2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

da_miser · 01-09-2020 11:16AM

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Are you sure you know anything about San Francisco, at all? Apart from the fact that it's a city with a (slight) growth rate, nobody is leaving because of crime. If people are leaving SF, it's almost always because of the high cost of living and ridiculous rents.

Who is in charge of SF?
Could the city be run by Dems?
Could it be the Dems who legalised shop lifting?
Could it be the city is going to rack and ruin under Dem control?

01-09-2020 11:17AM

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Well he certainly didn't know that they were crooks before he hired them otherwise he wouldn't have hired them.

He actively interfered in their investigations and got some of them out of jail....

salmocab · 01-09-2020 11:17AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

As already pointed out, the fact they had pre-existing conditions does not mean they would be dead even if we didn't have covid. Excess deaths are over two hundred thousand, care to explain that one? Pretty shameful that you're choosing to misrepresent the CDC and ignore the hundreds of thousands who have died that would still be alive today.

Your arguing with someone that believes in a conspiracy theory. Your absolutely wasting your time as rational points can’t be processed.

ohnonotgmail · 01-09-2020 11:17AM

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Well he certainly didn't know that they were crooks before he hired them otherwise he wouldn't have hired them.

he knew cohen was a crook. cohen committed his crimes working for trump at trumps request.

dwayneshintzy · 01-09-2020 11:19AM

da_miser wrote: »

Who is in charge of SF?
Could the city be run by Dems?
Could it be the Dems who legalised shop lifting?
Could it be the city is going to rack and ruin under Dem control?

Prop 47 didn't legalize shoplifting. Prop 47 was also a Californian-wide ballot initiative.

There are huge problems in SF. Most of them are to due with wealth, with high income earners driving everyone else out. Have you lived in San Francisco?

namloc1980 · 01-09-2020 11:24AM

da_miser wrote: »

Who is in charge of SF?
Could the city be run by Dems?
Could it be the Dems who legalised shop lifting?
Could it be the city is going to rack and ruin under Dem control?

Lies again. Can you show us exactly where "the Dems legalised shop lifting"? Exactly show us that.

WrenBoy · 01-09-2020 11:29AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Does this purile messaging actually work you reckon ?

Penn · 01-09-2020 11:31AM

Trump helps young people.

He's helping Kyle Rittenhouse form a defence for killing two people.

01-09-2020 11:32AM

WrenBoy wrote: »

Does this purile messaging actually work you reckon ?

I know, Trump has an unfortunate tendency to bully and behave in a purile way. Great to see a Trump supporter acknowledging it.

ohnonotgmail · 01-09-2020 11:32AM

WrenBoy wrote: »

Does this purile messaging actually work you reckon ?

you're not one of those people who think that trump wasn't actually mocking the disabled person?

da_miser · 01-09-2020 11:32AM

namloc1980 wrote: »

Sure you did. :pac:

I have no reason to lie, Trump will win again and will make me money this November.
Its as good as a sure thing at this stage.

1800_Ladladlad · 01-09-2020 11:33AM

WrenBoy wrote: »

Does this purile messaging actually work you reckon ?

Simpletons seem to think it does.

EgxSy6_VkAAXKQZ?format=jpg&name=medium

namloc1980 · 01-09-2020 11:34AM

da_miser wrote: »

I have no reason to lie, Trump will win again and will make me money this November.
Its as good as a sure thing at this stage.

Fair Play. Most times you hear people say - I won money on that - it's never actually true.

Tell me how · 01-09-2020 11:35AM

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

Simpletons seem to think it does.

You do know Sean Hannity is an adviser to Trump?

If Fox is the most widely watched cable news network, does that not make it MSM?

Hector Savage · 01-09-2020 11:47AM

https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/status/1300554359412076546?s=20

namloc1980 · 01-09-2020 11:49AM

This is hard to watch. Very embarrassing yet again from Trump. He's now comparing police shooting a man in the back to golfers missing putts. Laura Ingraham did her best to keep him on track. You can imagine what crazy things he'll come out with in the debates without a handler there controlling him.

.

da_miser · 01-09-2020 11:53AM

namloc1980 wrote: »

Lies again. Can you show us exactly where "the Dems legalised shop lifting"? Exactly show us that.

The Dems brought in a law if the value is less than $950 you wont be arrested, as you can imagine chaos

namloc1980 · 01-09-2020 11:54AM

da_miser wrote: »

The Dems brought in a law if the value is less than $950 you wont be arrested, as you can imagine chaos

So they didn't legalize shoplifting so as you claimed?

dwayneshintzy · 01-09-2020 11:58AM

da_miser wrote: »

The Dems brought in a law if the value is less than $950 you wont be arrested, as you can imagine chaos

Here's prominent Democrat Newt Gingrich with an editorial in support of Prop 47; https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0917-gingrich-prop--47-criminal-justice-20140917-story.html

The actual law is that it was reclassified from a felony to a misdemeanor. It is California-wide, not a San Francisco initiative.

dwayneshintzy · 01-09-2020 11:58AM

And "The Dems" didn't bring in anything, it was a ballot measure voted on directly by the people of California.

Penn · 01-09-2020 11:58AM

da_miser wrote: »

The Dems brought in a law if the value is less than $950 you wont be arrested, as you can imagine chaos

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/san-francisco-shoplifting-video/

No they didn't.

Prop 47, which California voters approved in 2014, reclassified some minor crimes as misdemeanors instead of felonies, with the intent of reducing what was at the time a severely overcrowded prison population. The aim was also to reduce the number of people serving long sentences and ending up with felony-conviction records for petty crimes.

Prop 47 increased the felony threshold for certain types of theft from $450 to $950 — meaning the simple theft of property valued below $950 is a misdemeanor. It also reduced simple drug possession (possession of drugs without the intent to sell) to a misdemeanor. The claim that Prop 47 is to blame for the incident depicted in the video is representative of misinformation that has been circulating about the law for years, said George Gascón, the former district attorney of San Francisco who is now running for the same position in Los Angeles County and who co-authored Prop 47.

Although the threshold for misdemeanor-versus-felony theft prior to Prop 47 was $450, it’s unclear whether the new law makes any potential difference in the San Francisco case. In the video, the thieves are seen stuffing drugstore-brand cosmetics into bags. It’s unknown how much the items were worth — SFPD would not give us an estimate.

“Prop 47 doesn’t cover robberies, theft by the use of force or fear. It doesn’t cover burglaries,” Gascón said. “If you break into a structure with the intent to commit theft or another felony, that continues to be a felony. If someone breaks into your car to steal even a pack of cigarettes, that’s still a felony. Even the crimes that are covered by Prop 47, they were not decriminalized. We moved them from a felony to a misdemeanor. [Perpetrators] can still go to county jail” if they are convicted.

Are you going to retract your claim?

extra gravy · 01-09-2020 12:02PM

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Prop 47 didn't legalize shoplifting. Prop 47 was also a Californian-wide ballot initiative.

There are huge problems in SF. Most of them are to due with wealth, with high income earners driving everyone else out. Have you lived in San Francisco?

Doubt he could pick SF out on a map never mind lived there.

namloc1980 · 01-09-2020 12:07PM

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

And "The Dems" didn't bring in anything, it was a ballot measure voted on directly by the people of California.

Trump supporters hate democracy at times.

da_miser · 01-09-2020 12:10PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

So they didn't legalize shoplifting so as you claimed?

The Dems brought in a law if the value is less than $950 you wont be arrested, nowthat sounds like legalised shoplifting to me.
Sure why not go downtown and rob, if you get caught the police wont arrest you, just send you on your way, nothing to loose by shoplifting, thats what i would call legalised shoplifting, of course the Dem supporters wont see anything wrong with this, and this is precisely why Trump will win in November

da_miser · 01-09-2020 12:12PM

Penn wrote: »

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/san-francisco-shoplifting-video/

No they didn't.

Are you going to retract your claim?

Snopes? really?
The owner left his wife and ran off with a prostitute amongst other unsavoury things

namloc1980 · 01-09-2020 12:12PM

Yeah he's gone fully down the rabbit hole now. Ranting and raving over baseless conspiracy theories and making absolutely no sense. I think his handlers need to keep him off the TV and possibly away from the debates at this stage. I mean if he goes this far off-piste in a friendly interview with Laura Ingraham doing her best to keep him on track and make him not sound completely nuts, imagine him in the debates. Planeful of thugs wearing dark uniforms flying into Washington apparently! Kind of sad really.

.

ohnonotgmail · 01-09-2020 12:13PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

Yeah he's gone fully down the rabbit hole now. Ranting and raving over baseless conspiracy theories and making absolutely no sense. I think his handlers need to keep him off the TV and possibly away from the debates at this stage. I mean if he goes this far off-piste in a friendly interview with Laura Ingraham doing her best to keep him on track and not sound completely nuts, imagine him in the debates. Planeful of thugs wearing dark uniforms flying into Washington apparently! Kind of sad really.

.

that is all just a dog whistle for his base. his supporters lap it up. expect it to be repeated ad nauseum by his supporters here.

namloc1980 · 01-09-2020 12:14PM

da_miser wrote: »

The Dems brought in a law if the value is less than $950 you wont be arrested, nowthat sounds like legalised shoplifting to me.
Sure why not go downtown and rob, if you get caught the police wont arrest you, just send you on your way, nothing to loose by shoplifting, thats what i would call legalised shoplifting, of course the Dem supporters wont see anything wrong with this, and this is precisely why Trump will win in November

Are you ignoring the fact that this was voted in at a statewide vote by the electorate? Yes of course you are. And it wasn't legalised - it's still a misdemeanor. Look just admit you were totally wrong that it was legalised and we can move on.

dwayneshintzy · 01-09-2020 12:15PM

da_miser wrote: »

Snopes? really?
The owner left his wife and ran off with a prostitute amongst other unsavoury things

What are you on about?

Proposition 47 was a ballot initiative passed by a significant majority of California voters. Newt Gingrich was a supporter of this, and he's most definitely not a Democrat. It was California wide and not just in effect in San Francisco. It changed non-violent theft of under $950 to a misdemeanor and not a felony, not at all what you claimed.

You're chatting total nonsense, basically.

Penn · 01-09-2020 12:17PM

da_miser wrote: »

Snopes? really?
The owner left his wife and ran off with a prostitute amongst other unsavoury things

Let me tell you a story of a man named Donald Trump...

Regardless, you were wrong. Are you going to retract your claim?

2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

Comments