Skip to main content

9,136 replies

Say Something Completely Random And Off Topic

N napacatMember
@irwin posted:
If I were on the Senate Judiciary committee, I’d ask Judge Barrett:
Q:  Was there communication between you and the White House prior to your Rose Garden introduction ceremony  regarding whether you, your spouse and children would wear masks, and, if so, what was it?
She either says there was no communication, or she says there was and she’s not disclosing what it was, or she says there was communication and she was told not to wear a mask, or there was communication and she was told it was up to her.
If she says there was no communication, or that there was communication and it was left up to her, then I’d ask:

Q: So, it was your own judgment that neither you nor your family would wear masks, despite the pandemic, despite the fact that several hundred people would gather maskless in close quarters?
She’d have to say yes.
Q: What sort of level headed judgment does that show for someone who has been nominated to the S. Ct.?
If she says there was communication, but she’s not disclosing what it was, then I’d ask:
Q: If there was communication, and you were asked not to wear a mask doesn’t that suggest that you will defer to President Trump’s bidding in other respects?
Q: If there was communication, couldn’t you have said to the President, “My choice for myself and my family would be to wear a mask?”
Q: You have praised the late Justice Ginsburg as a role model.  Wouldn’t wearing a mask be a good role model for citizens of the US....If they see a high government official wearing a mask, wouldn’t that tell them that it is a good idea to do so?
Q: Most if not all states require parents to secure their children in motor vehicles with seat belts or appropriate child safety devices.  The government requires this to protect these children.
Isn’t putting a mask on a child who is going to be at an event with a hundred or more people, not wearing masks, sitting close together, a lot like wearing a seatbelt?
But, I'm not on that committee.

The event was outside.  

irwinirwinMember
@napacat posted:

The event was outside.  

Napacat:  I referred to it as having taken place in the Rose Garden which is outside. I know it is outside.  Despite that it was outside, it has been characterized by Dr. Fauci as a "superspreader" event.  It is indeed fortunate that it was not inside.  What's the latest count on the number of people infected at that event? 34?  https://news.yahoo.com/too-tra...house-025127348.html

Of course, after the outdoor event with around 200 people, some reception of some sort took place inside with somewhat fewer people but also very few masks.

Don't even you, Napacat, agree that it is very poor judgment to attend an event like this, with dozens of persons sitting next to one another without masks?  The Supreme Court has heard arguments over a zoom network, you know.  Yes, I know that their hearings are inside.

InsightInsightMember
@irwin posted:

Napacat:  I referred to it as having taken place in the Rose Garden which is outside. I know it is outside.  Despite that it was outside, it has been characterized by Dr. Fauci as a "superspreader" event.  It is indeed fortunate that it was not inside.  What's the latest count on the number of people infected at that event? 34?  https://news.yahoo.com/too-tra...house-025127348.html

Of course, after the outdoor event with around 200 people, some reception of some sort took place inside with somewhat fewer people but also very few masks.

Don't even you, Napacat, agree that it is very poor judgment to attend an event like this, with dozens of persons sitting next to one another without masks?  The Supreme Court has heard arguments over a zoom network, you know.  Yes, I know that their hearings are inside.

When Putin’s Bitch recently said he wanted to kiss all the guys and gals at one of his rallies, you can bet Napacat would’ve elbowed dummies out of the way to be at the front of the line for the Putin’s Bitch kissing booth.......

The Old ManThe Old ManMember
@irwin posted:

Don't even you, Napacat, agree that it is very poor judgment to attend an event like this, with dozens of persons sitting next to one another without masks?  The Supreme Court has heard arguments over a zoom network, you know.  Yes, I know that their hearings are inside.

What a nice civil response. Unfortunately the answer is no, he's too ignorant to understand it. I have to, after all this time, and with the many disagreements I've gotten into with other people here, say that he is the only person here who I truly think is just plain stupid.

I actually was going to post that a few months ago but I thought it would be too mean. However with his constant trolling with inane points, this title is well deserved.

Last edited by The Old Man
W wine+artMember

In May, Fox News portrayed it as one of the greatest political scandals in American history. Ever! The Obamagate scandal of Obama, his administration and Biden had participated in a “ deep State” plot against Trump in the 2016 election.

Barr, Trump’s AG and personal attorney ordered federal prosecutors to get to the bottom of this!

When news broke of America suffered its 100,000 death, Fox reported about Obamagate. When America passed 200,000 deaths and Covid became the second leading cause of death, Fox News Bret Baier hosted a follow up on Obamagate with conspiracy commentator Mollie Hemingway.

Tucker Carlson called it domestic spying hidden under the pretext of national security.

Sean Hannity declared, “ the biggest abuse of power and corruption scandal America had ever seen. “

Laura Ingraham said top Obama administration officials had been exposed.


The Justice Department concluded no evidence of such and closed the investigation yesterday.  Fox News has declined requests for comments.

Fox News feeds Trump’s ignorant fucks what they want to hear and they eat it up! 🤣😂😅.  They too will believe this shit and take it to their grave, regardless.

Oh, one must also love what Tucker Carlson’s attorney said in court about him; no one believes what Mr. Carlson reports. They know he doesn’t tell the truth. It is just entertainment. Well, at least Tucker’s attorneys know he is a lying POS and said it in court on the record.

N napacatMember
@irwin posted:

Napacat:  I referred to it as having taken place in the Rose Garden which is outside. I know it is outside.  Despite that it was outside, it has been characterized by Dr. Fauci as a "superspreader" event.  It is indeed fortunate that it was not inside.  What's the latest count on the number of people infected at that event? 34?  https://news.yahoo.com/too-tra...house-025127348.html

Of course, after the outdoor event with around 200 people, some reception of some sort took place inside with somewhat fewer people but also very few masks.

Don't even you, Napacat, agree that it is very poor judgment to attend an event like this, with dozens of persons sitting next to one another without masks?  The Supreme Court has heard arguments over a zoom network, you know.  Yes, I know that their hearings are inside.

Irwin,



I'm not 100% sure that they can pinpoint where anyone contracts c-19 with certainty.  An inside reception makes a little more sense though.

I really would have no problem attending an outside event like that.

We have a cumulative total of 2% of the population testing positive...many have since recovered.

winetarelliwinetarelliMember
@irwin posted:
If I were on the Senate Judiciary committee, I’d ask Judge Barrett:
Q:  Was there communication between you and the White House prior to your Rose Garden introduction ceremony  regarding whether you, your spouse and children would wear masks, and, if so, what was it?
She either says there was no communication, or she says there was and she’s not disclosing what it was, or she says there was communication and she was told not to wear a mask, or there was communication and she was told it was up to her.
If she says there was no communication, or that there was communication and it was left up to her, then I’d ask:

Q: So, it was your own judgment that neither you nor your family would wear masks, despite the pandemic, despite the fact that several hundred people would gather maskless in close quarters?
She’d have to say yes.
Q: What sort of level headed judgment does that show for someone who has been nominated to the S. Ct.?
If she says there was communication, but she’s not disclosing what it was, then I’d ask:
Q: If there was communication, and you were asked not to wear a mask doesn’t that suggest that you will defer to President Trump’s bidding in other respects?
Q: If there was communication, couldn’t you have said to the President, “My choice for myself and my family would be to wear a mask?”
Q: You have praised the late Justice Ginsburg as a role model.  Wouldn’t wearing a mask be a good role model for citizens of the US....If they see a high government official wearing a mask, wouldn’t that tell them that it is a good idea to do so?
Q: Most if not all states require parents to secure their children in motor vehicles with seat belts or appropriate child safety devices.  The government requires this to protect these children.
Isn’t putting a mask on a child who is going to be at an event with a hundred or more people, not wearing masks, sitting close together, a lot like wearing a seatbelt?
But, I'm not on that committee.

You’re in good company.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IDBvYZH6xo0

The Old ManThe Old ManMember

Washington Post, "As he battles for seniors’ votes, Trump tweets a meme mocking Biden as elderly and disabled."

Certainly a stable genius. Seniors are currently polling something like 65% Biden , 30% Trump. But yeah, mock Biden as being too old, great way to bring him the large senior vote.

If our 4 year long national nightmare ends this year Trump can look right to himself. I've said before that if he had acted like a halfway decent human being over the coronavirus he would probably be at 60% approval rating.

winetarelliwinetarelliMember
@The Old Man posted:

Washington Post, "As he battles for seniors’ votes, Trump tweets a meme mocking Biden as elderly and disabled."

Certainly a stable genius. Seniors are currently polling something like 65% Biden , 30% Trump. But yeah, mock Biden as being too old, great way to bring him the large senior vote.

If our 4 year long national nightmare ends this year Trump can look right to himself. I've said before that if he had acted like a halfway decent human being over the coronavirus he would probably be at 60% approval rating.

The other issue is that Biden has always been a foot-in-mouth guy, but he is really quite aware and not senile. That may seem a low bar, but by Trump and others placing it there, once viewers actually see Biden clearing it by a mile, it works to his advantage.

The Old ManThe Old ManMember

"In perhaps his most incendiary remarks, Mr. Trump repeatedly declined to disavow QAnon, a pro-Trump internet community that has been described by law enforcement as a potential domestic terrorism threat. The president professed to have no knowledge of the group, and as a result could not disavow it, but then demonstrated specific knowledge of one of its core conspiracy theories involving pedophilia that is entirely false.

“'I know nothing about it,' Mr. Trump said. 'I do know they are very much against pedophilia. They fight it very hard.'" -- NYT

There is no way that we will ever be able to understand what is in the minds of people who support this man.

flwinoflwinoMember
@The Old Man posted:

"In perhaps his most incendiary remarks, Mr. Trump repeatedly declined to disavow QAnon, a pro-Trump internet community that has been described by law enforcement as a potential domestic terrorism threat. The president professed to have no knowledge of the group, and as a result could not disavow it, but then demonstrated specific knowledge of one of its core conspiracy theories involving pedophilia that is entirely false.

“'I know nothing about it,' Mr. Trump said. 'I do know they are very much against pedophilia. They fight it very hard.'" -- NYT

There is no way that we will ever be able to understand what is in the minds of people who support this man.

Ask Napa   you should get a real stupid answer from the troll

N napacatMember
@flwino posted:

Ask Napa   you should get a real stupid answer from the troll

What a stupid question...who the F even knows who QAnon is.  Ridiculous.  The fact that  a TV host asks that question and will not ask the same about ANTIFA (an idea...ok right), is just asinine.  Who gives a F about QAnon. 

A senator asked if Judge Barrett ever paid for sexual favors....really?  What is wrong with you on the left.  Trump is a narcissist, a bit of a liar...but still 1,000% better than anything the left wants to put forth. 

The Old ManThe Old ManMember

From Trump media, "President Trump Vows To Continue Protecting Senior Citizens From COVID-19"

When did he start?

Now this is the Trump we all know:

"Former White House chief of staff, retired Marine Gen. John Kelly, has told friends that President Donald Trump 'is the most flawed person' he's ever known.

"'The depths of his dishonesty is just astounding to me. The dishonesty, the transactional nature of every relationship, though it's more pathetic than anything else. He is the most flawed person I have ever met in my life,' the retired Marine general has told friends."

The Old ManThe Old ManMember

It is very useful to make a stop in the fairyland websites of Fox "News" and OAN. In their headlines you may find the bellwether of what crap Trump's team is going to try to shovel as they desperately try to stave off defeat. As far as I can tell they are, currently, hoping that crazy man Rudy Giuliani will give the dirt on Biden's son through a bizarre chain of events concerning a laptop.  They're actually pinning their hopes on this. They are certainly going  with the "mail-in ballots are fraud narrative." These to me are currently at top of the attempted October surprise list. Let's see what happens.

20201016_215935"When the face makeup is 30 shades darker than the hand, it's technically blackface."

Attachments

Show
Images (1)
  • 20201016_215935
Last edited by The Old Man
The Old ManThe Old ManMember
@bman posted:

Trump finally did that?  Is there video?

Well it's no longer the top item, it was that Jeffery Toobin's been suspended at the New Yorker for that above defense. I'd expect he will not be appearing on CNN before the election.

Anyway the new story is, "Talk radio legend grimly admits on air that his battle with lung cancer is now a 'death sentence"

"ANDREW MCCARTHY: Rush Limbaugh is an American original, there's no one like him. Keep him in your prayers."

He's a bastard who is certainly responsible for much of the sick, toxic political atmosphere we're living through. Just for  promoting the word, "feminazi" should mean there's a welcome place in hell for him.

flwinoflwinoMember
@The Old Man posted:

"We have already seen Iran sending spoof emails designed to intimidate voters, incite social unrest and damage President (Donald) Trump," Ratcliffe added. "You may have seen some reporting on this in the last 24 hours, or you may have even been one of the recipients of those emails."

They're getting desperate.

Keep those e-mails coming.  Anything to help Joe

The Old ManThe Old ManMember

The GOP actually Tweeted this out:

"Pres. Trump is fighting for YOU! Here are some of his priorities for a 2nd term:

*Establish Permanent Manned Presence on The Moon
*Send the 1st Manned Mission to Mars
*Build World’s Greatest Infrastructure System
*Establish National High-Speed Wireless Internet Network"

Exactly the priorities we need with a pandemic which doesn't seem to be "vanishing soon like a miracle" and our economy in ruins. Also he had four years, two of them with both houses, so when exactly is "infrastructure week"?

mneeley490mneeley490Member
@flwino posted:

Totally unqualified!  Court packing the donald style.

She was not picked because of her brilliant legal acumen or noted scholarly decisions. She was picked because she gave a few lectures years ago that fit into the ultra-right's viewpoint. If she is somehow able to acknowledge that truth,  then shame on her for accepting the nomination. She will always be a lesser justice because of it.  Just look at Justice Kavanaugh as a prime example. They are both solidly in the pocket of Trump, should any of his cases reach them. God forbid the election results reach the SCOTUS.

J jcocktostenMember

Kavanaugh - like him or not and his shady past and insanely conservative judicial philosophy - was far more qualified.  Two Circuit court clerkships, lengthy careert where he actually did legal work (even if a lot of it was BS for Ken Starr), thirteen or 14 years as a judge.  I do not like him but in terms of experience, at least he had some meaningful experience

G g-manMember

what about her ruling on Kanter vs Barr?  The law says felons don't get to own guns, she interprets that as, noooo that's not necessarily true, only the type of violent felons I think shouldn't get to own guns.  I'd hate her to consider a misdemeanor like domestic violence as not violent enough to ban these folks from owning guns considering the stats are overwhelming that domestic violence abusers are one of the worst offenders of gun crime.

Makes me wonder if she'd rule the same way when it comes to felons and their right to vote.  Sadly, I don't think so.

irwinirwinMember
@flwino posted:

For the lawyers here.

Should she vote on any case where she did not sit in on the pleadings?  If so it would appear that she did not catch all the issues, nuansiances [sp??] etc. of the case.  seems a bit unfair to both parties in the case.

You mean if she doesn’t sit in on the arguments.   She probably won’t but we will see her participating shortly In matters that she has the same exposure to as the others

J jcocktostenMember
@irwin posted:

You mean if she doesn’t sit in on the arguments.   She probably won’t but we will see her participating shortly In matters that she has the same exposure to as the others

On appeals, it is far less important anyway - they have the briefs, the arguments can be listened to  - of course, she is outcome driven rather than principled - so it is largely irrelevant.

Originalists are only originalist when it supports their position - they are happy to ignore that when it does not suit their purposes.  Otherwise Bush v. Gore would never happened because that decision was (and remains) a farce  And yes I worked on the matter and am still peeved 20 years later.

bmanbmanMember
@patespo1 posted:

As an Ohioan the Nicklaus thing hurt deeply, as he has been a long time sports hero.  Now he's just another rich white guy that values money over people.

Imagine how it feels being the biggest Bruins fan on earth after Bobby Orr took out a full page ad in support of Trump. I met Orr a few times. He was one of my childhood heroes. And to think he was born and raised Canadian!  He isn't very Canadian any more, it seems.....

Last edited by bman
The Old ManThe Old ManMember

Fascism 101:

"This is a fraud on the American public. This is an embarrassment to our country. We were getting ready to win this election, frankly we did win this election. We did win this election. So our goal now is to ensure the integrity for the good of this nation, this is a very big moment. This is a major fraud on our nation. We want the law to be used in the proper manner.

“So we will be going to the U.S. Supreme Court. We want all voting to stop. We don’t want them to find any ballots at 4 o’clock in the morning and add them to the list. OK? It’s a very sad, it’s a very sad moment. To me, this is a very sad moment, and we will win this, and as far as I’m concerned, we already have won it.”

irwinirwinMember
The law that says that one must be 18 to vote for President is a federal law.  But the states are allowed to run the elections in accordance with their own state laws.
So, for example, some states have more days of “early voting” than others.  Some permit the elections boards to start counting absentee and mail in ballots prior to the close of the polls and others require that the state elections boards refrain from doing so until after the polls close.  The way the ballot itself is laid out is up to the states. (Remember the hanging chads of 2000?).  Some states only have mail in voting, others have hybrids.  In Maryland, we have early voting, mail in voting, absentee voting, and show up on election day voting.
So, when the election challenges come, should Biden hold on and win, you’ll have an interesting dynamic.  The Republicans will be arguing for federalism.  They’ll want the federal courts and the S. Ct. to make national election rules by which all states should abide.  The Democrats will be arguing “states rights.”
It will be interesting to see if Justice Barrett or Justice Kavanaugh or Justice Alito or Justice Thomas, as “originalists” and “strict constructionists” can scrutinize the constitution and find a provision in the constitution which says that it is forbidden for a state to have a rule permitting the counting of a ballot received 3 days after the election if the voter mailed it timely.
J jcocktostenMember
@irwin posted:
The law that says that one must be 18 to vote for President is a federal law.  But the states are allowed to run the elections in accordance with their own state laws.
So, for example, some states have more days of “early voting” than others.  Some permit the elections boards to start counting absentee and mail in ballots prior to the close of the polls and others require that the state elections boards refrain from doing so until after the polls close.  The way the ballot itself is laid out is up to the states. (Remember the hanging chads of 2000?).  Some states only have mail in voting, others have hybrids.  In Maryland, we have early voting, mail in voting, absentee voting, and show up on election day voting.
So, when the election challenges come, should Biden hold on and win, you’ll have an interesting dynamic.  The Republicans will be arguing for federalism.  They’ll want the federal courts and the S. Ct. to make national election rules by which all states should abide.  The Democrats will be arguing “states rights.”
It will be interesting to see if Justice Barrett or Justice Kavanaugh or Justice Alito or Justice Thomas, as “originalists” and “strict constructionists” can scrutinize the constitution and find a provision in the constitution which says that it is forbidden for a state to have a rule permitting the counting of a ballot received 3 days after the election if the voter mailed it timely.

They will Irwin - in 2000 they managed to find that the word "shall" which is always used in the mandatory sense in statutory construction did not mean that and the Florida Supreme Court was wrong on an issue of Florida state law - so please do not try to look for consistency or intellectual honesty from the conservative Supreme Court Justices

irwinirwinMember
@jcocktosten posted:

They will Irwin - in 2000 they managed to find that the word "shall" which is always used in the mandatory sense in statutory construction did not mean that and the Florida Supreme Court was wrong on an issue of Florida state law - so please do not try to look for consistency or intellectual honesty from the conservative Supreme Court Justices

we have a case in Maryland which says that "shall" sometimes means "may."

C csmMember

For the US lawyers here Can Trump just go to the Supreme Court?  In Canada the Prime Minister can ask the Supreme Court for interpretation of legislation but if anyone wants a decision of the Supreme Court you actually need to go through the normal process, even the Prime Minister.  Wondering if it’s the same in the US.

The Old ManThe Old ManMember
@csm posted:

For the US lawyers here Can Trump just go to the Supreme Court?  In Canada the Prime Minister can ask the Supreme Court for interpretation of legislation but if anyone wants a decision of the Supreme Court you actually need to go through the normal process, even the Prime Minister.  Wondering if it’s the same in the US.

Not a lawyer but I know for a fact you just don't go to the Supreme Court. There is a procedure and you first ask them to consider the case.

robsutherlandrobsutherlandMember
@arsenal4ever posted:

Oregon also legalized magic mushrooms. Half of CA will be moving there tomorrow.

https://www.oregonlive.com/pol...-things-to-know.html

There is increasing amounts of very good research which shows the usefulness of psilocybin to combat mental health issues. Judging by the amount of capital markets interest in early stage psilocybin companies it will be the next marijuana (though at a smaller usage rate).   

F futronicMember
@The Old Man posted:

Not a lawyer but I know for a fact you just don't go to the Supreme Court. There is a procedure and you first ask them to consider the case.

Also not a lawyer (or American), but federal elections in Canada are run by Elections Canada, a federal agency, and therefore clarification can go to the Supreme Court directly.

Elections in the US are run by the states, and therefore it has to work its way up the chain.

sunnylea57sunnylea57Member
@The Old Man posted:

For the first time I see a path for Biden (of course eliminating all the voting suppression efforts of the Repubs), NV, AZ and MI. 270 to 268.

Michigan is in the bag. So is Arizona, and Nevada is pretty much a sure thing. Yes, that’s 270. But I wouldn’t be surprised if Biden also snagged Pennsylvania. So many blue votes still to be counted. It’s also still very possible for him to take Georgia and North Carolina. I think the final number (post lawsuits and recount demands) will be considerably higher than 270.

Shame about the Senate, though. It will end up either 51-49 for the Republicans or possibly even 52-48.

Last edited by sunnylea57
bmanbmanMember
@sunnylea57 posted:

Michigan is in the bag. So is Arizona, and Nevada is pretty much a sure thing. Yes, that’s 270. But I wouldn’t be surprised if Biden also snagged Pennsylvania. So many blue votes still to be counted. It’s also still very possible for him to take Georgia and North Carolina. I think the final number (post lawsuits and recount demands) will be considerably higher than 270.

Shame about the Senate, though. It will end up either 51-49 for the Republicans or possibly even 52-48.

Not sure Nevada is a sure thing but Georgia may come around.

A arsenal4everMember

There is increasing amounts of very good research which shows the usefulness of psilocybin to combat mental health issues. Judging by the amount of capital markets interest in early stage psilocybin companies it will be the next marijuana (though at a smaller usage rate).   

Rob - The article from The Oregonian stated:

You won’t necessarily need to be suffering from mental health issues to use psilocybin,

The treatment isn’t only for Oregonians struggling with mental health problems. Anyone age 21 or older who passes a screening will be able to access the services for “personal development,” according to the Eckerts.


G g-manMember
@arsenal4ever posted:

There is increasing amounts of very good research which shows the usefulness of psilocybin to combat mental health issues. Judging by the amount of capital markets interest in early stage psilocybin companies it will be the next marijuana (though at a smaller usage rate).   

Rob - The article from The Oregonian stated:

You won’t necessarily need to be suffering from mental health issues to use psilocybin,

The treatment isn’t only for Oregonians struggling with mental health problems. Anyone age 21 or older who passes a screening will be able to access the services for “personal development,” according to the Eckerts.

curious, have you've ever done shrooms before?

C csmMember
@sunnylea57 posted:

Michigan is in the bag. So is Arizona, and Nevada is pretty much a sure thing. Yes, that’s 270. But I wouldn’t be surprised if Biden also snagged Pennsylvania. So many blue votes still to be counted. It’s also still very possible for him to take Georgia and North Carolina. I think the final number (post lawsuits and recount demands) will be considerably higher than 270.



AZ and NV looking less certain for Joe...but PA may make it moot. Cannot believe the Presiden'ts 600,000+ lead may evaporate.

C csmMember
@futronic posted:

Also not a lawyer (or American), but federal elections in Canada are run by Elections Canada, a federal agency, and therefore clarification can go to the Supreme Court directly.

Elections in the US are run by the states, and therefore it has to work its way up the chain.

Supreme Court here though can only offer an interpretation of legislation at the request of the PM.  The PM can't ask the SC to consider an issue and render a decision, which it seems like the President is implying he can do (I suspect he can't).

The Old ManThe Old ManMember

The mind of a stable genius: "It’s amazing how those mail-in ballots are so one-sided."

Er, Prez, don't you remember you and your prime enabler, Bill Barr, telling everyone about the supposed dangers in voting by mail? Your cult members believe everything you tell them so your warning may actually have helped the Democrats. Something about hoists and petards comes to mind about now.

The Old ManThe Old ManMember

As the president held another press conference full of lies--CNN's Anderson Cooper said, "The president is like an obese turtle on his back flailing in the hot sun realizing his time is over."

From the NY Times: "'Stop the count.' Of all the violations of things that we hold precious in this country, this tweet by President Trump on Thursday, demanding that millions of voters be disenfranchised so he can steal an election, is the one that will live in infamy."

R RothkoMember

To paraphrase and bastardize from an earlier post of mine:

"Look upon this moment. Savor it! Rejoice with great gladness! Great gladness! Remember it always, for you are joined by it. You are One, under the stars. Remember it well, then... this night, this great victory. So that in the years ahead, you can say, 'I was there that night, with Joe Biden, the President-Elect!' For it is the doom of men that they forget."

flwinoflwinoMember

Happy Days Are Here Again.  Was a long, slow, nasty campaign  but honor and decency won in th eend.  Now Donald has more time to play golf.

TOM  also Kamala is mixed race, and a female.  Really sets a record.

Joe was one of the youngest representatives ever, and now the oldest President.  Third time trying to win. More  records

Thankfully 2020 is ending, a very painful year for all Americans.  Now we all can be part of the UNITED State of America.

The Old ManThe Old ManMember

"I shouldn’t joke, I shouldn’t joke because you know what? Running against the worst candidate in the history of presidential politics puts pressure on me. Could you imagine if I lose?

"My whole life — what am I going to do? I’m going to say, I lost to the worst candidate in the history of politics! I’m not going to feel so good. Maybe I’ll have to leave the country, I don’t know."

mneeley490mneeley490Member
@The Old Man posted:

The mind of a stable genius: "It’s amazing how those mail-in ballots are so one-sided."

Er, Prez, don't you remember you and your prime enabler, Bill Barr, telling everyone about the supposed dangers in voting by mail? Your cult members believe everything you tell them so your warning may actually have helped the Democrats. Something about hoists and petards comes to mind about now.

"Think about how stupid the average American is. Then realize, half the people are even more stupid than that!"   --George Carlin

Last edited by mneeley490
bmanbmanMember
@purplehaze posted:

We have a big tent.  

I thought about you and w+a a lot these past weeks.  That was a good little get-together, no?

PH

It was great fun.  I was hoping we'd get to do it again this year but no such luck. 

And yes, it's a big tent.  All are welcome who meet the rather easy-to-meet membership requirements:  love great wine, despite terrible Presidents!

BTW, my wife made more of those candied pecans.  Just sayin'......

W wine+artMember

Trump’s very first ever political contest was the Iowa caucuses held in 2016. Here are Trump’s comments.

” Ted Cruz didn’t win Iowa, he stole it.” Trump tweeted. “ that is why all the polls were so wrong and why he got far more votes than anticipated. Bad!”  “ Based on the fraud committed by Senator Ted Cruz during the Iowa caucus, either a new election should take place or Cruz results nullified.”

The POS better known as an orange pile of dung plays the same song over and over since he knows his cult of ignorant f#@ks buy it hook, line and sinker.🙈😂🤣😅

irwinirwinMember

If you have a spare hour, make a list of the people and groups of people who Trump insulted.  Start with the other Republicans against whom he ran in the primaries. Rubio, Cruz, Fiorina, Bush.  Then go to generals, scientists, civil servants, his former employees, soldiers. Heads of state of other countries. Senator McCain --"I like people who weren't captured."  He has routinely praised only one person on earth, namely himself.  That is not a recipe for endearment. Yet, 71 million voters chose him on their ballot.

bmanbmanMember
@irwin posted:

If you have a spare hour, make a list of the people and groups of people who Trump insulted.  Start with the other Republicans against whom he ran in the primaries. Rubio, Cruz, Fiorina, Bush.  Then go to generals, scientists, civil servants, his former employees, soldiers. Heads of state of other countries. Senator McCain --"I like people who weren't captured."  He has routinely praised only one person on earth, namely himself.  That is not a recipe for endearment. Yet, 71 million voters chose him on their ballot.

National personality cults are contagious.  Look at Putin, Kim and his father and grandfather in North Korea, Mussolini, Hitler (not otherwise comparing Trump to the latter two) and others. 

BTW, has there ever been a leader of a national personality cult who wasn't an evil overlord?

winetarelliwinetarelliMember
@bman posted:

National personality cults are contagious.  Look at Putin, Kim and his father and grandfather in North Korea, Mussolini, Hitler (not otherwise comparing Trump to the latter two) and others.

BTW, has there ever been a leader of a national personality cult who wasn't an evil overlord?

The French may have a different response to that last question than many other European countries.  My own views of Napoleon are complicated, but I tend to view him, overall, somewhat positively.

But, in broad terms, I would say the personality traits (and, frequently, policies) required to be a "successful" populist leader generally preclude the possibility of being a selfless, thoughtful, liberal-minded person.  

sunnylea57sunnylea57Member
@wine+art posted:

Trump’s very first ever political contest was the Iowa caucuses held in 2016. Here are Trump’s comments.

” Ted Cruz didn’t win Iowa, he stole it.” Trump tweeted. “ that is why all the polls were so wrong and why he got far more votes than anticipated. Bad!”  “ Based on the fraud committed by Senator Ted Cruz during the Iowa caucus, either a new election should take place or Cruz results nullified.”

The POS better known as an orange pile of dung plays the same song over and over since he knows his cult of ignorant f#@ks buy it hook, line and sinker.🙈😂🤣😅

He views everything through his own filter. In his business life, he’s so accustomed to stealing, manipulating and rigging things for his own benefit, it’s how he sees the world.