?

For whom will/would you vote?

This poll will close on Nov 4, 2020 at 8:41 PM.
  1. Donald Trump and Mike Pence (Republican Party)

    33.6%
  2. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris (Democratic Party)

    51.4%
  3. Jo Jorgensen and Spike Cohen (Libertarian Party)

    2.7%
  4. Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker (Green Party)

    4.0%
  5. Other

    8.3%
  6. 556 voter(s)
  1. notimp

    notimp Well-Known Member
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    Messages:
    4,660
    Country:
    Laos
    Trolling. (Thats not even what corruption means.)

    You are stirring the pot.

    You are destroying conversation.

    You are eliminating nuance.

    You are promoting hate speech.

    No one in here cares, the moderator is with you.

    — Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

    Because depending on the state you are in that is a vote that doesnt count towards the actual race.

    In a real democracy all of that is ok, and fine, because the other side has an equal problem with loosing votes to independents.

    But in the US currently the system is gamed in a way where Republicans have more engagement, because they use single issue topics like 'BABYKILLERS', or 'THEY ARE STEALING THE ELECTION FROM MY FATHER', that pulls more engagement, than what the democrats are able to produce.

    So if you are a moderate, and you decide not to vote for one of the likely presidential candidate, as of now - and only in swing states, you are putting Trump into a better position.

    This is acknowledged by the republican party. Voting suppression strategies were enacted even before Trump.
    (You made election topics single issue, highly emotional, not about the economy, if you just messed it up, ... )

    And they are enacted by Trump, watch him tell republican voters once in a while, that mail in voting is ok (they will try to suppress it being counted, but its a tough thing for him to tell republicans who are older and have voted by mail for a while, that thats no good, so he has to claim both things at once). Its real fun. :)

    That then spirals into beauties like this one: https://www.vox.com/2020/9/12/21434...eople-to-vote-twice-even-though-thats-a-crime
     
    Last edited by notimp, Sep 27, 2020
    monkeyman4412, Ektif and Lacius like this.
  2. VartioArtel

    VartioArtel GBAtemp Regular
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Messages:
    230
    Country:
    United States
    You spent your whole first post attacking me. Then you claim the moderator's with me. You know why they'd be with me? Your entire first half of your post was flaming, trolling, and harassment, all in one. Not because I share the same political ideology - if any - with them. But because you are ignoring the rules of the board in an attempt to throw buzz words in an attempt to stick something to me, anything, in order to discredit me rather than my argument

    Your general behavior is atrocious in a realm of debate. You do not explain anything and provide counter arguments, you spent the entire first post just attacking. The most you did was edit in details that weren't in the above to give a weak argument. Corruption is the essence of using one's office in a way they shouldn't. Withholding evidence is a form of corruption. It prevents the system from working correctly. The very system that requires the individuals to follow the rules in order for its smooth operation. And actions, influences, etc, that do not allow the system to work as it should is the essence of corruption.

    I won't even bother addressing the 2nd post as you're literally answering a rhetorical question that I myself posed, and answered.
     
  3. notimp

    notimp Well-Known Member
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    Messages:
    4,660
    Country:
    Laos
    Just a general notion. (On the moderators biases.)

    If you want to make a point, make it distinct. If you've found something thats worth looking into with Harris, then bring that forward as a point.

    Withholding information in a trial on behalf of your client is not corruption. If you want a real good notion about the difference between law and justice, watch the 3 hour C-SPAN video in the RBG successor thread. The entire hearing circles around that question, and what you do in edge cases. (And how to influence law, once you get the chance to, and what you would do in that instance - all in subtext. ;) ) (Then you can read the pdf from the new designated supreme court judge which talks about those instances as well.)

    Dont start a claim with 'as we all know, all democrats are corrupt as well'. Thats just an insult, and a claim that has to be false on face value.

    From the videos you posted, one seems to be an outrage peddler, that fake emotions into camera, and then you have the video from the girl standing at a townhall saying that she doesnt want to stick to just a scripted message. I dont like that one bit. But we had an entire townhall in here where people were proud to say scripted messages into the FOX camera (with no smoking gun video, but people bending over backwards to thank the president to have them, when he holds court... ;) ), so that kind of is what it is as well.. (The general issue here is, that if you ask your audience for questions, and collect them, then preselect and approve them, you get everything you could want to direct a townhall format anyhow. If you stick to easy to understand questions of a general, or topical nature (you decide on topics), that are current, so your audience might be interested in.)

    The girl wanted to say more than that (her question probably was edited), and then she did.
     
    Last edited by notimp, Sep 27, 2020
  4. r0achtheunsavory

    r0achtheunsavory GBAtemp Regular
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2020
    Messages:
    122
    Country:
    United States
    Dude, what is your malfunction? Spamming "if you don't agree with me you're racist and it's hate speech" is not a valid thing. The entire world watched SJWs pull this scam tactic for the last 10 years in a row to the point where calling someone racist is now basically a compliment that means someone who isn't taking George Soros money to lie to try and destroy the country on purpose.
     
    Last edited by r0achtheunsavory, Sep 27, 2020
  5. VartioArtel

    VartioArtel GBAtemp Regular
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Messages:
    230
    Country:
    United States
    Or your own bias. "Because the staff enforce the rules against my hostile comments and behavior, they're clearly biased."

    Follow the rules, and they'd leave you alone.

    I provided links on the manner.

    It was evidence that would exonerate the defendant. And as the Attorney General, it is against the law to withhold evidence obtained in investigations.

    I am not that interested in the RBG incident. All I know is this: one of her greatest sayings is Rational minds can disagree. But you already prove you don't believe in her, by automatically launching into your verbal assault on me.

    See, this is exactly what I meant about gaslighting. You aren't EVEN subtle. You're STRAIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF US trying to put words in my mouth to make people hate me with NO PROOF.

    And in case you pull an edit:
    https://i.imgur.com/LoxM0Hh.png - Your post

    https://i.imgur.com/UP6fQBa.png
    https://i.imgur.com/HOI3TEY.png - My post. It's been *2* hours and a half since I last editted, so you can't even claim I've editted it on you.

    Which? Viva Frei? He's a Canadian Lawyer.
    The Biden Videos? News groups.
    Memology? Does that matter as much as the subject in it?
    Nate the Lawyer? Do you really want to go down that?
    How about Ford Fischer, who the Proud Boys leader acknowledges as a neutral/independant?

    You only know how to attack, you don't know how to debate. You don't provide facts, you don't even reference to any sources. You spew insults and comments and expect us to believe you and if we don't we're, in your own words:

     
  6. r0achtheunsavory

    r0achtheunsavory GBAtemp Regular
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2020
    Messages:
    122
    Country:
    United States
    Who would have thought a career criminal politician that's been in Washington 50 years overseeing the entire destruction of America would say such a thing!

    [​IMG]
     
    gregory-samba likes this.
  7. notimp

    notimp Well-Known Member
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    Messages:
    4,660
    Country:
    Laos
    Good, than thats a plausible case. :)

    All I have currently is a video from a youtuber that talks at 2x speed, and inserts videoclips from movies (emotional gafs), do you have more than that? :)

    edit: Dont need it, google provides. ;)

    Although the first hits it provides are conservative attackblogs? (And no, I'm not logged in.. ;) So shadowprofiles, or nothing.. ;) )
    https://www.google.com/search?q=harris+withholding+information


    This is the issue you are so concerned about:

    https://web.archive.org/web/2020030...7/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html

    Which leads to what? An account of not immaculate moral standing? Whats the horrible issue here that made you call all democrats corrupt?

    Also, that still isnt corruption on Harris' part.

    edit: Accusations were, that that would have been structural, not a one time issue. Implied, so she could get more convictions, to climb the political carreer ladder faster as the attorney general. But the actual case concerned one account of withholding the information, that that technician was recently convicted.
     
    Last edited by notimp, Sep 27, 2020
  8. VartioArtel

    VartioArtel GBAtemp Regular
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Messages:
    230
    Country:
    United States
    Love how he ignores you btw.
     
  9. notimp

    notimp Well-Known Member
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    Messages:
    4,660
    Country:
    Laos
    Out of context:
    snopes then verified it as a correct attribution
    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-racial-jungle-quote/

    The laps to say 'jungle' in that instance was a no go. Even back then. But the intention was not to demean black people.

    I mean, you can troll this thread all day, but if the only things you bring are obvious spin and lies, its easy to confront them.. ;)

    — Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

    On the youtubers case of 'gross misconduct within the FBI?' the issue here is, that you dont just sue one of the big agencies, then have them pay a fine, or replace people there, based on an open court decision.

    If you have misconduct there, its usually dealt with through internal reviews, or a political process in which the people having the political oversight over those agencies make apparent (or not) what the issue is, and then its supposed to get fixed internally, with them following up.

    You dont sue the FBI to convict it of wrongdoing to then dissolve it to found another one.. ;) As a result you have those pro forma hearings where judges close to the intelligence community judge on cases in a very favourable manner. All of that is expected. The question here is, was the issue allowed to surface publicly in which case - there is not much more you can ask for, this should activate internal review and accountability procedures.

    There is also the term "it would unsettle the public" in which case all of that goes through secret hearings and courts, in which case you hear nothing, because - "national interest".

    None of that is shocking, or criminal corruption, ... Thats just 'dealing with extralegal agencies' (they arent bound by law (in a sense within their own statutes they can break the law), but by political control)

    Thats not 'total corruption' as the youtube title suggested. The youtuber even knows that, which is why he puts a "?" after "total corruption", the title is just for the clicks.

    And yes this might include scare tactics, or public smear campaigns by the respective agencies.

    The BIGGER issue here is, that the youtuber derives and projects pleasure out of constructing the following argument. There are text messages from two FBI agents, that monitored and prosecuted the - quote youtuber: "National Hero Michael Flynn", while they made personal comments on text message, that they hated Trump.

    Defense used this to construct "procedual error", to delegitimize the prosecution. Its the same as in the Harris case - procedual error (although knowingly condoned in that case), so the accused got free.

    Those are not "big cases of moral corruption", those are people believing in a case getting stood up by procedural errors.

    You cant get a FBI prosecutor that "has no political orientation" at will. And "forgeting" to mention, that the technician was convicted of destroying evidence in another case, doesnt make the defendent innocent all of a sudden, it just gets them free, because of neglect and malice in regard to procedure.

    Those are offenses that warrant for the actual perpetrators to be reprimanded, and thats about all.

    Those are not even criminal offenses, or anything close to it.

    So how on earth, you, or that youtuber could arrive at large scale systemic corruption, is beyond me. :)

    Have you ever worked with humans?

    And yes, for an attorney general the stakes in outcome (it could have exonerated someone) are higher, but that doesnt mean that people seize to be human.

    If you set the bar for 'who can be a vice presidential candidate' that high, you've never seen house of cards.. ;)
     
    Last edited by notimp, Sep 27, 2020
  10. gregory-samba

    gregory-samba GBAtemp Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2020
    Messages:
    302
    Country:
    United States
    You've failed once again to provide me any information related to Donald Trump personally being charged and found guilty of a criminal offense. You've listed two examples that only contain civil matters, matters that were dismissed and matters that had to do with companies he owned run by people that worked for him. I'm just going to stop asking because apparently you for whatever reasons are failing to provide me with a clear answer. You're not guilty unless a Jury or Judge finds you guilty of a criminal offense. I'm not sure why you're unable to differentiate between civil and criminal cases either. I'd just like to know if that's happened to Trump, because speculation of guilt or charges that got dropped/dismissed don't equate to bring charged and convicted of a criminal offense.

    Civil Cases vs. Criminal Cases: Key Differences
    --- https://litigation.findlaw.com/filing-a-lawsuit/civil-cases-vs-criminal-cases-key-differences.html

    So, what are the criminal charges that Trump was arrested/charged/Indicted and found guilty for?
     
    Last edited by gregory-samba, Sep 27, 2020
  11. Lacius

    OP Lacius GBAtemp Legend
    Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    13,854
    Country:
    United States
    You should check your own link with regard to who brings forward criminal cases and then check to see who brought forward the cases against Trump University and the Trump Foundation.
     
    Ektif and IncredulousP like this.
  12. gregory-samba

    gregory-samba GBAtemp Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2020
    Messages:
    302
    Country:
    United States
    "criminal law and civil law are different" ... I give up. You can't provide any evidence so I'm not going to budge on my statement that Trump is not a convicted criminal. He's lost some lawsuits, but lawsuits are a civil matter and they can be brought on by the same people that prosecute criminal matters.
     
  13. Lacius

    OP Lacius GBAtemp Legend
    Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    13,854
    Country:
    United States
    You're the one arguing these cases are civil cases when they objectively and demonstrably are not.
     
    Ektif and IncredulousP like this.
  14. gregory-samba

    gregory-samba GBAtemp Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2020
    Messages:
    302
    Country:
    United States
    Please provide proof or don't reply to me again regarding this issue.

    ALL CIVIL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_J._Trump_Foundation
    ALL CIVIL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump
    ALL CIVIL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_University

    Any sort of criminal investigation was dropped on all of those pages. I can't find a single ounce of evidence that Trump himself was charged and found guilty of a criminal offense.
     
    Last edited by gregory-samba, Sep 27, 2020
  15. Lacius

    OP Lacius GBAtemp Legend
    Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    13,854
    Country:
    United States
    So, a few quick points:
    1. These are examples of Trump being found to have committed crimes.
    2. These are not civil matters.
    3. There are examples of crimes we know Trump has committed (e.g. criminal obstruction of justice in the Mueller Report) that he was never charged for.
    4. There are examples of crimes we know Trump is being investigated for (e.g. hush money payments, bank fraud, etc.).
    5. Points 1-3 don't matter with regard to the larger conversation topic. The argument was about whether or not Trump should have to surrender his tax returns. Whether or not Trump has been charged with other crimes in the past is irrelevant to whether or not he is being investigated for crimes now.
    6. In an act of desperation, you're shamelessly moving the goalposts and distracting from the real topic. You went from "There's no evidence Trump is being investigated for crimes" to "There's no evidence Trump committed crimes" to "There's no evidence Trump was ever found to have committed past crimes." And each time you moved the goalposts, you were still wrong.
    I'm losing my patience for conversations with conservatives, to be honest. They will argue until they're blue in the face for whichever side is the conservative side, regardless of the facts, because I guess abortion is baby murder? I don't know.

    Conservatives are enabling real harm to occur, and all because
     
    Last edited by Lacius, Sep 27, 2020
  16. notimp

    notimp Well-Known Member
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    Messages:
    4,660
    Country:
    Laos
    Trump doesnt sign building contracts personally.

    You found a company, then you make it a limited accountability vehicle (get a few partners, get outside investment), then you do all of the contracts through them, then you have no personal liability.

    Its an open secret, that Trump (the company) - regularly - dint pay contractors, in insolvency cases, but didnt tell them that they wouldnt be payed and had them start and finish work. Or that his 'Trump university' was a fraud set up as a ponzi scheme. (But he "didnt run that", he just provided the naming rights, ...)

    Then on top of that you have legal arrangements, where both parties agree that they settle outside of court, which carry less risk and are cheaper for both parties in most cases.

    Trump personally didn't do anything since he was born. It was always the estate which managed various companies.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_career_of_Donald_Trump

    That comes with being an ultra rich real estate heir. ;)

    — Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

    Yes, settlements outside of the court. Doesnt make you innocent, just means, there is no plaintiff left in the end.

    edit: Read up on Roger Stones business philosophy in that regard.. ;) edit: Here: The golden rule: Deny everything:


    But thats not even anything that special. Plausible deniability as a concept wasnt invented by Stone.. ;)
     
    Last edited by notimp, Sep 27, 2020
  17. gregory-samba

    gregory-samba GBAtemp Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2020
    Messages:
    302
    Country:
    United States
    Welp, it seems that The New York Times might have gotten there hands on Trump's tax returns for the past 20 some years. They claim he's lost a lot of money and not paid very much in form of income tax, which makes sense for 2016-2020 because he's been giving his entire paycheck away to good causes. It also claims Trump didn't pay taxes for some years and that's due to tax law. There's also a recent IRS Audit, so if the information is correct Trump hasn't done anything sketchy regarding his taxes. Oh, and there's no hidden hush money from Russia (like the damned President of the USA would be a Russian agent, LOL). It also contains nothing illegal.

    Once again, the Liberal Left made a mountain out of a mole hill and were completely wrong. That's if the tax records the New York Times obtained are correct. Trump claims they aren't, which makes sense because he doesn't have access to them to verify so they could be fabricated or not accurate/correct.
     
    Last edited by gregory-samba, Sep 28, 2020
    shamzie likes this.
  18. Hanafuda

    Hanafuda GBAtemp Psycho!
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    3,161
    Country:
    United States
    Trump's taxes apparently contain nothing illegal, but someone at the IRS and someone at the NYT participated in something illegal.
     
    shamzie likes this.
  19. gregory-samba

    gregory-samba GBAtemp Fan
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2020
    Messages:
    302
    Country:
    United States
    That's if an IRS employee leaked confidential information. Though, who else would have had access to the apparently non-incriminating data?
     
  20. r0achtheunsavory

    r0achtheunsavory GBAtemp Regular
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2020
    Messages:
    122
    Country:
    United States
    Every politician in Washington is crooked except a miniscule number of people like Ron Paul. These leftists actually think anyone cares about Trump tax returns when every single person in Washington is a criminal thief?

    The only issue that actually matters is that modern day leftism is nothing more than a South African-style, white genocide movement spearheaded by an anti-white racist, international terrorist, Jewish man named George Soros. Inb4 some leftist lies and tries to claim it's possible for White people to be racist but it's not possible for others to be racist against Whites.
     
    Last edited by r0achtheunsavory, Sep 28, 2020
Draft saved Draft deleted
Loading...

Hide similar threads Similar threads with keywords - Presidential, Election, [POLL]