Posted by MikeT23 on 8/30/2016 4:33:00 PM (view original):
Pretty much. But there's no point in arguing with BL. He's decided what everyone else is saying. He can argue with himself. Or, since he can't find the post where that was said, he can go **** himself.

don't forget that he often decides what we are arguing about, even if its only him arguing about that, while everyone else is arguing about something else.

What's this "we" bullshit?

When was the last time someone responded to you in this thread???

Posted by bad_luck on 8/30/2016 5:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 8/30/2016 5:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 8/30/2016 12:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/30/2016 9:29:00 AM (view original):
It's easier to make a counterpoint after you've told the other person what they meant.

Feel free to correct me if I misunderstood your point.

Anyway, this seems like a weird thing to complain about. Even if there is a large group of people that are completely clueless about the issues and yet continue to vote for a certain party, that's still better than the very real large group of people that do not bother to vote at all.

What a retarded thing to say.

I would rather have somebody NOT vote, than just blindly vote for a candidate they know nothing about running on a platform they don't understand only because they're from the party their pappy always voted for. And his pappy before him.

Like I said before, almost everyone voting has notion of why they are voting for whatever candidate they are voting for. Even if it's just a vague notion, that's still better than not voting at all.

So you're saying the vague notion of "I only vote for Republicans because they're Republicans" is a great approach to voting?

I'm saying that people who "only vote Republican," do so because there's something about the party they like. Those people voting is better than them not voting.

Posted by bad_luck on 8/30/2016 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm saying that people who "only vote Republican," do so because there's something about the party they like. Those people voting is better than them not voting.

And if the thing they like is that their daddies always voted Republican . . . ?

Posted by tecwrg on 8/30/2016 9:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 8/30/2016 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm saying that people who "only vote Republican," do so because there's something about the party they like. Those people voting is better than them not voting.

And if the thing they like is that their daddies always voted Republican . . . ?

Everyone should vote.

Posted by bad_luck on 8/30/2016 10:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 8/30/2016 9:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 8/30/2016 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm saying that people who "only vote Republican," do so because there's something about the party they like. Those people voting is better than them not voting.

And if the thing they like is that their daddies always voted Republican . . . ?

Everyone should vote.

Explain.

Explain that everyone should vote???

...uh...ok

So politicians enact and enforce laws. Those laws impact you and me and mike and moy and everyone else. Well, maybe not DougOut, unless the law restricts internet access in mental hospitals. But, anyway, because those laws impact everyone, everyone has a stake in the decisions made when writing the laws and everyone has a stake in how the laws are enforced. And since voting is really the only say we get when it comes to politicians/policy/laws/enforcement, everyone should vote.

And is it your contention that everybody who votes has informed themselves, however minimally, on the issues at stake so that they are casting the vote that's in their best interests?

Based on what we have been electing for the last 40 years maybe voting is not something we do well

Posted by bad_luck on 8/30/2016 7:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 8/30/2016 6:21:00 PM (view original):
State Department says Benghazi emails involving Clinton recovered by FBI



But but but those were 'personal' emails!!! Crooked Hillary... Ha ha ha!!!

No one cares about Benghazi because Clinton didn't do anything wrong.

Trump has no path to 270 if he's fighting to hold Georgia and Missouri.

Georgia:

Poll	Date	Sample	MoE	Clinton (D)	Trump (R)	Spread
RCP Average	7/29 - 8/17	--	--	43.3	43.0	Clinton +0.3
FOX 5 Atlanta*	8/17 - 8/17	730 LV	3.6	43	43	Tie
CBS News/YouGov*	8/10 - 8/12	990 LV	4.3	41	45	Trump +4
Gravis	8/4 - 8/8	1604 RV	2.5	44	45	Trump +1

Missouri:

RCP Average	7/20 - 8/22	--	--	43.8	40.8	Trump +3.0
Monmouth*	8/19 - 8/22	401 LV	4.9	44	43	Trump +1
Remington Research (R)*	8/5 - 8/6	1280 LV	3.0	44	42	Trump +2

hardly fighting.... he has barely even began to advertise in the general election...

That said he just spent $10 million in OH, PA, NC, FL, NH, VA, IA, CO, NV..... not in GA or MO which means trump doesn't think Hillary stands a chance there.

BL is wrong again. MOY THE SOOTHSAYER +1!!!!

Donald Trump is jetting to Mexico City on Wednesday for a meeting with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, just hours before he delivers a high-stakes speech in Arizona to clarify his views on immigration policy, according to people in the United States and Mexico familiar with the discussions.

Donald Trump closed a 12-point polling gap with Hillary Clinton in five days, leaving them half a percent apart during the next two-day period, according to new polling data from Reuters.

On August 22, Clinton led Trump by 12 points, 44.8 percent to 32.8 percent. By Aug. 27, the two candidates were neck and neck, according to Reuters.

By Aug. 29, Trump had nudged up again to 39.1 percent, while she was at 39.7 percent. He gained 6.7 points, while she lost 5.1 points during the entire seven-day period.

BL is getting SCURRRRRED!!!