Posts: straightUp | One Political Plaza

4430 wrote:

Name One Politician that has fulfilled every campaign promise ?

OK... none that I know of. Happy?

That being said however, I don't recall any politicians making such astounding promises and then failing to meet them, so Trump DOES stand out in that respect.

Still, if you paid more attention to what I was stating you would know that I mentioned campaign promises as being of lesser significance to the point I was making about normalizing shitty politics.

4430 wrote:

Funny how blind you all are that see all the promises Trump made has been done but won't admit it !

There's already been an abundance of back and forth on this issue and it's not relevant to the point I was making which is this... Trump supporters are willfully supporting a degradation in American ethics to protect their politics.

I'll say it again, so you get it this time...

Trump supporters are willfully supporting a degradation in American ethics to protect their politics.

I encourage you to find a solid argument to challenge this assessment. If that's too hard for you and you would rather spar over Trump's record on his campaign promises because you think he actually kept his promises then I'll start by giving you the same challenge you gave me... Name one.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

permafrost wrote:

Darn, it is such a chore, trying to bring truth to... (show quote)

Thanks for sharing that permafrost.

I certainly think the question regarding the loyalty of Trump's base is worth looking at and the article featured in the Atlantic really brings this question out - not so much underlining Trump's failure to meet campaign promises or the meaningless of his campaign promises in the first place, but more than anything, to highlight the significance of the attempted "normalization" of shitty politics.

Indeed, there was an era where politicians had to hide their corruption because they could never get it past the American people. This is something Republicans today very much depend on as they point to the Democratic past and suggest a wide range of crazy, hidden conspiracies. But what Trump did (and this is perhaps his greatest "accomplishment") is he pushed the envelope on what Americans are actually willing to accept and this is creating a new divide between us, not so much based on the forgivable premise of being misled but on the unforgivable premise of willful choice.

This is why "divided America" carries so much more weight now under Trump than it ever has before. It's one thing to point to a citizen and say "you've been misled" - quite another to point to a citizen and say you made the informed choice to downgrade American ethics.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

Seth wrote:

I have several; a Marlin 336C, a Mossberg 12 gauge, a Safari Arms Enforcer, a Glock 23 and a Colt Python, had all of them for years, and you know what?

Not a single one of them has ever suddenly leaped up of its own volition and shot anybody.

Maybe I just have them trained right...

I have a Mossberg 12 gauge too... I traded my much heavier Remington for it. Very happy with the trade.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

Barracuda2020 wrote:

How did you deal with them? All you did was agree ... (show quote)

Do you think they know how they appear to the vast majority of people around the world? These apologists for a so-called president who has demonstrated a degree of callous ignorance and blatant corruption never before even imagined in the White House and then having the audacity to claim the moral high ground?

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

amadjuster wrote:

Actually, Clinton lied to a Grand Jury and was convicted of perjury, resulting in the loss of his law license. A little more serious that a little poontang in the White House.

I understand that, which is exactly why I stressed that Nixon and Trump were caught doing things that clearly violated the Constitution BEFORE they were being prosecuted.

Think about it... if Clinton just admitted to the affair, there would have been no grounds on which to impeach him. So, yeah, he made a bonehead move - I'm not defending him there, but as you can see by my list, I am not suggesting the Democrats are perfect people, either... But there *IS* and undeniable pattern of reality that conflicts entirely with the image Republicans have that they stand on the moral high ground. They clearly don't.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

son of witless wrote:

May I humbly ask where these stats came from ?

Of course you can...

These convictions are public record, so there are lot's of sources. You can google for instance "federal politicians convicted of crime" and get plenty of hits. Personally, I like using Wikipedia because they do a good job of organizing things like this into easy-to-read lists and they include all of their sources in their notes so you don't have to take their word for it.

(The image that you see, is taken from a spreadsheet I used to compile the names from the data I found.)

Also, keep in mind - these are only federal politicians. I didn't have time to dive into the hundreds of convictions at the state and municipal levels.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

Seth wrote:

Yeah, they certainly qualify for the Nobel Sleaze Prize, that's for sure.

There's nothing too dirty, despicable or just plain "sell-small-children-into-slavery" low for today's Democrats -- they'd frame their own mothers for sex crimes if that's what it took to get elected.

So this is all the Republicans have... opinions about how "sleazy" they think Democrats are and wild fantasies about them.

In contrast, I have some hard facts to share...

These are ALL the federal politicians convicted of crime since 2000. No imaginary crimes or fabricated conspiracies or personal opinions about how sleazy they are. Just the facts.

Something else to note... The names followed by a party indicator and state (ie.. R-TX) are legislators that people vote for directly. There are 8 such Democrats and 13 such Republicans... In contrast the names with only a party indicator are the politicians appointed by their party. There is only 1 such Democrat and 12 such Republicans. This tells me that the mistakes citizens make when voting is a little more even across the board, but with such an extreme difference in appointments I think it's safe to say the Republican party itself is in fact the indisputable champion of corruption.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

son of witless wrote:

In the interest of fairness and accuracy I wish to bring up a few points, if I may. First you called Ralph Shortey a Republican Senator without noting whether he was a US or State Senator. That is hardly a minor point.

Given the context of the post - yes, it *is* a minor point... if even a point at all.

son of witless wrote:

You also make a point that Congressman Chris Collins was reelected while under indictment. So at that point he had not been convicted and this is a big deal to you. You slammed Republican voters. Fair enough.

Being under indictment is not the same thing as being under investigation. People don't come under indictment unless there is clear evidence of a crime. It's a step beyond investigation and a step short of conviction. Hillary was under investigation for 25 years and was never indicted because those 25 years of investigations failed to reveal enough evidence to indict her. That being said, it's my opinion that any vote for a public figure while he/she is under indictment DOES say something about the voter.

son of witless wrote:

He was not yet convicted and you slam Republican voters for reelecting him. Sounds pretty damn bad, however I doubt that those same Republican voters could hold a candle to the Democratic voters of Mayor Marion Barry. Remember him ?

The Mayor of the District of Columbia was caught in an FBI drug sting and served 6 months in Federal Prison. When he got out quess what ? What ? He got on council, and then became Mayor once again.

I'll give you half a point for this one because Barry was convicted for possession of drugs which is not an offense against anyone but himself. Unlike Collins, he did not interfere with markets through inside information and the abuse of his office. Nor did his election support come until AFTER he served his sentence.

We also can say a Democrat was impeached but with the same difference... Clinton got in trouble for having an extramarital affair, which can hardly be called a crime against the country. His own personal integrity maybe and Hillary of course, but not the country... illicit affairs are not even an impeachable offense... His attackers had had to goad him into denial to catch him with anything impeachable. The preparation of the impeachment of Nixon and Trump - totally different. Those two were caught doing things that clearly violated the Constitution BEFORE they were being attacked.

So yet, crime happens on both sides, but the point being made in my post is how much worse it is on the Republican side.

son of witless wrote:

Now as far as the statement that President Donald J. Trump did not lift a finger to help investigate 3 Republicans who were convicted under his watch, if they were convicted his help obviously was unneeded.

And by the same token, Trump's help wouldn't be needed to convict the Bidens either. Are you getting the point yet?

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

byronglimish wrote:

Atta boy, never ever admit there are many animals embedded with non violent illegals.

Well, thank you for that broad generalization, but I'm not denying anything. Let's say there ARE "many animals embedded with non-violent illegals" (although so far there is not one shred evidence to suggest there is) It is STILL unlikely that they are "embedded" with EVERY single last one of them.

I know you folks WANT this to be true and maybe if you keep chanting you can convince yourselves but if you want to convince anyone else, you need some evidence or at least a plausible theory.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

nonalien1 wrote:

You mean like the Hillside Strangler did? :Having lunch with cops and asking how their be investagation was going? Or theZodiak Killer writing letters bragging about his crimes?

Are you suggesting that we have almost 12 million illegal immigrants that are ALL as insane as the Hillside Strangler or the Zodiac Killer?

Do you have ANY idea how unrealistic that is?

I mean, seriously think about this for second. The Democrats have 12 million more registered voters than Republicans. There is a slightly smaller number of illegal immigrants... Now, when numbers increment by a million at a time the coincidence really isn't all that remarkable. In contrast, it would be highly unlikely that every last one of those immigrants (that authorities are hunting down) would be insane enough to register their presence AND for each of them to be processed by authorities that don't check for their citizenship OR the age of all those immigrants under 18.

Even if that were possible, it wouldn't say much for the Republicans that let such an enormous violation of the Constitution to go answered.

This is one of those situations where the more you try the more you lose. It would be better if you just said - yeah, ok... The Democrats have more registered voters than Republicans. At least then you can try and figure out what to do about it, right?

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

Weewillynobeerspilly wrote:

Hence the resistance to voter ID....they all about technology, except when it comes to finger prints, photo IDs, proof of citizenship.....the list is long, I would prattle on, but i have lunch with slatt49 in a couple hours and the list would eat that time up

The resistance to voter ID is a resistance to centralized (big government) authority. The Constitution gave the power of handling elections to the states and all 50 states check for citizenship one way or another. I'm sure you can prattle on because the lies and distortions are endless but it's just as well that you didn't. It sounds like lunch with Slatt49 is a better use of your time. Say hi to him for me.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

Weewillynobeerspilly wrote:

I know you do not believe that, the last admin was sucking up, gave them Crimea.........failed reset try.

Yea....i hear ya man

Obama didn't "give" Crimea to Russia (in case you didn't know, it wasn't ours to give). Crimea used to be part of Russia and most of the people that live there, being of Russian decent and wanted to be returned to Russian rule because they were frustrated with the corrupt and troubled governments in Kiev. So Putin took advantage of the situation and reclaimed Crimea. No one in the U.S. government agreed with how the Russians did that but with the majority of Crimeans happy with the result, it didn't seem worth starting a war with Russia over it.

In Syria it was a different story though... Under Obama's command, US forces kept blocking Putin's moves to secure a pro-Russian tyranny in Damascus. I suspect that was one of the critical reasons why Putin put so much effort into interfering with the 2016 elections, because he knew Hillary would keep the same highly effective strategists under her command. Obama/Clinton = formidable foe, Trump/Pompeo = circus clowns.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

Liberty Tree wrote:

They say that Democrats are ahead by 12 million in voter registration. Is it a coincidence that it is the same number of estimated illegals in this country?

LOL, that's funny... the latest estimate of illegal immigrants is 11.96 million, so you do bring up an interesting point, but I'm going to call that a coincidence because not only are illegal immigrants prohibited from registering, it would also be a stupid move considering how they are trying to hide from the authorities not register with them. An illegal immigrant registering to vote is like an outlaw showing up at a police station to brag about his crime.

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

Weewillynobeerspilly wrote:

Learn to speak Russian, you have a little over 4 years to pick it up.

That's only if Trump wins in 2020. Anyone else, is going to tell Putin to zip his pants back up. ;)

(Main)

...and yet another disgraced Republican

byronglimish wrote:

Hillary was the only candidate who cheated in the last presidential election.

Maybe you're unaware that she's a Demoproggie.

Yeah, I'm just not into all those fantasies you folks keep churning out to make yourselves feel better. I stick with recorded facts and there are no such facts to support the idea that Hillary cheated. The facts are that Hillary got 3 million more votes from the people than Trump did which is why his election relied entirely on the EC which is based on a distribution of representatives that has been growing more and more distorted since the 1910 U.S. Census.

Here's another fact... Democrats are currently ahead in voter registration by 12 million. The current ratio is 40% Democrat, 29% Republican, 28% Independent. We can expect the Republicans to vote for Trump and the Democrats to vote for whoever the other candidate is. The independents will probably split but even if Trump gets half he would still be behind.

Bottom line is... Republicans are dwindling. Americans are getting tired of the games, especially the younger Americans that grew up watching Republicans sending us to war, crashing our economy, sabotaging laws they don't like, circumventing rules they don't like and then hoisting the most corrupt and incompetent clown to our highest office.

It's come to a point where the only people the Republicans can depend on now are people who are so obsessed with various personal hangups like bigotry that they don't care about anything else. Well, at this point it's going to take millions of stuffed buttholes to even the score, so good luck!