|
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 06:51:29 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 3/1/2016 6:15 AM, John H. wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2016 00:38:49 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:36:14 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote: Keyser Söze wrote: Obviously your reading comprehension skills are about as bad as CalifBill's, and you will be voting for Trump in the general. Your debate skills suck. Interesting, is how low the Democrats are turning out for the elections. Tells us, that not many are enthused about Hillary and Berni. Harry debates just like Trump. It is all "you are stupid, I am awesome and I don't need to tell you anything else". Ironic isn't it. I still say if Trump was running as a democrat, Harry would love him. You hit that nail right on the head. In the futile interest of a reasonable debate, I don't think that is true at all. Trump would have to change his colors and adopt most or all of mainstream Democratic positions on issues in order to gain Harry's approval. Harry is a Social Democrat IMO and has outlined what he believes are the important issues that need to be addressed and has offered ways of accomplishing them. Not all agree with the priorities or methods with the GOP and it's supporters being the primary opposition. Hillary meets his standards as does Bernie, so he could accept or vote for either of them. My personal opposition to Hillary isn't necessarily her (changing) positions on issues but rather on my strong belief that she, more than most, is a deceitful, lying and selfishly motivated politician and has been for all of her professional and political career. Even if I agreed with everything she spouts, I could never vote for her. There's a limit to what can be overlooked, IMO. Greg made two comments. You didn't disagree with the first, so I assume you'll let it stand. I agree with Greg's comment on Trump running as a Democrat and getting Harry's support. Hillary has Harry's total support. Why? Because she's a Democrat, amen. IMHO, Harry's position revolves not around the beliefs, attitudes, goals, etc, of the Democrats, but simply a position *against* Republicans, regardless of their platforms. You see the same attitude here, as Greg mentioned. Harry's 'debating strategy' consists of name-calling and patting himself on the back. His 'claims to fame', when questioned, receive no answer...a lack of 'entitlement'. Harry had very little going for him, in the way of integrity, before his 'Vietnam service' story. Now he has none. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/1/2016 7:15 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 06:51:29 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 3/1/2016 6:15 AM, John H. wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2016 00:38:49 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:36:14 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote: Keyser Söze wrote: Obviously your reading comprehension skills are about as bad as CalifBill's, and you will be voting for Trump in the general. Your debate skills suck. Interesting, is how low the Democrats are turning out for the elections. Tells us, that not many are enthused about Hillary and Berni. Harry debates just like Trump. It is all "you are stupid, I am awesome and I don't need to tell you anything else". Ironic isn't it. I still say if Trump was running as a democrat, Harry would love him. You hit that nail right on the head. In the futile interest of a reasonable debate, I don't think that is true at all. Trump would have to change his colors and adopt most or all of mainstream Democratic positions on issues in order to gain Harry's approval. Harry is a Social Democrat IMO and has outlined what he believes are the important issues that need to be addressed and has offered ways of accomplishing them. Not all agree with the priorities or methods with the GOP and it's supporters being the primary opposition. Hillary meets his standards as does Bernie, so he could accept or vote for either of them. My personal opposition to Hillary isn't necessarily her (changing) positions on issues but rather on my strong belief that she, more than most, is a deceitful, lying and selfishly motivated politician and has been for all of her professional and political career. Even if I agreed with everything she spouts, I could never vote for her. There's a limit to what can be overlooked, IMO. Greg made two comments. You didn't disagree with the first, so I assume you'll let it stand. My post was in response to the second comment by Greg. The first was just routine, rec.boats insult slinging. I agree with Greg's comment on Trump running as a Democrat and getting Harry's support. Hillary has Harry's total support. Why? Because she's a Democrat, amen. That may be your opinion or your interpretation but it is not supported by what Harry has actually said. On numerous occasions he has justified his support of Hillary based on her positions as a Democrat on many social issues. To say he supports her simply because she's a Democrat just gives him the ammo to fire back with his opinions of "conserva-trash". IMHO, Harry's position revolves not around the beliefs, attitudes, goals, etc, of the Democrats, but simply a position *against* Republicans, regardless of their platforms. You see the same attitude here, as Greg mentioned. Harry's 'debating strategy' consists of name-calling and patting himself on the back. His 'claims to fame', when questioned, receive no answer...a lack of 'entitlement'. Harry had very little going for him, in the way of integrity, before his 'Vietnam service' story. Now he has none. I agree that Harry has adopted a certain style of debate in rec.boats but I don't think it's a general attitude he has elsewhere. A lot of it is due to assumptions like you made (above) where you ignore his reasons and focus on "being a Democrat". The issues are lost in the insults. Personally, I don't agree with most of what Harry spouts here because it's mostly a reaction to what he is accused of being without much thought put into the discussion. I suspect that an adult, one on one reasonable discussion with him outside of rec.boats would be very different, much like the ones I've had with my Democratic Socialist lawyer friend. We disagree on many subjects related to politics but remain respectful of each other's positions and never resort to slinging insults. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
|
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/1/16 6:51 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/1/2016 6:15 AM, John H. wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2016 00:38:49 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:36:14 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote: Keyser Söze wrote: Obviously your reading comprehension skills are about as bad as CalifBill's, and you will be voting for Trump in the general. Your debate skills suck. Interesting, is how low the Democrats are turning out for the elections. Tells us, that not many are enthused about Hillary and Berni. Harry debates just like Trump. It is all "you are stupid, I am awesome and I don't need to tell you anything else". Ironic isn't it. I still say if Trump was running as a democrat, Harry would love him. You hit that nail right on the head. In the futile interest of a reasonable debate, I don't think that is true at all. Trump would have to change his colors and adopt most or all of mainstream Democratic positions on issues in order to gain Harry's approval. Harry is a Social Democrat IMO and has outlined what he believes are the important issues that need to be addressed and has offered ways of accomplishing them. Not all agree with the priorities or methods with the GOP and it's supporters being the primary opposition. Hillary meets his standards as does Bernie, so he could accept or vote for either of them. My personal opposition to Hillary isn't necessarily her (changing) positions on issues but rather on my strong belief that she, more than most, is a deceitful, lying and selfishly motivated politician and has been for all of her professional and political career. Even if I agreed with everything she spouts, I could never vote for her. There's a limit to what can be overlooked, IMO. As I have stated here, I could happily vote for Hillary, Bernie, or Martin, but my feeling is that Hillary has the best chance of winning in November. I could not vote for any of the three "leading" Republicans. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/1/2016 7:56 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/1/16 6:51 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/1/2016 6:15 AM, John H. wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2016 00:38:49 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:36:14 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote: Keyser Söze wrote: Obviously your reading comprehension skills are about as bad as CalifBill's, and you will be voting for Trump in the general. Your debate skills suck. Interesting, is how low the Democrats are turning out for the elections. Tells us, that not many are enthused about Hillary and Berni. Harry debates just like Trump. It is all "you are stupid, I am awesome and I don't need to tell you anything else". Ironic isn't it. I still say if Trump was running as a democrat, Harry would love him. You hit that nail right on the head. In the futile interest of a reasonable debate, I don't think that is true at all. Trump would have to change his colors and adopt most or all of mainstream Democratic positions on issues in order to gain Harry's approval. Harry is a Social Democrat IMO and has outlined what he believes are the important issues that need to be addressed and has offered ways of accomplishing them. Not all agree with the priorities or methods with the GOP and it's supporters being the primary opposition. Hillary meets his standards as does Bernie, so he could accept or vote for either of them. My personal opposition to Hillary isn't necessarily her (changing) positions on issues but rather on my strong belief that she, more than most, is a deceitful, lying and selfishly motivated politician and has been for all of her professional and political career. Even if I agreed with everything she spouts, I could never vote for her. There's a limit to what can be overlooked, IMO. As I have stated here, I could happily vote for Hillary, Bernie, or Martin, but my feeling is that Hillary has the best chance of winning in November. I could not vote for any of the three "leading" Republicans. Nor I. The GOP has completely fallen off the tracks although I have to admit that some of the more recent insult wars are hilarious. Trump isn't a Republican to the core but has other dis-qualifiers that prevents me from voting for him ... even symbolically due to the state I live in. I have the most respect but the least in common issue-wise with Bernie. One thing that always gets me ... and it's true of both Democrats and Republicans ... is they all like to claim that they are public servants and have dedicated their lives to public service. It's amazing to me to see the number of dedicated public servants who, while still "serving" have become multimillionaires. A few exceptions exist ... Bernie and Biden for two. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 06:51:29 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: Ironic isn't it. I still say if Trump was running as a democrat, Harry would love him. You hit that nail right on the head. In the futile interest of a reasonable debate, I don't think that is true at all. Trump would have to change his colors and adopt most or all of mainstream Democratic positions on issues in order to gain Harry's approval. He seems to be all over Hillary and she is a tool of Wall street. The Clintons have a very spotty history with gays and welfare programs. Trump certainly could dig up plenty of liberal positions from his past. He suddenly became this god fearing conservative, just to win GOP primaries. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 07:49:13 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: I agree with Greg's comment on Trump running as a Democrat and getting Harry's support. Hillary has Harry's total support. Why? Because she's a Democrat, amen. That may be your opinion or your interpretation but it is not supported by what Harry has actually said. On numerous occasions he has justified his support of Hillary based on her positions as a Democrat on many social issues. To say he supports her simply because she's a Democrat just gives him the ammo to fire back with his opinions of "conserva-trash". Who know what Hillary really believes. She lives in the "right now" and has supported all sorts of things Harry hates (the war, DOMA, welfare "reform", the bailouts etc). You have to look at what people have done, not what they say, particularly when they have been termed "congenital liars" and have a rich history of bending the truth around to suit their current needs. Bernie is doing a better job of articulating this than I can. In the same way Trump could have run as a democrat, with Hillary's history and beliefs, she could easily be a centrist republican. I bet she puts on quite a show at a revival meeting. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 07:50:42 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/1/16 12:38 AM, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:36:14 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote: Keyser Söze wrote: Obviously your reading comprehension skills are about as bad as CalifBill's, and you will be voting for Trump in the general. Your debate skills suck. Interesting, is how low the Democrats are turning out for the elections. Tells us, that not many are enthused about Hillary and Berni. Harry debates just like Trump. It is all "you are stupid, I am awesome and I don't need to tell you anything else". Ironic isn't it. I still say if Trump was running as a democrat, Harry would love him. Your political naivete never fails to astonish. The current iteration of Trump could never find success running for the Democratic nomination for POTUS and, of course, I couldn't support a pig like Trump under any circumstances. You just said it "The current iteration of Trump". He could just have easily came out of the box as the other Trump and been a democrat. He has plenty of liberal history, including endorsing Hillary and giving her money. You seem to support the "The current iteration of Hillary" but it is easy to point out that she has not always shared your views and her views seem to be very fungible, depending on who's money she is trying to get. Why won't she release transcripts of those speeches she was giving to the banksters for six figure fees? Is it like that Romney video that got leaked? I really seem to be the only one here who is skeptical of the campaign rhetoric. Maybe it is because I am willing to admit when I was betrayed by a person I voted for. You Clintonistas are still in denial every time they screw you and say "thank you sir, may I have another" |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/1/2016 11:34 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 07:50:42 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/1/16 12:38 AM, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:36:14 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote: Keyser Söze wrote: Obviously your reading comprehension skills are about as bad as CalifBill's, and you will be voting for Trump in the general. Your debate skills suck. Interesting, is how low the Democrats are turning out for the elections. Tells us, that not many are enthused about Hillary and Berni. Harry debates just like Trump. It is all "you are stupid, I am awesome and I don't need to tell you anything else". Ironic isn't it. I still say if Trump was running as a democrat, Harry would love him. Your political naivete never fails to astonish. The current iteration of Trump could never find success running for the Democratic nomination for POTUS and, of course, I couldn't support a pig like Trump under any circumstances. You just said it "The current iteration of Trump". He could just have easily came out of the box as the other Trump and been a democrat. He has plenty of liberal history, including endorsing Hillary and giving her money. You seem to support the "The current iteration of Hillary" but it is easy to point out that she has not always shared your views and her views seem to be very fungible, depending on who's money she is trying to get. Why won't she release transcripts of those speeches she was giving to the banksters for six figure fees? Is it like that Romney video that got leaked? I really seem to be the only one here who is skeptical of the campaign rhetoric. Maybe it is because I am willing to admit when I was betrayed by a person I voted for. You Clintonistas are still in denial every time they screw you and say "thank you sir, may I have another" You are not alone with regard to Hillary. Your given reasons are much the same that I have for never casting a vote for her. It's not because she's a Democrat. It's because she is Hillary. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
10:57 AMKeyser Söze
- show quoted text - I'm a pragmatic voter, not an idealist. I vote for candidates who most closely match up with my interests and beliefs. I don't expect any of them to be 100% in my column on every issue. You seem to be waiting for Godot. As for Trump, he came out of the box as a horror, and has only gotten worse. The Republicans deserve him. Hey, go ahead and vote for your favorite libertarian or don't vote at all. I don't waste my vote. ........ I dont waste my vote either. I (like Greg)!have always voted my conscience. I'm not a party liner. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/1/16 12:12 PM, Tim wrote:
10:57 AMKeyser Söze - show quoted text - I'm a pragmatic voter, not an idealist. I vote for candidates who most closely match up with my interests and beliefs. I don't expect any of them to be 100% in my column on every issue. You seem to be waiting for Godot. As for Trump, he came out of the box as a horror, and has only gotten worse. The Republicans deserve him. Hey, go ahead and vote for your favorite libertarian or don't vote at all. I don't waste my vote. ....... I dont waste my vote either. I (like Greg)!have always voted my conscience. I'm not a party liner. My conscience will not let me vote for Trump, Cruz, or Rubio. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 11:57:52 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:
I don't waste my vote. Of course you do. The democrat will win in your state, no matter who you vote for, just like Richard. I don't see another Reagan any time soon and Maryland didn't vote for him in 80 only 84. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 09:12:46 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote: 10:57 AMKeyser Söze - show quoted text - I'm a pragmatic voter, not an idealist. I vote for candidates who most closely match up with my interests and beliefs. I don't expect any of them to be 100% in my column on every issue. You seem to be waiting for Godot. As for Trump, he came out of the box as a horror, and has only gotten worse. The Republicans deserve him. Hey, go ahead and vote for your favorite libertarian or don't vote at all. I don't waste my vote. ....... I dont waste my vote either. I (like Greg)!have always voted my conscience. I'm not a party liner. There is no limit to the lengths the Clintonistas will go to deny that they were lied to by their hero. If Hillary keeps embracing Bill, she is going to slam into the fact that he was the one who deregulated Wall Street and caused the crash of 2007-8. (along with all of the other things that go against their creed) |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
|
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
|
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
11:23 AMKeyser Söze - show quoted text - My conscience will not let me vote for Trump, Cruz, or Rubio. ------ Good! |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:23:08 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:
Hey, go ahead and vote for your favorite libertarian or don't vote at all. I don't waste my vote. ....... I dont waste my vote either. I (like Greg)!have always voted my conscience. I'm not a party liner. My conscience will not let me vote for Trump, Cruz, or Rubio. Mine either but the same thoughts go to Bernie and Hillary |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:34:33 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/1/16 12:25 PM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 11:57:52 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: I don't waste my vote. Of course you do. The democrat will win in your state, no matter who you vote for, just like Richard. I don't see another Reagan any time soon and Maryland didn't vote for him in 80 only 84. The fact that the Dem candidate will carry Maryland does not mean that my voting for my candidate is a wasted vote, except, perhaps, to a political cynic like you. I have voted in every general election since I achieved voting age. I vote but I vote for someone who reflects my views, not someone in a given party |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tuesday, March 1, 2016 at 12:11:01 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/1/2016 11:34 AM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 07:50:42 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/1/16 12:38 AM, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:36:14 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote: Keyser Söze wrote: Obviously your reading comprehension skills are about as bad as CalifBill's, and you will be voting for Trump in the general. Your debate skills suck. Interesting, is how low the Democrats are turning out for the elections. Tells us, that not many are enthused about Hillary and Berni. Harry debates just like Trump. It is all "you are stupid, I am awesome and I don't need to tell you anything else". Ironic isn't it. I still say if Trump was running as a democrat, Harry would love him. Your political naivete never fails to astonish. The current iteration of Trump could never find success running for the Democratic nomination for POTUS and, of course, I couldn't support a pig like Trump under any circumstances. You just said it "The current iteration of Trump". He could just have easily came out of the box as the other Trump and been a democrat. He has plenty of liberal history, including endorsing Hillary and giving her money. You seem to support the "The current iteration of Hillary" but it is easy to point out that she has not always shared your views and her views seem to be very fungible, depending on who's money she is trying to get. Why won't she release transcripts of those speeches she was giving to the banksters for six figure fees? Is it like that Romney video that got leaked? I really seem to be the only one here who is skeptical of the campaign rhetoric. Maybe it is because I am willing to admit when I was betrayed by a person I voted for. You Clintonistas are still in denial every time they screw you and say "thank you sir, may I have another" You are not alone with regard to Hillary. Your given reasons are much the same that I have for never casting a vote for her. It's not because she's a Democrat. It's because she is Hillary. I saw a clip of her on the morning news shrieking, "I'm still standing!" with that crazy bitch look on her face. Made me want to blow chunks. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/1/16 1:19 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:34:33 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/1/16 12:25 PM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 11:57:52 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: I don't waste my vote. Of course you do. The democrat will win in your state, no matter who you vote for, just like Richard. I don't see another Reagan any time soon and Maryland didn't vote for him in 80 only 84. The fact that the Dem candidate will carry Maryland does not mean that my voting for my candidate is a wasted vote, except, perhaps, to a political cynic like you. I have voted in every general election since I achieved voting age. I vote but I vote for someone who reflects my views, not someone in a given party None of the GOP "frontrunners" reflect my views on any issue of importance to me. I certainly wouldn't want any of the Republithugs nominating to the Supreme Court. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/1/16 1:22 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:36:06 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/1/16 12:29 PM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 09:12:46 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: 10:57 AMKeyser Söze - show quoted text - I'm a pragmatic voter, not an idealist. I vote for candidates who most closely match up with my interests and beliefs. I don't expect any of them to be 100% in my column on every issue. You seem to be waiting for Godot. As for Trump, he came out of the box as a horror, and has only gotten worse. The Republicans deserve him. Hey, go ahead and vote for your favorite libertarian or don't vote at all. I don't waste my vote. ....... I dont waste my vote either. I (like Greg)!have always voted my conscience. I'm not a party liner. There is no limit to the lengths the Clintonistas will go to deny that they were lied to by their hero. If Hillary keeps embracing Bill, she is going to slam into the fact that he was the one who deregulated Wall Street and caused the crash of 2007-8. (along with all of the other things that go against their creed) There are many issues in the upcoming general election. I agree but the most important ones will not even be on the agenda and I don't really believe what they say anyway. Naive. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
In article ,
says... On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:36:06 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/1/16 12:29 PM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 09:12:46 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: 10:57 AMKeyser Söze - show quoted text - I'm a pragmatic voter, not an idealist. I vote for candidates who most closely match up with my interests and beliefs. I don't expect any of them to be 100% in my column on every issue. You seem to be waiting for Godot. As for Trump, he came out of the box as a horror, and has only gotten worse. The Republicans deserve him. Hey, go ahead and vote for your favorite libertarian or don't vote at all. I don't waste my vote. ....... I dont waste my vote either. I (like Greg)!have always voted my conscience. I'm not a party liner. There is no limit to the lengths the Clintonistas will go to deny that they were lied to by their hero. If Hillary keeps embracing Bill, she is going to slam into the fact that he was the one who deregulated Wall Street and caused the crash of 2007-8. (along with all of the other things that go against their creed) There are many issues in the upcoming general election. I agree but the most important ones will not even be on the agenda and I don't really believe what they say anyway. Got news for you - turning the USA into Bangladesh isn't a winning strategy. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
|
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/1/2016 2:37 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... You are not alone with regard to Hillary. Your given reasons are much the same that I have for never casting a vote for her. It's not because she's a Democrat. It's because she is Hillary. I could vote for her if she didn't have that big wart on her ass named Bill. I won't vote for her, but I hope she wins over any Republican that's running. They're all backwards looking. I don't want backwards. When it comes to the Republican choices this time around Mitt Romney looked pretty good in retrospect. I can't believe how far to the right the GOP has gone. Jeb seemed moderate for a while but even he had to bow to Tea Party influence led by people like Cruz. Trump is a great marketing pro but he's nuts otherwise. Then again, the Dems choices ... really just Hillary and Bernie .... have swung hard to port (notice the boating reference?) led by Bernie. Hillary has had to adjust her positions several times to avoid losing young voters who know nothing about what being a "moderate" is. Socialism is on the rise and it agrees with them. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 07:49:13 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 3/1/2016 7:15 AM, John H. wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 06:51:29 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 3/1/2016 6:15 AM, John H. wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2016 00:38:49 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:36:14 -0800, Califbill billnews wrote: Keyser Söze wrote: Obviously your reading comprehension skills are about as bad as CalifBill's, and you will be voting for Trump in the general. Your debate skills suck. Interesting, is how low the Democrats are turning out for the elections. Tells us, that not many are enthused about Hillary and Berni. Harry debates just like Trump. It is all "you are stupid, I am awesome and I don't need to tell you anything else". Ironic isn't it. I still say if Trump was running as a democrat, Harry would love him. You hit that nail right on the head. In the futile interest of a reasonable debate, I don't think that is true at all. Trump would have to change his colors and adopt most or all of mainstream Democratic positions on issues in order to gain Harry's approval. Harry is a Social Democrat IMO and has outlined what he believes are the important issues that need to be addressed and has offered ways of accomplishing them. Not all agree with the priorities or methods with the GOP and it's supporters being the primary opposition. Hillary meets his standards as does Bernie, so he could accept or vote for either of them. My personal opposition to Hillary isn't necessarily her (changing) positions on issues but rather on my strong belief that she, more than most, is a deceitful, lying and selfishly motivated politician and has been for all of her professional and political career. Even if I agreed with everything she spouts, I could never vote for her. There's a limit to what can be overlooked, IMO. Greg made two comments. You didn't disagree with the first, so I assume you'll let it stand. My post was in response to the second comment by Greg. The first was just routine, rec.boats insult slinging. I agree with Greg's comment on Trump running as a Democrat and getting Harry's support. Hillary has Harry's total support. Why? Because she's a Democrat, amen. That may be your opinion or your interpretation but it is not supported by what Harry has actually said. On numerous occasions he has justified his support of Hillary based on her positions as a Democrat on many social issues. To say he supports her simply because she's a Democrat just gives him the ammo to fire back with his opinions of "conserva-trash". IMHO, Harry's position revolves not around the beliefs, attitudes, goals, etc, of the Democrats, but simply a position *against* Republicans, regardless of their platforms. You see the same attitude here, as Greg mentioned. Harry's 'debating strategy' consists of name-calling and patting himself on the back. His 'claims to fame', when questioned, receive no answer...a lack of 'entitlement'. Harry had very little going for him, in the way of integrity, before his 'Vietnam service' story. Now he has none. I agree that Harry has adopted a certain style of debate in rec.boats but I don't think it's a general attitude he has elsewhere. A lot of it is due to assumptions like you made (above) where you ignore his reasons and focus on "being a Democrat". The issues are lost in the insults. Personally, I don't agree with most of what Harry spouts here because it's mostly a reaction to what he is accused of being without much thought put into the discussion. I suspect that an adult, one on one reasonable discussion with him outside of rec.boats would be very different, much like the ones I've had with my Democratic Socialist lawyer friend. We disagree on many subjects related to politics but remain respectful of each other's positions and never resort to slinging insults. Have you had to accuse your Democratic Socialist lawyer friend of lying? His lying and the continuous name-calling (of everyone who is right leaning) are my big hangups with the guy. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/1/16 4:12 PM, John H. wrote:
His lying and the continuous name-calling (of everyone who is right leaning) are my big hangups with the guy. -- I believe truly that you are an entirely self-centered, extreme right-wing racist asshole with absolutely no redeeming social value. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
In article ,
says... On 3/1/2016 2:37 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... You are not alone with regard to Hillary. Your given reasons are much the same that I have for never casting a vote for her. It's not because she's a Democrat. It's because she is Hillary. I could vote for her if she didn't have that big wart on her ass named Bill. I won't vote for her, but I hope she wins over any Republican that's running. They're all backwards looking. I don't want backwards. When it comes to the Republican choices this time around Mitt Romney looked pretty good in retrospect. I can't believe how far to the right the GOP has gone. Jeb seemed moderate for a while but even he had to bow to Tea Party influence led by people like Cruz. Trump is a great marketing pro but he's nuts otherwise. Then again, the Dems choices ... really just Hillary and Bernie .... have swung hard to port (notice the boating reference?) led by Bernie. Hillary has had to adjust her positions several times to avoid losing young voters who know nothing about what being a "moderate" is. Socialism is on the rise and it agrees with them. Hillary hasn't gone near Bernie. Nothing she has proposed is more radical than the health care she pushed +20 years ago. The R's are so far right reality gets distorted. Trump is a con man. Hillary will tear him up. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 16:31:42 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/1/16 4:12 PM, John H. wrote: His lying and the continuous name-calling (of everyone who is right leaning) are my big hangups with the guy. -- I believe truly that you are an entirely self-centered, extreme right-wing racist asshole with absolutely no redeeming social value. If you didn't lie so often, I might believe that's what you believe. Hell, I don't even believe that! Sure hope you got that big Ducatti out today. It was a beautiful day for a ride. -- Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns! |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/1/2016 2:37 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... You are not alone with regard to Hillary. Your given reasons are much the same that I have for never casting a vote for her. It's not because she's a Democrat. It's because she is Hillary. I could vote for her if she didn't have that big wart on her ass named Bill. I won't vote for her, but I hope she wins over any Republican that's running. They're all backwards looking. I don't want backwards. When it comes to the Republican choices this time around Mitt Romney looked pretty good in retrospect. I can't believe how far to the right the GOP has gone. Jeb seemed moderate for a while but even he had to bow to Tea Party influence led by people like Cruz. Trump is a great marketing pro but he's nuts otherwise. Then again, the Dems choices ... really just Hillary and Bernie .... have swung hard to port (notice the boating reference?) led by Bernie. Hillary has had to adjust her positions several times to avoid losing young voters who know nothing about what being a "moderate" is. Socialism is on the rise and it agrees with them. I think the good thing that RM2D38ill come out with f this election, is enough ****ed off voters, to change both the Democrats and republicans parties. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:21:17 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:
I vote but I vote for someone who reflects my views, not someone in a given party None of the GOP "frontrunners" reflect my views on any issue of importance to me. I certainly wouldn't want any of the Republithugs nominating to the Supreme Court. I suppose that all depends on what you expect out of the court. Liberals want to court to do social engineering and bypass the legislative process. True conservatives simply want the court to defend the constitution. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:21:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/1/16 1:22 PM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:36:06 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/1/16 12:29 PM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 09:12:46 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: 10:57 AMKeyser Söze - show quoted text - I'm a pragmatic voter, not an idealist. I vote for candidates who most closely match up with my interests and beliefs. I don't expect any of them to be 100% in my column on every issue. You seem to be waiting for Godot. As for Trump, he came out of the box as a horror, and has only gotten worse. The Republicans deserve him. Hey, go ahead and vote for your favorite libertarian or don't vote at all. I don't waste my vote. ....... I dont waste my vote either. I (like Greg)!have always voted my conscience. I'm not a party liner. There is no limit to the lengths the Clintonistas will go to deny that they were lied to by their hero. If Hillary keeps embracing Bill, she is going to slam into the fact that he was the one who deregulated Wall Street and caused the crash of 2007-8. (along with all of the other things that go against their creed) There are many issues in the upcoming general election. I agree but the most important ones will not even be on the agenda and I don't really believe what they say anyway. Naive. Naive is believing the campaign rhetoric from people who have a horrible history of keeping promises. I only have to point to the current flip flopper in chief. I have a hard time thinking of a single promise that he has kept. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 13:27:50 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:36:06 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/1/16 12:29 PM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 09:12:46 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: 10:57 AMKeyser Söze - show quoted text - I'm a pragmatic voter, not an idealist. I vote for candidates who most closely match up with my interests and beliefs. I don't expect any of them to be 100% in my column on every issue. You seem to be waiting for Godot. As for Trump, he came out of the box as a horror, and has only gotten worse. The Republicans deserve him. Hey, go ahead and vote for your favorite libertarian or don't vote at all. I don't waste my vote. ....... I dont waste my vote either. I (like Greg)!have always voted my conscience. I'm not a party liner. There is no limit to the lengths the Clintonistas will go to deny that they were lied to by their hero. If Hillary keeps embracing Bill, she is going to slam into the fact that he was the one who deregulated Wall Street and caused the crash of 2007-8. (along with all of the other things that go against their creed) There are many issues in the upcoming general election. I agree but the most important ones will not even be on the agenda and I don't really believe what they say anyway. Got news for you - turning the USA into Bangladesh isn't a winning strategy. Nor is turning it into Weimar Germany with a fiscal policy that is so loose that the monetary system fails. Neither party seems to have a plan that makes any financial sense. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
|
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:33:00 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: When it comes to the Republican choices this time around Mitt Romney looked pretty good in retrospect. I can't believe how far to the right the GOP has gone. Jeb seemed moderate for a while but even he had to bow to Tea Party influence led by people like Cruz. Trump is a great marketing pro but he's nuts otherwise. Then again, the Dems choices ... really just Hillary and Bernie .... have swung hard to port (notice the boating reference?) led by Bernie. Hillary has had to adjust her positions several times to avoid losing young voters who know nothing about what being a "moderate" is. Socialism is on the rise and it agrees with them. The biggest problem with Bernie is his numbers to justify his plans are crap. The taxes he proposes will not raise nearly enough money and he is projecting growth numbers that are totally unrealistic. He thinks he can recreate the US right after WWII when the rest of the world needed to be rebuilt and we were the only game in town. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:19:54 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/2/16 10:09 AM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:21:17 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: I vote but I vote for someone who reflects my views, not someone in a given party None of the GOP "frontrunners" reflect my views on any issue of importance to me. I certainly wouldn't want any of the Republithugs nominating to the Supreme Court. I suppose that all depends on what you expect out of the court. Liberals want to court to do social engineering and bypass the legislative process. True conservatives simply want the court to defend the constitution. True conservatives... gosh, what is the litmus test for that these days? It is not what passes for the current test, I would say a person who respects the text of the constitution, defends the individual rights of the population against an oppressive government and someone who wants a sustainable fiscal policy. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
In article ,
says... On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:19:54 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/2/16 10:09 AM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:21:17 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: I vote but I vote for someone who reflects my views, not someone in a given party None of the GOP "frontrunners" reflect my views on any issue of importance to me. I certainly wouldn't want any of the Republithugs nominating to the Supreme Court. I suppose that all depends on what you expect out of the court. Liberals want to court to do social engineering and bypass the legislative process. True conservatives simply want the court to defend the constitution. True conservatives... gosh, what is the litmus test for that these days? It is not what passes for the current test, I would say a person who respects the text of the constitution, defends the individual rights of the population against an oppressive government and someone who wants a sustainable fiscal policy. That's convenient, since it covers 100% of politicians. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:19:54 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/2/16 10:09 AM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:21:17 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: I vote but I vote for someone who reflects my views, not someone in a given party None of the GOP "frontrunners" reflect my views on any issue of importance to me. I certainly wouldn't want any of the Republithugs nominating to the Supreme Court. I suppose that all depends on what you expect out of the court. Liberals want to court to do social engineering and bypass the legislative process. True conservatives simply want the court to defend the constitution. True conservatives... gosh, what is the litmus test for that these days? It is not what passes for the current test, I would say a person who respects the text of the constitution, defends the individual rights of the population against an oppressive government and someone who wants a sustainable fiscal policy. That's convenient, since it covers 100% of politicians. California very few of the present politicians these days. All parties. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On 3/2/16 10:40 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:19:54 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/2/16 10:09 AM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:21:17 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: I vote but I vote for someone who reflects my views, not someone in a given party None of the GOP "frontrunners" reflect my views on any issue of importance to me. I certainly wouldn't want any of the Republithugs nominating to the Supreme Court. I suppose that all depends on what you expect out of the court. Liberals want to court to do social engineering and bypass the legislative process. True conservatives simply want the court to defend the constitution. True conservatives... gosh, what is the litmus test for that these days? It is not what passes for the current test, I would say a person who respects the text of the constitution, defends the individual rights of the population against an oppressive government and someone who wants a sustainable fiscal policy. Gosh, what national politicians meet your standards? Preferably name those who hold or who have held national office. |
Teddy Roosevelt and the Donald
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 11:31:17 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/2/16 10:40 AM, wrote: On Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:19:54 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/2/16 10:09 AM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:21:17 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: I vote but I vote for someone who reflects my views, not someone in a given party None of the GOP "frontrunners" reflect my views on any issue of importance to me. I certainly wouldn't want any of the Republithugs nominating to the Supreme Court. I suppose that all depends on what you expect out of the court. Liberals want to court to do social engineering and bypass the legislative process. True conservatives simply want the court to defend the constitution. True conservatives... gosh, what is the litmus test for that these days? It is not what passes for the current test, I would say a person who respects the text of the constitution, defends the individual rights of the population against an oppressive government and someone who wants a sustainable fiscal policy. Gosh, what national politicians meet your standards? Preferably name those who hold or who have held national office. At least you and BAO recognize my frustration with the weasels we have been presented with. Those do not seem to be unreasonable things to ask for |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:22 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com