ? The Trump Administration has been the most competent adminstration in dealing with NK and getting them to the table and moving the situation forward. I dont see any incompetancy. Long term, think Rekjavik summit, think glasnost and peristroika, think the irish peace process, think how history has thought us how things work in the real world and evolve over months and years and even decades. Just cos a person has different opinions to you does not warrant them being called a wind up merchant, your displaying a baser self.
jooksavage wrote: » Whoa, hold your horses there. Only yesterday it was reported that NK were ramping up their nuclear program, not 3 weeks after the summit. Pompeo is in his way there now but there's a lot of scepticism among regional experts like Steph Haggard and Mira Rapp-Hooper that anything substantial will come of any agreement.
StringerBell wrote: » This abolish ICE stuff is so foolish, exactly the type of thing you expect from the Democrats to score an own goal. It's a free home run for Trump and the Republicans to boot. This is a microcosm of what is wrong with them.
StringerBell wrote: » This abolish ICE stuff is so foolish...
RIGOLO wrote: » If you can find an example in the Trump administration of the same stature as The US SECRETARY OF STATE presenting the RUSSIA FOREIGN MINISTER with a " small device with a big red knob' then perhaps you have scored a point on me. If its a whatabouttery game you want, I expect we are both too busy and others are not interested in posts of whatabout this and whatabout that. Id still assert the current Whitehouse adminstration is far more mature and effective than the last one. Every short term event has a long term ripple effect, some ripples are larger than others.
B0jangles wrote: » It is important to note that there has been an active and enthusiastic effort to repress democrat voters in republican-controlled states. It's not always voter apathy, sometimes it's de facto voter disenfranchisement.https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a15912246/north-carolina-voter-suppression-tactics/https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/13/america-history-voter-suppression-donald-trump-election-fraudhttps://www.thenation.com/article/wisconsins-voter-id-law-suppressed-200000-votes-trump-won-by-23000/
RIGOLO wrote: » At this point in time it looks like being a disaster for the Democrats. RIGOLO wrote: » Theres been no evidence of Dem voter turnout in any primaries, most turnout has been on the low side. This is surely a problem for all sides, not sure why it would be specific to the Dems. It indicates a feeling of disenchantment. RIGOLO wrote: » Continued infighting in the DNC. The level of infighting leading up the POTUS election within the GOP was staggering, many GOP house members were openly hostile to Trump and many still are. If you are going to use this point then you must conceded that either A) its irrelevant to voters or b)that it is going to hurt the GOP as much RIGOLO wrote: » The rise of a 'socialist' left in the DNC will scare off many Dems from turning out. The continued rise of the hard right i the GOP will also scare many GOP members off. The move away from the party ideals (fiscal conservatism for eg.) RIGOLO wrote: » The GOP and Trump backed candidates have many positive messages to bring to their campaigns. Well that is entirely subjective of course. Some will see the move to the right as terrible, some will welcome it. Some will see the trade wars as an unnecessary fight, others will welcome it. RIGOLO wrote: » Fundraising is not as strong as it once was in the DNC. Not as much money for ads. If I recall correctly there was a recent election, won by the Dems, where the GOP outspent them nearly 10 - 1. Surely a a Trump supporter you can see that money for ads is not the deciding factor as HC had far more funds that Trump. Aslo, and I hate to bring this up again, but do you have any evidence of this assertion. What are the historic levels on which you are basing you point? How does the Gop compare? RIGOLO wrote: » Too many of the old HRC guard still hanging about that will prevent the DNC from unifying Is the GOP unified? There are plenty of resignations going on, higher than in previous terms. They couldn't agree on the Obamacare vote (the one major issue they had). There are plenty of the old guard from the GOP still around as well, that is an issue with politics. RIGOLO wrote: » the media continue to alienate the moderates and swing voters, the media continue to give too much air time to Trump. I agree that the media gives too much time to Trump, or more specifically on non important issues like Melania coat. They should be following up on his continued failed policies, such as the turnabout on his immigration policy. But even with that, I haven't seen any upswing in support for either the GOP of Trump that would lead to your conclusion. RIGOLO wrote: » The media should be getting the DNC policy message across, but the DNC don't have any . It is not the job of the media to get the message across. RIGOLO wrote: » The left continues to provide ammo for the GOP campaign, Maxine Waters and the like. Is there anything they could do to stop that? I mean, they complained that Obama wore a tan suit once. Maxine has done nothing different that what Trump does nearly everyday. Not sure why the right should have any problem with her, they should be welcoming her "telling it like it is" approach. RIGOLO wrote: » Mueller probe has been a damp squid, a few indictments but nothing major. So we need to take a long term helicopter view of Trump, but Mueller needs to deliver fast or he is a failure? RIGOLO wrote: » Nunes continues to expose DNC corruption, FBI and CIA collusion, this story is gathering pace, with further public testimony to come and will feed into the November cycle. Again, so Nunes bringing up concerns is exposing, but Mueller actually getting people to confess is a nothing burger. Using you own logic, then Trump has serious questions to answer and Trump Jr should already be in jail. RIGOLO wrote: » Trumps SCOTUS pick will excite conservatives , and with a potential further pick in this term or next term, the Senate majority may increase. It will excite the base, but Trump is not taking the chance of losing the majority in November so is going to go ahead with his pick now. So there is nothing for the voters to vote on. RIGOLO wrote: » Trump will go out on the campaign trail and do the same thing he did for his election, get voters turned out and voting GOP. Trump is certainly a major weapon for the GOP. Not sure that he is a vote getter though. His last number of endorsements have failed. RIGOLO wrote: » Polling trends are mostly trending towards the GOP and away from DNC. The generic polling ballot gap is shortening. But you guys don't believe in polls, they always get it wrong don't they? RIGOLO wrote: » DNC still may have positive leads but they are much narrower. They only need .1% to win RIGOLO wrote: » Continued positive employment trends for black and hispanics will aid the GOP vote. Totally agree.
RIGOLO wrote: » Theres been no evidence of Dem voter turnout in any primaries, most turnout has been on the low side.
RIGOLO wrote: » Continued infighting in the DNC.
RIGOLO wrote: » The rise of a 'socialist' left in the DNC will scare off many Dems from turning out.
RIGOLO wrote: » The GOP and Trump backed candidates have many positive messages to bring to their campaigns.
RIGOLO wrote: » Fundraising is not as strong as it once was in the DNC. Not as much money for ads.
RIGOLO wrote: » Too many of the old HRC guard still hanging about that will prevent the DNC from unifying
RIGOLO wrote: » the media continue to alienate the moderates and swing voters, the media continue to give too much air time to Trump.
RIGOLO wrote: » The media should be getting the DNC policy message across, but the DNC don't have any .
RIGOLO wrote: » The left continues to provide ammo for the GOP campaign, Maxine Waters and the like.
RIGOLO wrote: » Mueller probe has been a damp squid, a few indictments but nothing major.
RIGOLO wrote: » Nunes continues to expose DNC corruption, FBI and CIA collusion, this story is gathering pace, with further public testimony to come and will feed into the November cycle.
RIGOLO wrote: » Trumps SCOTUS pick will excite conservatives , and with a potential further pick in this term or next term, the Senate majority may increase.
RIGOLO wrote: » Trump will go out on the campaign trail and do the same thing he did for his election, get voters turned out and voting GOP.
RIGOLO wrote: » Polling trends are mostly trending towards the GOP and away from DNC. The generic polling ballot gap is shortening.
RIGOLO wrote: » DNC still may have positive leads but they are much narrower.
RIGOLO wrote: » Continued positive employment trends for black and hispanics will aid the GOP vote.
Midlife wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » Its here in pictures... Does anyone remember HRC and her Russia RESET RED BUTTON .... The US Secretary of State presents the Russian Foreign Minister with a little RED BUTTON to signify US-Russian relations reset, it was embarassing, lets present Putin with a red button, or as the articla says, " she gave him a device with a red knob " The US state dept could'nt even get the name right. So yes there are adults in the WhiteHouse now, dealing very effectively with US Foreign Policy , and dealing effectively with authoritarian regimes . The Trump Administration wont be presenting any red buttons to Foreign leaders. Firstly, you weren't just talking about foreign relations. It's adults in the whitehouse in general. Your comment was about long term planning, future elections and all that. Am I incorrect here? Secondly, according to your argument, one silly gesture from the previous Secretary of state proves that there were indeed not adults in the whitehouse before. not in terms of foreign relations but actually in terms of everything.So by this rationale, if I find one immature gesture or silly thing done by someone in the whitehouse under Trump, I'm negating your entire argument and indeed showing that the entire administration lacks maturity. Can you correct me as appropriate please?
RIGOLO wrote: » Its here in pictures... Does anyone remember HRC and her Russia RESET RED BUTTON .... The US Secretary of State presents the Russian Foreign Minister with a little RED BUTTON to signify US-Russian relations reset, it was embarassing, lets present Putin with a red button, or as the articla says, " she gave him a device with a red knob " The US state dept could'nt even get the name right. So yes there are adults in the WhiteHouse now, dealing very effectively with US Foreign Policy , and dealing effectively with authoritarian regimes . The Trump Administration wont be presenting any red buttons to Foreign leaders.
RIGOLO wrote: » What incompetancy ? The Trump Administration has been the most competent adminstration in dealing with NK and getting them to the table and moving the situation forward.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bed6f1d088326d5eb21c0139847332c7.svg)
