Is the US President supposed to represent all the people?

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re:

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

henry quirk wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 6:49 pm "Modern polling"

The same modern polling (and pollsters) who predicted a Clinton win right up to election day.
Yes, they are going to investigate 2016 election tampering, alright!

Forgive me if I don't take polling any more seriously than I do 'the news'.
Forgive me if I don't take rigged elections any more seriously than I do 'god'.

And: I'm not lookin' to sell you anything, SoB. I'm just pointing out the obvious skew of 'the press' against Trump and suggesting you figure that skewing into your political calculus.
No, no, no, HQ you don't understand, I'm skewed against Trump, always have been. The press being skewed, comes way after me! I'm just very happy indeed to see them bashing the idiot! I want him gone, he's a disaster! He's gonna kill us all. I believe he'd actually push the button, to teach us a lesson, if we push him too far, he's fucking nuts!

And: yes, I voted for him. He was, as I explained elsewhere, the lesser of two evils to me (and still is)...don't know that 'that' makes me an apologist for the man.
No! But of course in such a case, I'd expect you to take the stance that you have in this thread. Guess who I voted for? Duh!!!

if he's done wrong, let that wrong be aired, proven, and dealt with, in court. This flaying away at him, this declaration -- subtle or gross -- of his guilt by folks who are supposed to convey fact, not color it, is small and wrong. I'll no more climb up on that haywagon than I will the other where all riders say Trump can do no wrong.
What you have to SERIOUSLY ask yourself is, "why they are doing this to him when it's never been seen before?" I would think it should be painfully obvious!

I'll applaude when he does good; condemn when his wrong-doing is proven...till then: this cheese stands alone.
Notice how you used "proven" on the wrong and not on the good: BIAS! Pure and simple. And I understand that, Completely! He's your man, and as such can do no wrong. Because then you'd be feel wrong for voting for him. I get it, it's the same for all humans!
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Post by henry quirk »

" 2016 election tampering"

What tampering?

You mean that bundle of facts damning of and embarrassing to Dems? The facts hacked out of computers and email accounts highlighting how the DNC violated its own rules and screwed Bernie S out of the Dem nomination? The facts showing how 'reporters' violated journalistic ethics to help Clinton and hinder Trump?

If that's tampering, then let's have more of it....mebbe we could call  it 'journalism' or 'reporting' or some-such.

#

"why they are doing this to him when it's never been seen before?"

Thomas Jefferson called the press 'polluted'. What's happening here is not new and not surprising (just kinda pathetic and small).

#

"it('s)...painfully obvious!"

Damned straight it is: the bulk of 'the press' hates him as you do, and for the same reasons (which, of course, aren't reasons at all [that is, those reasons aren't founded in reason, but in feeeeelings]) and they'll sacrifice the ethic they all prize to express that hatred. They nullify any claim to being conduits of information when they adulterate that information.

#

"Notice how you used "proven" on the wrong and not on the good: BIAS!"

Mebbe...or mebbe it's cuz good is not an offense.
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re:

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

henry quirk wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 8:40 pm " 2016 election tampering"

What tampering?

You mean that bundle of facts damning of and embarrassing to Dems?
An unnamed source ponied up a piece of unsubstantiated information to a propagandist rag, one overtly skewed against Clinton.

The facts hacked out of computers and email accounts highlighting how the DNC violated its own rules and screwed Bernie S out of the Dem nomination?
An unnamed source ponied up a piece of unsubstantiated information to a propagandist rag, one overtly skewed against Clinton.

The facts showing how 'reporters' violated journalistic ethics to help Clinton and hinder Trump?
An unnamed source ponied up a piece of unsubstantiated information to a propagandist rag, one overtly skewed against Clinton.

So is this starting to sink in, or are you daft? My vote's for the latter!
;-) :lol:

If that's tampering, then let's have more of it....mebbe we could call  it 'journalism' or 'reporting' or some-such.
Can you say Russian??? Nope, as it's way above your pay grade! :)

#

"why they are doing this to him when it's never been seen before?"

Thomas Jefferson called the press 'polluted'. What's happening here is not new and not surprising (just kinda pathetic and small).
Concentrate, I'm talking about recent history that you and I have both witnessed, so as to actually know. Still, mention a president that had to deal with this kind of thing. He deserves it, it's that simple!

#

"it('s)...painfully obvious!"

Damned straight it is: the bulk of 'the press' hates him as you do, and for the same reasons (which, of course, aren't reasons at all [that is, those reasons aren't founded in reason, but in feeeeelings])
And this is why you so often come off as an idiot. You profess to know why I hate him, and you don't have a fucking clue. I'll give your dumb ass a hint, "IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FEELINGS." THE GUY HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN IDIOT, AND AN IDIOT SHOULD NEVER BECOME A PRESIDENT!

Idiot[ id-ee-uht]
noun
1. an utterly foolish or senseless person: If you think you can wear that outfit to a job interview and get hired, you're an idiot!


and they'll sacrifice the ethic they all prize to express that hatred.
No dumb ass, we're talking about a president, not some fucking clown on a TV show, you know, like The Apprentice!

They nullify any claim to being conduits of information when they adulterate that information.
There is no adulteration, he's an idiot, pure and simple. His thoughts on global warming alone, make that fact perfectly clear.

#

"Notice how you used "proven" on the wrong and not on the good: BIAS!"

Mebbe...or mebbe it's cuz good is not an offense.
Sometimes talking to you is like talking to some dumb animal, just sayin' Ha!!! :lol: ;-)

Edit: I forgot a letter, go figure
Last edited by SpheresOfBalance on Thu May 18, 2017 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Post by henry quirk »

"dumb animal"

:|
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re:

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

henry quirk wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 10:33 pm "dumb animal"

:|
You know I'm just messin' with you man. You're OK, not that you need my dumb ass to tell you! ;-)

Politics, yuck!
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re:

Post by Greta »

henry quirk wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 8:40 pm " 2016 election tampering"

What tampering?

You mean that bundle of facts damning of and embarrassing to Dems?
That happened to happen 11 days before the election - 100% perfect timing for Trump. Suspiciously perfect timing. Comey's leak could have happened at any time.

Ironically, instead of a reward he is sacked for checking on Trump doing the same as Clinton, only worse because he's giving away national secrets to the Ruskis because it suits his development agenda.

No, Comey is a lifelong Republican and the leak before the election unprecedented, obviously corrupt and timed to perfection. Clinton was certain to win before the Comey intervention. I think that gun-toting Repubicans would have started a civil war if they had they had an election stolen from them in the same way by such an outrageously transparent piece of corruption that has now seriously further undermined US democracy.
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Re:

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Greta wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 11:09 pm
henry quirk wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 8:40 pm " 2016 election tampering"

What tampering?

You mean that bundle of facts damning of and embarrassing to Dems?
That happened to happen 11 days before the election - 100% perfect timing for Trump. Suspiciously perfect timing. Comey's leak could have happened at any time.

Ironically, instead of a reward he is sacked for checking on Trump doing the same as Clinton, only worse because he's giving away national secrets to the Ruskis because it suits his development agenda.

No, Comey is a lifelong Republican and the leak before the election unprecedented, obviously corrupt and timed to perfection. Clinton was certain to win before the Comey intervention. I think that gun-toting Repubicans would have started a civil war if they had they had an election stolen from them in the same way by such an outrageously transparent piece of corruption that has now seriously further undermined US democracy.
Often I'm just far too lazy to go back are refresh my memory as to all the specific reasons I've formed my opinions. Thanks! ;-)
At my level of activity it seems like I move and think in slow motion! I loathe becoming 60 this year! ;-)
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Re:

Post by Walker »

Greta wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 11:09 pm
henry quirk wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 8:40 pm " 2016 election tampering"

What tampering?

You mean that bundle of facts damning of and embarrassing to Dems?
That happened to happen 11 days before the election - 100% perfect timing for Trump. Suspiciously perfect timing. Comey's leak could have happened at any time.

Ironically, instead of a reward he is sacked for checking on Trump doing the same as Clinton, only worse because he's giving away national secrets to the Ruskis because it suits his development agenda.

No, Comey is a lifelong Republican and the leak before the election unprecedented, obviously corrupt and timed to perfection. Clinton was certain to win before the Comey intervention. I think that gun-toting Repubicans would have started a civil war if they had they had an election stolen from them in the same way by such an outrageously transparent piece of corruption that has now seriously further undermined US democracy.
One day Trump is the bumbling buffoon babbling secrets.

The next day he’s using the presidency as a cover to build a real estate empire.

The next day he’s the master manipulator steering the seasoned politican, also FBI director, also really tall, into a shady conspiracy with God knows what as an inducement.

The next day he’s again an idiot.

In other words, whatever paints Trump the worst is the lie de jour flavored with a little smelly whiff of fact.

Can’t have it both ways, or rather, all ways.

Smear tactics only insult, they do not impress a t’all.

*

Despite the hype and the polls, in reality no sane person wanted to listen to Clinton’s screeching and phoniness for years.

Although, she’s back at it again, making public noises for the donors to the foundation. And miraculously getting air time, for which someone not her is likely paying. Life is all about the money and power with these people.

Her old buddy Al Gore is trying to shake down the world for $15 trillion.
She’s probably kicking herself for thinking so small.
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Re:

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Walker wrote: Fri May 19, 2017 12:19 am
Greta wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 11:09 pm
henry quirk wrote: Thu May 18, 2017 8:40 pm " 2016 election tampering"

What tampering?

You mean that bundle of facts damning of and embarrassing to Dems?
That happened to happen 11 days before the election - 100% perfect timing for Trump. Suspiciously perfect timing. Comey's leak could have happened at any time.

Ironically, instead of a reward he is sacked for checking on Trump doing the same as Clinton, only worse because he's giving away national secrets to the Ruskis because it suits his development agenda.

No, Comey is a lifelong Republican and the leak before the election unprecedented, obviously corrupt and timed to perfection. Clinton was certain to win before the Comey intervention. I think that gun-toting Repubicans would have started a civil war if they had they had an election stolen from them in the same way by such an outrageously transparent piece of corruption that has now seriously further undermined US democracy.
One day Trump is the bumbling buffoon babbling secrets.

The next day he’s using the presidency as a cover to build a real estate empire.

The next day he’s the master manipulator steering the seasoned politican, also FBI director, also really tall, into a shady conspiracy with God knows what as an inducement.

The next day he’s again an idiot.

In other words, whatever paints Trump the worst is the lie de jour flavored with a little smelly whiff of fact.

Can’t have it both ways, or rather, all ways.
Strawman!! As there is nothing stopping him or anyone from being guilty of all of those things.


Smear tactics only insult, they do not impress a t’all.

*

Despite the hype and the polls, in reality no sane person wanted to listen to Clinton’s screeching and phoniness for years.

Although, she’s back at it again, making public noises for the donors to the foundation. And miraculously getting air time, for which someone not her is likely paying. Life is all about the money and power with these people.

Her old buddy Al Gore is trying to shake down the world for $15 trillion.
She’s probably kicking herself for thinking so small.


“Science has made enormous inroads in understanding climate change and its causes, and is beginning to help develop a strong understanding of current and potential impacts that will affect people today and in coming decades. This understanding is crucial because it allows decision makers to place climate change in the context of other large challenges facing the nation and the world. There are still some uncertainties, and there always will be in understanding a complex system like Earth’s climate. Nevertheless, there is a strong, credible body of evidence, based on multiple lines of research, documenting that climate is changing and that these changes are in large part caused by human activities. While much remains to be learned, the core phenomenon, scientific questions, and hypotheses have been examined thoroughly and have stood firm in the face of serious scientific debate and careful evaluation of alternative explanations.
— United States National Research Council, Advancing the Science of Climate Change — 

So are you fool enough to take on climate change now? Trump's an idiot! Are you?
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Is the US President supposed to represent all the people?

Post by Greta »

It's simple, Walker. All your words can't take away the fact that Clinton was heading towards a comfortable victory until Comey's perfectly timed intervention. Such a perversion of democracy is not unprecedented, eg. the wrongful sacking of Australia's Whitlam government but it's at the extreme end.

Whatever, if Trump truly is representing these good ole blue collar boys rather than the big end of town, isn't that a complete change of form? Trump is one of the very corporate manipulators who has systematically exploited the "little people" by pushing their liabilities to PAYE taxpayers.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Is the US President supposed to represent all the people?

Post by Walker »

No, she was not headed for a win. The ninety percenters just convinced themselves of that so vociferously, that in their minds it just had to be true. She and her enablers created a fantasy world called Progressivism and then the voters were to blame for not stepping into it. Not to be deterred, the fantasy lives on. And these are very important people, so something must be done.

She did jump the gun. She called supporters of her opposition "deplorables" before the end of the election, which was but one of many ways she alienated the population. Quite revealing of her character.

The same principle is now being applied to President Trump. So many are saying that things aren’t right because Clinton wasn’t elected, so something must be wrong with the universe.

At some point baseless attacks become a treasonous coup.

Now there is a special investigator.

There is no way that he can clear Trump because if he does, he will be attacked, accused of conspiracy, dragged through the mud personally, etc. It’s the same principle as the Bush-Gore vote recount in Florida. There the Dems kept pushing, kept changing the definition of what counted as a vote, started finding ballots in unexpected places, started counting hanging chads, extending time deadlines, kept re-counting with the sole objective of getting the results that would match their fantasy world … by any means necessary.

Only when Progs hear what they want to hear will they declare the matter settled, and what they want to hear is that President Trump is not president.

Surprised you don't see this blatant, and accepted, dishonesty.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Is the US President supposed to represent all the people?

Post by Greta »

Walker wrote: Fri May 19, 2017 12:46 pm No, she was not headed for a win. The ninety percenters just convinced themselves of that so vociferously, that in their minds it just had to be true.
No, the polls turned dramatically. I know what happened. It was stunning and rather shocking to watch unfold. A line was crossed by a public servant that I'd not seen before - direct interference with an election.
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Is the US President supposed to represent all the people?

Post by Walker »

No, the polls were wrong because of flaws in the polling. Insertion of bias. Questions, samples polled, etc. This is documented. Read up.

It's like asking loaded questions on an internet forum.

*

Q: "Why is it the Times has the story but not the memo?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jcy0ZxlE0f8

A: “Someone who had seen them recounted details to me …”
Translation: We don’t need no stinking memo.

Uh huh. If someone who has seen God recounts the details to the NY Times reporter, I don’t think that will be the basis for … anything.

If someone who has seen God writes a memo about it, then someone else sees the memo, and then tells someone else about the memo they saw after it was written, neither is that a basis for ... anything.

I remember an occasion in school when a woman disputed something the professor said in a previous lecture. She said he was now contradicting himself. He was a cultured Russian.

She said, “I wrote down what you said, right here.”

He politely said, “My dear lady, I cannot be responsible for what you hear or what you write.”

Thing is, I also had written down what he said from the previous lecture, and he was right. She heard it wrong.

Likely, she heard what she wanted to hear.

It's like the so-called scientists who study the weather. The climatologists. They study the future and make a living from doing so, albeit with a cushier ride than those ladies with the crystal balls. :roll:

Plug scraps of tortured data into a computer and reject the subsequent models that don't fit the narrative, like any fortune-teller. Who's to say they're wrong?

$15 trillion is a bit of steep fee. Not exactly working out the living room, wot?
User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5688
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Is the US President supposed to represent all the people?

Post by SpheresOfBalance »

Walker wrote: Fri May 19, 2017 1:40 pm No, the polls were wrong because of flaws in the polling. Insertion of bias. Questions, samples polled, etc. This is documented. Read up.
Well if that's the case, point to it! Right, I thought not!

It's like asking loaded questions on an internet forum.

*

Q: "Why is it the Times has the story but not the memo?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jcy0ZxlE0f8

A: “Someone who had seen them recounted details to me …”
Translation: We don’t need no stinking memo.

Uh huh. If someone who has seen God recounts the details to the NY Times reporter, I don’t think that will be the basis for … anything.

If someone who has seen God writes a memo about it, then someone else sees the memo, and then tells someone else about the memo they saw after it was written, neither is that a basis for ... anything.

I remember an occasion in school when a woman disputed something the professor said in a previous lecture. She said he was now contradicting himself. He was a cultured Russian.

She said, “I wrote down what you said, right here.”

He politely said, “My dear lady, I cannot be responsible for what you hear or what you write.”

Thing is, I also had written down what he said from the previous lecture, and he was right. She heard it wrong.

Likely, she heard what she wanted to hear.

It's like the so-called scientists who study the weather. The climatologists. They study the future and make a living from doing so, albeit with a cushier ride than those ladies with the crystal balls. :roll:

Plug scraps of tortured data into a computer and reject the subsequent models that don't fit the narrative, like any fortune-teller. Who's to say they're wrong?

$15 trillion is a bit of steep fee. Not exactly working out the living room, wot?
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Is the US President supposed to represent all the people?

Post by Walker »

SpheresOfBalance wrote: Sun May 21, 2017 2:41 am
Walker wrote: Fri May 19, 2017 1:40 pm No, the polls were wrong because of flaws in the polling. Insertion of bias. Questions, samples polled, etc. This is documented. Read up.
Well if that's the case, point to it! Right, I thought not!
Duh. She lost the election.
Post Reply