Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

04-18-2017 , 03:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004


I hate that one of the things I dislike most about this ******* is that he doesn't grammar good, but **** me, he provides the impression that we are a land of ****ing idiots.
The impression became reality when he won the election. Also the USA aka. the Land who does hate health care, was not sending of a genius impression even before Trump.
04-18-2017 , 03:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlk9s
I still find it hilarious that the worst the Ossoff attack ads can say is that he's a LIBERAL.

Unfortunately, I think the election will go like this: Ossoff gets the most votes with something like 42%. Handel (R) and Hill (R) will get the next most, maybe around 20% each. Ossoff will then lose the runoff.

There's also a race for State Senate. I have no idea who to vote for in that. There are three Democratic candidates and all seem to be pretty much the same when it comes to the issues. Only one really gives any details on his stances on his website. I might just vote for the one who has publicized himself the most just because that might mean he has a better chance to win. I know that's lame, but in these races, rallying behind the front-runner might be more important than voting for the ideal candidate.
Is there a chance that some Republican voters stay home for the run-off if their preferred choice doesn't make it?
04-18-2017 , 03:50 PM
Every time I look up Kissinger I realize I'd forgotten a solid 3-4 countries he really ****ed up for no reason at all.
04-18-2017 , 03:53 PM
Trump is slowing immigration by making this a much less desirable country. And that's before his trickle down deregulation starts wreaking havoc.
04-18-2017 , 03:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
Every time I look up Kissinger I realize I'd forgotten a solid 3-4 countries he really ****ed up for no reason at all.
He's not a contender for worst criminal in world history, but he and Nixon are in the conversation if you're making a top ten list.
04-18-2017 , 03:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
Every time I look up Kissinger I realize I'd forgotten a solid 3-4 countries he really ****ed up for no reason at all.


Henry Kissinger’s War Crimes Are Central to the Divide Between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders
04-18-2017 , 03:59 PM
That was basically the biggest and most intentional Dan signal of all time fwiw.

Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
He's not a contender for worst criminal in world history, but he and Nixon are in the conversation if you're making a top ten list.
It's genuinely insane to me as someone who had their first easy ass degree while playing poker (because who needs to actually attend class?) in history/polisci that people think the USA did more harm than good for the ROW as a "world leader." Their role as world leader just shielded their prominent figures of charges of war crimes.
04-18-2017 , 03:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese
No, not quite. For medical doctors, it is their job title. It succinctly explains what they do. Calling a PhD holder "Dr" gives no hints as to occupation, and may confuse readers unaware of the academic tradition.
It only succinctly explains what they do because other doctors don't get consistently called doctor, right?

I guess my thing is IDGAF if you insist on being called doctor, at least I don't so long as you've achieved that status in your discipline. It's douchey, sure, but I'd argue it shouldn't be considered more or less douchey by medical doctors or clinical psychologists or whatever else.

And medical docs' egos are inflated enough as it is, so I'd love a cultural change that'd require them to explain their being medical doctors in ways similar to PhDs in sociology explaining they're NOT medical doctors. If that makes sense.
04-18-2017 , 04:02 PM
04-18-2017 , 04:27 PM
Quote:
With only six days remaining in Bill O’Reilly’s vacation, the pressure on the Murdoch family to decide the embattled commentator’s fate is intensifying. Three sources with knowledge of the discussions said that, while no final decision has been made, the Murdochs are leaning toward announcing that O’Reilly will not return to the air. Sons James and Lachlan have been arguing that O’Reilly needs to go, say these sources, though their father, Rupert, has resisted that outcome.

The prospect of dumping O’Reilly — once unimaginable — has gained steam this week due in part to street protests outside Fox News headquarters and advertiser boycotts on O’Reilly’s air. One network insider said Fox executives are alarmed by the severity of the ad-revenue decline. “It’s worse than Glenn Beck,” the insider said, referring to the advertiser revolt that helped derail Beck’s Fox News career in 2011.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...l-oreilly.html
04-18-2017 , 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl
And we all know Beck was never heard from again. I wonder if O'Reilly would even be mad if Brer Fox threw him in that there briar patch.
04-18-2017 , 04:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl
This gives me a chubby.
04-18-2017 , 04:40 PM
@DIB: Idk if I made my point clearly the first time, so I'll try to restate. Sorry if this is belaboring the point.

What's being discussed is not a special privileged status that medical doctors enjoy. The title "Dr" is used to indicate their profession, just like "Sen. So-And-So," because for whatever historical reasons, that's what we call people who do what they do. Like I'm not gonna bother confirming this, but I doubt WaPo refers to to people who got MDs but then decided to open up a B&B instead as "doctors." And people who have PhDs that pursue careers in academia will be referred to in reporting as "Professor XYZ." So both groups are being treated equally.
04-18-2017 , 04:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by All-In Flynn
And we all know Beck was never heard from again. I wonder if O'Reilly would even be mad if Brer Fox threw him in that there briar patch.
I can't see oldster BillO creating his own indie media platform the way Beck did. Some AM radio channel will pick up O'Reilly, but he's gonna take a huge pay cut.
04-18-2017 , 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
I can't see oldster BillO creating his own indie media platform the way Beck did. Some AM radio channel will pick up O'Reilly, but he's gonna take a huge pay cut.
I hope you're right.
04-18-2017 , 04:49 PM
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...33960566431746

"Just learned"

Like that time he "Just found out" that Obama wiretapped him on Mar 4th, then refers to a January NYT article as his evidence. Idiot.
04-18-2017 , 04:49 PM
I'm sure Papa Bear quietly retires and gets a sweet golden parachute for dedicating his life to pulling America back into the Dark Ages.
04-18-2017 , 04:50 PM
O'Reilly is getting the boot over money not the allegations themselves. Murdochs/ @foxnews only care now because advertisers are fleeing.
04-18-2017 , 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis Cyphre
Is there a chance that some Republican voters stay home for the run-off if their preferred choice doesn't make it?
I doubt it. The Republican candidates are so similar that I would think supporters of one would have no problem voting for the other in the run-off. It's not like Bernie Bros not voting for Hillary (even though those two were very similar, as well).

I guess the question is how many Republicans will either stay home because they don't like Trump and don't want another Trump supporter in Congress. I figure some might vote for Ossoff, but I doubt that's a huge number.

My hope - assuming a run-off - is that Democratic/Democrat-leaning/anti-Trump voters really get inspired and get to the polls. Clinton beat Trump in every county that is covered by District 6.

Side note: I've had four election-related phone calls this afternoon. I've actually taken them all, as I was curious. There was one this morning, as well, but I let that go to voicemail. Yesterday I probably got 10-12 calls.

EDIT: This race is a huge example of how important money is in elections. I don't even know if Ossoff is the best candidate (he seems perfectly fine, FWIW). I do know, though, that he is the candidate everyone knows about and is therefore going to get the most votes, so if I want District 6 to flip, I'd better vote for him. At the same time, I was greatly swayed by John Lewis' endorsement of Ossoff. Who am I to say no to that?

Last edited by dlk9s; 04-18-2017 at 05:00 PM.
04-18-2017 , 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASAP17
O'Reilly is getting the boot over money not the allegations themselves. Murdochs/ @foxnews only care now because advertisers are fleeing.
Advertisers are the moral arbiters and moral compass of modern America.
04-18-2017 , 05:10 PM
You know what would REALLY piss Trump off? If Ossoff wins outright tonight (no run-off) and then comes out thanking Trump for raising his popularity enough to win.
04-18-2017 , 05:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Our House
You know what would REALLY piss Trump off? If Ossoff wins outright tonight (no run-off) and then comes out thanking Trump for raising his popularity enough to win.
I dunno, I'm pretty sure Trump just likes being thanked and won't care if it's sarcastic or not.
04-18-2017 , 05:24 PM
I am also too lazy to make a sweat thread but fwiw, I read results should start coming in around 7:30 ET (two hours from now).
04-18-2017 , 05:26 PM
First protected DREAMer is deported under Trump

Ignored orders or Trump lying again?
04-18-2017 , 05:31 PM
Odds O'Reilly asked Trump to give him that public comment about it not being a big deal? They definitely talked or communicated.

      
m