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
 

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.

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 3/1/16 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"


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.

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.