Say Something Completely Random And Off Topic

wineart 2 posted:

patespo1 posted:

flwino posted:

We may have to drink US wine, if as rumored that the orange man wants a 100% duty on all European wines.  Will kill my budget for sure

I can now justify to my wife all of the wine in our cellar, I was just planning years ahead of the 100% duty!  

Touché. With a cellar deep in French, Italian and Spanish I am not worried and this idiot will be out of office long before I could ever ‘need’ any wine!

And you've got all that delicious shiraz and zin to fall back on too!  

The deed is done and Trump is impeached.  Won't get rid of him but will ensure that in future decades people will understand what a horrible President and person he was, a stain on his presidency by which all but the most rabid Trumpanzees will judge him. Provided he loses the next election perhaps the nation will heal, the Republicans will return to being a conservative party, and the US can begin to regain respect and, I hope, its leadership role in the world, rather than China or Russia.  

But something in today's vote surprised me:  why did 30 Republicans not vote?  Swing districts?  A sudden fit of conscience?  An ill-timed bathroom break?  

bman posted:

The deed is done and Trump is impeached.  Won't get rid of him but will ensure that in future decades people will understand what a horrible President and person he was, a stain on his presidency by which all but the most rabid Trumpanzees will judge him. Provided he loses the next election perhaps the nation will heal, the Republicans will return to being a conservative party, and the US can begin to regain respect and, I hope, its leadership role in the world, rather than China or Russia.  

 

Do you really think so regarding a stain on his presidency?  Clinton was impeached (and committed an actual crime), was disbarred, and it hasn't affected his legacy one iota.  If anything, he's more popular.  The people that hate Trump will continue to do so and use this as evidence to support their position.  As will those that love him (will call the impeachment a witch hunt by the Dems, especially once he's acquitted in the Senate). 

I'm also not so sure Trump loses the next election.  His popularity/approval is going up, and its independents that are giving him the bump.  The Dems should be worried.    

bman posted:

But something in today's vote surprised me:  why did 30 Republicans not vote?  Swing districts?  A sudden fit of conscience?  An ill-timed bathroom break?  

I think you miscounted, bman.  There were a total of 3 "no-votes" in all of Congress.  2 Rs and 1 D.  Gabbard (D) voted "present".  There are currently 4 empty seats in Congress.  

PH

csm posted:

bman posted:

The deed is done and Trump is impeached.  Won't get rid of him but will ensure that in future decades people will understand what a horrible President and person he was, a stain on his presidency by which all but the most rabid Trumpanzees will judge him. Provided he loses the next election perhaps the nation will heal, the Republicans will return to being a conservative party, and the US can begin to regain respect and, I hope, its leadership role in the world, rather than China or Russia.  

 

Do you really think so regarding a stain on his presidency?  Clinton was impeached (and committed an actual crime), was disbarred, and it hasn't affected his legacy one iota.  If anything, he's more popular.  The people that hate Trump will continue to do so and use this as evidence to support their position.  As will those that love him (will call the impeachment a witch hunt by the Dems, especially once he's acquitted in the Senate). 

I'm also not so sure Trump loses the next election.  His popularity/approval is going up, and its independents that are giving him the bump.  The Dems should be worried.    

Clinton's poll numbers remained at a very high level even after impeachment. However, though it's taken decades, his general sliminess (toward women) has finally caught up with him. He will not be at anyone's primary campaign stops and he sure won't be speaking at the Democratic convention.

"The Dems should be worried." Of course they should be worried. The impeachment of this malignant tumor will not lead to its removal. First there's going to be a year of his revenge and continuous abuse of the agencies of government (can you impeach a president a second time? Yes, but to what end?) Second, of course there's an very good chance he'll be reelected. (If you read my comment about one of the lessons of the movie Chinatown is that the bad guys sometimes win.) However, this was not done to win the 2020 election; it was done because it had to be done. At some point in this Gahan Wilson type slime creature's presidency it was finally say enough is enough. One of the big lies by the sycophantic enablers is that the Democrats always wanted to do this. (Partly because one Dem Representative wacko tried to bring it to the floor on "day one.") Nobody should be happy about this impeachment, but simply resigned to the fact that there was no choice. "I'd like you to do us a favor though..." 

Congrats to the orange Dump. You finally did something Obama didn’t do and only two others have ever done.

Well deserved. 

And if he gets re-elected (heaven forbid), he will have done something no one has ever done

arsenal4ever posted:

And if he gets re-elected (heaven forbid), he will have done something no one has ever done

Told 30,000 lies in eight years?

The Old Man posted:

"The Dems should be worried." Of course they should be worried. The impeachment of this malignant tumor will not lead to its removal. First there's going to be a year of his revenge and continuous abuse of the agencies of government (can you impeach a president a second time? Yes, but to what end?) Second, of course there's an very good chance he'll be reelected. (If you read my comment about one of the lessons of the movie Chinatown is that the bad guys sometimes win.) However, this was not done to win the 2020 election; it was done because it had to be done. At some point in this Gahan Wilson type slime creature's presidency it was finally say enough is enough. One of the big lies by the sycophantic enablers is that the Democrats always wanted to do this. (Partly because one Dem Representative wacko tried to bring it to the floor on "day one.") Nobody should be happy about this impeachment, but simply resigned to the fact that there was no choice. "I'd like you to do us a favor though..." 

I think you're giving Pelosi and her crew far too much credit on this one.  

"Do you really think so regarding a stain on his [Clinton's] presidency? "----from post above by CSM.

My recollection is that the stain was not on his presidency, but rather on a certain dress.

A old Tweet from little Donny Jr.:

"Dear Clintons,

You know what's deplorable?

Being Impeached!!!#BasketOfDeplorables"
2:49 PM - Sep 10, 2016

irwin posted:

"Do you really think so regarding a stain on his [Clinton's] presidency? "----from post above by CSM.

My recollection is that the stain was not on his presidency, but rather on a certain dress.

By the way, Clinton was not disbarred (shockingly). He was suspended from the practice of law in Arkansas, where he had not practiced for a long time, for 5 years, with a right to reapply after that 5 year suspension. He has not reapplied.   Thus he remains "suspended." He has no interest in practicing law. He might have been stricken from his membership in the bar of the Supreme Court, which he never exercised and also has no interest in exercising.

He clearly committed perjury. He lied under oath.  He certainly should have been disbarred, prosecuted, convicted, and punished.  And maybe beaten with a whip.

arsenal4ever posted:

And if he gets re-elected (heaven forbid), he will have done something no one has ever done

True. Clinton had an 8 year run and Johnson wasn’t even nominated by his own party to run for the presidency. 

irwin posted:

By the way, Clinton was not disbarred (shockingly). He was suspended from the practice of law in Arkansas, where he had not practiced for a long time, for 5 years, with a right to reapply after that 5 year suspension. He has not reapplied.   Thus he remains "suspended." He has no interest in practicing law. He might have been stricken from his membership in the bar of the Supreme Court, which he never exercised and also has no interest in exercising.

He clearly committed perjury. He lied under oath.  He certainly should have been disbarred, prosecuted, convicted, and punished.  And maybe beaten with a whip.

 

No need to worry about Dump being disbarred. Too dump to have any chance of even grad school, much less a J.D. 🤣

Of course Clinton never ran a Ponzi scheme university, had it closed and ordered to pay millions in refunds like the Dump, or ran a fraud charity like the Dump that has been closed, still under investigation, millions in fines pending plus told he will never be allowed to apply for such again. The conman has too many despicable things tied to him for any one person to match. 

Under oath: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

In his own way, Slick Willie was the Dumpster 20 years early

arsenal4ever posted:

Under oath: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

In his own way, Slick Willie was the Dumpster 20 years early

Kind of like saying "in his own way, Jeffrey Dahmer was the Chef Jose Andres of 20 years ago...."

arsenal4ever posted:

Under oath: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

Nope. That sentence was not said under oath. However, he did lie under oath about having sex with that woman.

"In his own way, Slick Willie was the Dumpster 20 years early"

Minus the racism, bigotry, know-nothingism, support of white nationalists, mockery of POWs and other military heroes, admiration of despots and dictators, mistreatment of allies, ten to twenty lies and misstatements (lies) daily, and demagoguery. Other than that, just the same.

Whatever. Clinton lied under oath and was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice. Your hatred knows no bounds though. I often wonder if you ever learned how to use copy and paste as the same words/ phrases are in all of your political posts. Save yourself time typing...

arsenal4ever posted:

Whatever. Clinton lied under oath and was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice. Your hatred knows no bounds though. I often wonder if you ever learned how to use copy and paste as the same words/ phrases are in all of your political posts. Save yourself time typing...

 

"Whatever, [I just make stuff up to make a point."]

Hatred of who? I do not hate the pussy-grabber in chief. I think he is immoral, a racist, a bigot, a sexist, a know-nothing, and a demagogue, but I don't hate him. I've never even met him. I actually don't think I currently hate anyone, but there are certainly people I dislike. I'm sure given a half a chance you could be one of them.

Lying under oath about an unrelated consensual sexual relationship is bad.  

But, the false equivalency of that as contrasted with - extorting an ally by withholding Congressionally mandated military aid for a hot conflict with a mutual adversary in order to compel the ally to dig up dirt on a political opponent - is outrageous.  

The lack of perspective, contextual consideration, and ability to judge severity, required to conflate these things is mind-boggling and paints a picture of a deteriorating liberal democracy.

Trump is substantially more despicable than Clinton in my view.  Trump attacks every other living thing personally. "Crooked Hillary, Lyin' Ted, Sleepy Joe".  Fiorina- "look at that face"., As to John McCain, "I like people who weren't captured." Today, John Dingell is in hell. Little Marco, etc., etc. etc.  You could go on and on.

What kind of person does this? Someone who is terminally insecure.  He is a fountain of hate. 

The Old Man posted:

arsenal4ever posted:

Whatever. Clinton lied under oath and was charged with perjury and obstruction of justice. Your hatred knows no bounds though. I often wonder if you ever learned how to use copy and paste as the same words/ phrases are in all of your political posts. Save yourself time typing...

 

"Whatever, [I just make stuff up to make a point."]

Hatred of who? I do not hate the pussy-grabber in chief. I think he is immoral, a racist, a bigot, a sexist, a know-nothing, and a demagogue, but I don't hate him. I've never even met him. I actually don't think I currently hate anyone, but there are certainly people I dislike. I'm sure given a half a chance you could be one of them.

Unfortunately, I have spent multiple days with him and can in no uncertain terms state that he is a despicable person with no redeeming qualities

 Bears repeating......

irwin posted:

By the way, Clinton was not disbarred (shockingly). He was suspended from the practice of law in Arkansas, where he had not practiced for a long time, for 5 years, with a right to reapply after that 5 year suspension. He has not reapplied.   Thus he remains "suspended." He has no interest in practicing law. He might have been stricken from his membership in the bar of the Supreme Court, which he never exercised and also has no interest in exercising.

He clearly committed perjury. He lied under oath.  He certainly should have been disbarred, prosecuted, convicted, and punished.  And maybe beaten with a whip.

 

The Supreme Court disbarred him.  You are correct about the state bar of Arkansas.  He's not practicing so it's irrelevant, but he should have been disbarred completely.  Committing perjury is unforgiveable for a lawyer.  Whip might have been a touch excessive (and enjoyed by the slickster).

Not really sure what Clinton has to do with the current situation.  In addition to everything else, he did not destabilize our system of government; attack the free press;  appoint completely incompetent people to every post; fill the judiciary with moronic ideologues . . .

jcocktosten posted:

Not really sure what Clinton has to do with the current situation.  In addition to everything else, he did not destabilize our system of government; attack the free press;  appoint completely incompetent people to every post; fill the judiciary with moronic ideologues . . .

It's all the Trumpers have.  "Don't look at my guy, look at your guy".  Hell, they're still chanting Lock Her Up.  Taking a page from their personal Jesus, if the facts aren't on your side, yell, scream, deny, etc. etc.  Pathetic. 

patespo1 posted:

jcocktosten posted:

Not really sure what Clinton has to do with the current situation.  In addition to everything else, he did not destabilize our system of government; attack the free press;  appoint completely incompetent people to every post; fill the judiciary with moronic ideologues . . .

It's all the Trumpers have.  "Don't look at my guy, look at your guy".  Hell, they're still chanting Lock Her Up.  Taking a page from their personal Jesus, if the facts aren't on your side, yell, scream, deny, etc. etc.  Pathetic. 

I forgot to mention antagonize all of our allies, and cozy up with our enemies - and believe every word Putin says to him.

irwin posted:

Trump is substantially more despicable than Clinton in my view.  Trump attacks every other living thing personally. "Crooked Hillary, Lyin' Ted, Sleepy Joe".  Fiorina- "look at that face"., As to John McCain, "I like people who weren't captured." Today, John Dingell is in hell. Little Marco, etc., etc. etc.  You could go on and on.

What kind of person does this? Someone who is terminally insecure.  He is a fountain of hate. 

 

 

irwin, those are some of the orange Dump’s better traits. Before his Ponzi scheme university was closed down he stole millions from fools that sent him money. The courts forced the conman to pay millions in penalties. The orange Dump ran a fraud charity that he used illegally to benefit himself and avoid taxes. This too has been shut down and penalties are pending. The conman cannot ever open a charity again per the state of New York. If was a simple fraud. 

Federal judge William Pauley III said in open court that Trump directed his lawyer to commit a federal felony thus making Trump a co-conspirator in a federal crime. Trump’s lawyers did not take issues with this statement and of coarse Cohen is serving time for a crime that benefitted only Trump, not himself. 

The POS is a grifter and a conman and is no republican. 

jcocktosten posted:

patespo1 posted:

jcocktosten posted:

Not really sure what Clinton has to do with the current situation.  In addition to everything else, he did not destabilize our system of government; attack the free press;  appoint completely incompetent people to every post; fill the judiciary with moronic ideologues . . .

It's all the Trumpers have.  "Don't look at my guy, look at your guy".  Hell, they're still chanting Lock Her Up.  Taking a page from their personal Jesus, if the facts aren't on your side, yell, scream, deny, etc. etc.  Pathetic. 

I forgot to mention antagonize all of our allies, and cozy up with our enemies - and believe every word Putin says to him.

I don't know if Trump actually believes what Putin tells him or if he goes along with Putin because of the original quid pro quo:  Putin will get Trump elected (which it can be argued he did through massive fake social media fake identities and posts in key swing states along with other election interference well documented by every American security agency) provided Trump follows his lead as President.  That and the likely fact that Putin has real dirt on Trump that he can expose at any time.  It will be interesting to see, once Trump is out of office, if Russia shares some of that dirt just for the hell of it.

jcocktosten posted:

Not really sure what Clinton has to do with the current situation. 

It doesn't. What the pathetic Trumpublicans do is engage in "whataboutism." Interestingly it comes from a technique that Russia tried during the cold war to deflect from their crimes and mistreatment of their own people. It also is known by the translated Russian phrase, "And you are lynching Negros."

jcocktosten posted:

Not really sure what Clinton has to do with the current situation.  In addition to everything else, he did not destabilize our system of government; attack the free press;  appoint completely incompetent people to every post; fill the judiciary with moronic ideologues . . .

Clinton's relevant only insofar as the historical lesson of unintended consequences that have arisen from impeachment proceedings.  The similarities between the public response to Clinton's impeachment and Trump's impeachment are interesting to me.  Ironically, impeachment increased the president's popularity in Clinton's case and the same seems to be happening with Trump. 

The first time we see Auric Goldfinger in Goldfinger it's not Gert Forbe.

Speaker Pelosi has invited Pres. Trump to give the state of the union address to Congress on February 4.

Kumbaya.

csm posted:

jcocktosten posted:

Not really sure what Clinton has to do with the current situation.  In addition to everything else, he did not destabilize our system of government; attack the free press;  appoint completely incompetent people to every post; fill the judiciary with moronic ideologues . . .

Clinton's relevant only insofar as the historical lesson of unintended consequences that have arisen from impeachment proceedings.  The similarities between the public response to Clinton's impeachment and Trump's impeachment are interesting to me.  Ironically, impeachment increased the president's popularity in Clinton's case and the same seems to be happening with Trump. 

A bit of a stretch, csm.  Clinton had a pretty good approval rating, even after Starr accused him of lying under oath.  He was in the mid to upper 50%s, and rose to a 71% approval rating  after the articles of impeachment were brought against him.  He never fell below the low 60s after.

tRump was somewhere in the low 40s in late October, and even with a couple point pickup in the past week or so, is stuck at an unenviable 43% approval rating.  Apples and oranges, methinks.  I'll wager that the dotard will never hit 50% in his (hopefully) short tenure.

Most of us know that polls are of limited utility, but the difference between these men, and the difference in the circumstances of their impeachments is quite different.  When evangelical magazines start to bail on this guy, it's not a good sign for his longevity.  

PH

I have to say all of Washington is an absolute shit show.  The dems can't / won't even provide the articles to the Senate.  And then want to tell them how to run their trial.  A lot of chutzpah and hypocrisy. Listen, Trump is an extremely petty, narcissistic and I don't think a very religious person.  But his overall view of what Washington needed I think is quite right.

That place is a disaster.  Still rather have him than Hillary.  Although...the interview she did with Howard Stern was fairly entertaining and she came off well.   Lies too much (as does Trump).  But watching the Dem debate...none of them are beating Trump.  

Old man...going to be a rough four more years for you.

napacat posted:

Old man...going to be a rough four more years for you.

You seem to spend a lot of your time thinking about me. (I think of you only when you write one of your pathetic defenses of the bigot in chief's actions.)  As for your racist in chief winning, I've already said the bad guys sometimes win. And with dumb-clucks such as you and your ilk. it's certainly possible again.

"...and I don't think a very religious person." Gee, do you think? I'd settle for just half-way decent. You are truly pathetic.

One of the great skills in life is keeping your mouth shut when you don't know something.  Instead of expressing an opinion on a topic about which you know nothing, You just remain silent and let the experts discuss it.

Well, I don't know anything about wind and these wind turbines.  I mean, I know that there is some energy associated with wind and that it would be nice to harness it, but I can't understand how these turbines can suck up the energy, store it, and deliver it, so you can flick on the lights. Actually, I'm not sure that is what the turbines do. I just don't understand it.   I don't understand it and I don't need/want to understand it. Therefore, I don't babble about how great they are or how horrible they are. 

But, not knowing about these things doesn't stop everyone from commenting upon them.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/don...mills-080051820.html

purplehaze posted:

csm posted:

jcocktosten posted:

Not really sure what Clinton has to do with the current situation.  In addition to everything else, he did not destabilize our system of government; attack the free press;  appoint completely incompetent people to every post; fill the judiciary with moronic ideologues . . .

Clinton's relevant only insofar as the historical lesson of unintended consequences that have arisen from impeachment proceedings.  The similarities between the public response to Clinton's impeachment and Trump's impeachment are interesting to me.  Ironically, impeachment increased the president's popularity in Clinton's case and the same seems to be happening with Trump. 

A bit of a stretch, csm.  Clinton had a pretty good approval rating, even after Starr accused him of lying under oath.  He was in the mid to upper 50%s, and rose to a 71% approval rating  after the articles of impeachment were brought against him.  He never fell below the low 60s after.

tRump was somewhere in the low 40s in late October, and even with a couple point pickup in the past week or so, is stuck at an unenviable 43% approval rating.  Apples and oranges, methinks.  I'll wager that the dotard will never hit 50% in his (hopefully) short tenure.

Most of us know that polls are of limited utility, but the difference between these men, and the difference in the circumstances of their impeachments is quite different.  When evangelical magazines start to bail on this guy, it's not a good sign for his longevity.  

PH

You mean after Clinton actually lied under oath

I didn't say they were identical, but there are some undeniable similarities I think.  The impeachment proceedings for both are correlated with a big jump in approval ratings .  I've seen polls, from the New Yorker, that say Trump up over 10% in approval rating, almost entirely from undecided/independent voters.  I've said all along, that the impeachment proceedings will be the best thing that ever happened to Trump and will ultimately be what gets him re-elected. 

csm posted:

purplehaze posted:

csm posted:

jcocktosten posted:

Not really sure what Clinton has to do with the current situation.  In addition to everything else, he did not destabilize our system of government; attack the free press;  appoint completely incompetent people to every post; fill the judiciary with moronic ideologues . . .

Clinton's relevant only insofar as the historical lesson of unintended consequences that have arisen from impeachment proceedings.  The similarities between the public response to Clinton's impeachment and Trump's impeachment are interesting to me.  Ironically, impeachment increased the president's popularity in Clinton's case and the same seems to be happening with Trump. 

A bit of a stretch, csm.  Clinton had a pretty good approval rating, even after Starr accused him of lying under oath.  He was in the mid to upper 50%s, and rose to a 71% approval rating  after the articles of impeachment were brought against him.  He never fell below the low 60s after.

tRump was somewhere in the low 40s in late October, and even with a couple point pickup in the past week or so, is stuck at an unenviable 43% approval rating.  Apples and oranges, methinks.  I'll wager that the dotard will never hit 50% in his (hopefully) short tenure.

Most of us know that polls are of limited utility, but the difference between these men, and the difference in the circumstances of their impeachments is quite different.  When evangelical magazines start to bail on this guy, it's not a good sign for his longevity.  

PH

You mean after Clinton actually lied under oath

I didn't say they were identical, but there are some undeniable similarities I think.  The impeachment proceedings for both are correlated with a big jump in approval ratings .  I've seen polls, from the New Yorker, that say Trump up over 10% in approval rating, almost entirely from undecided/independent voters.  I've said all along, that the impeachment proceedings will be the best thing that ever happened to Trump and will ultimately be what gets him re-elected. 

The fivethirtyeight website which I think is most reliable for polling as it's a weighted aggregate of polls based on the strength of each shows only modest growth in approval with Trump still deep underwater overall.