Woman says Roy Moore initiated sexual encounter when she was 14, he was 32

[RoosGirl]

I'm staying out of this. I don't want to offend anyone.

Smart man.  I knew there was something about you I liked. 

[truth_seeker]

I thought it was Mussolini who made the trains run on time . . .

It is my understanding Hitler was inspired by Mussolini.  Hitler improved on Mussolini's idea.

Had he stopped at that point of industrial-tranport  efficiency the world would have been okay. That he made humans his cargo made it horrific.

BTW Eisenhower was inspired by the Autobahn, to push his Interstate Highway project.

[aligncare]

I have stated repeatedly for years here, that for some so-called conservatives "logic and math" are not part of their skillsets.

I am considering adding "common sense" and "judgment."



 

It’s funny how some people take satisfaction in the notion that voting is somehow an exercise in self expression. Odd that, since no one really knows how you voted.

I didn’t want to vote for McCain in ‘08, but I did. Oh, what? Was I supposed to vote for the cool young liberal black guy?

I supported and voted for Romney in ‘12, the severely conservative candidate. What could I have done differently to send Obama to an early retirement? Vote third party? And how would that have helped?

My point is, voting is not about me. It’s about what’s best for the country given the electable choices on the ballot.

[Frank Cannon]

The way you "speak" reminds me of someone.  Tell us the truth, are you really Bill Clinton?

It's not Bill. It's Roger.

[Emjay]

Fully agree. I am now an follower of Scott Adams, and his "Master Persuader" depiction of Trump.

Check out his new best-selling book "Win Bigly."  Like Trump or not, he won and did so with a different paradigm.

And he is doing most of the things, that conservatives have said they wanted, for years.

Loved Scott Adams and Dilbert.  But I have a slight caveat about his depiction of Trump as a 'Master Persuader."

The thing that made Trump persuasive was that he tapped into a lot of feelings that people had but hadn't been able to express.

People were sooo tired of Obama and his open door policy to immigrants and his fostering of racism.

People wanted a stronger policy on illegal immigration.  They wanted America respected.

They wanted MAGA.

Bigly.

So, yeah, Trump was able to persuade but it was by advocating what people already wanted.

[DiogenesLamp]

I happen to believe that Ted Cruz would have won all the states that Trump won and perhaps a couple of more to boot!

What message would have allowed Cruz to win the rust-belt and unionized states?   

[truth_seeker]

Nice avatar, I'm a big Johnny Winter fan.

Not Johnny Winter. It is supposed to be Sven from the North, or Odin or something along those lines.

[Emjay]

It’s funny how some people take satisfaction in the notion that voting is somehow an exercise in self expression. Odd that, since no one really knows how you voted.

I didn’t want to vote for McCain in ‘08, but I did. Oh, what? Was I supposed to vote for the cool young liberal black guy?

I supported and voted for Romney in ‘12, the severely conservative candidate. What could I have done differently to send Obama to an early retirement? Vote third party? And how would that have helped?

My point is, voting is not about me. It’s about what’s best for the country given the electable choices on the ballot.

Amen, brother.  And I made the same two choices you did in 08 and 12 though those two candidates were far from my first choice.

We looked at the alternative and made the logical choice.  It is selfish to do otherwise.

[edpc]

It's not Bill. It's Roger.

@RoosGirl
@Frank Cannon


You’re both wrong.......

[Bigun]

What message would have allowed Cruz to win the rust-belt and unionized states?

Truth!

Do you happen to recall the encounter Ted's encounter with the Iowa farmer?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi5IZ9StVUI

[DiogenesLamp]

The fact of the "none of the above" option existing on the Nevada ballot isn't a question of popular whim
or mass opinion.

But it happens that 28,863 Nevadans including yours truly exercised the option at the voting booth
last year. Considering that was 2.56 percent of the Nevada presidential voting, it certainly
wasn't a question of "popular whim."

Yes,  it wasn't even that.   It was an expression of the whims of the kooky fringe,  the sort that scream at the sky. 

[roamer_1]

Lots of people voted for 'none of the above' and are claiming that they did not vote for Hillary.

But, in truth, by denying the Republican candidate a vote, they were, in fact, giving one-half vote to Hillary. 

Yeah... you're not very good at math.

-------------------------------------------------
Butthead  Bimbette  Actual Conservative

   [ ]            [ ]                 [X]

 
-------------------------------------------------

HALF VOTE my ass. the vote goes in ONE column, denying that line item vote to the rest of the columns. It can only go in one. A vote FOR a candidate is a vote FOR that candidate, and only that candidate.

It was not a rational choice by anyone who had the slightest inkling of what Hillary would do to the country.

Whats the difference? Not a damn thing changed. You just like it better with a big 'R' on the top.

Running to prophets with itching ears.

[Emjay]

Yeah... you're not very good at math.

-------------------------------------------------
Butthead  Bimbette  Actual Conservative

   [ ]            [ ]                 [X]

 
-------------------------------------------------

HALF VOTE my ass. the vote goes in ONE column, denying that line item vote to the rest of the columns. It can only go in one. A vote FOR a candidate is a vote FOR that candidate, and only that candidate.

Whats the difference? Not a damn thing changed. You just like it better with a big 'R' on the top.

Running to prophets with itching ears.

Oh, pooh.

[DiogenesLamp]

Bless your heart.

But, you're right, I'm afraid.

If one takes the time to look at the regular voting patterns of the swing states,  it becomes clear that Social conservatism doesn't get you anywhere in those places.  It is in fact,  a detriment in places like Ohio,  Pennsylvania,  Wisconsin and Michigan.   

Fiscal conservatism doesn't work there either.    You know what works?   Telling them you are going to "Make America Great Again"  and reassuring everyone that your prime concern will be creating Jobs and getting the money flowing again.   

That is what works in those states.  Blue Collar union membership opposed their own leadership just to vote for Trump.   Cruz could not have done that. 

[Emjay]

They ought to pay me for all the really stupid posts I have to read and feel compelled to respond to.

Any offer considered.

[Cripplecreek]

Back to Moore.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=-KT-r2vHeMM

[DiogenesLamp]

Your analogy of voting between Sodom and Gomorrah is apt.

No it isn't,  it is childishly silly,  and unworthy of further consideration.   

[TomSea]

If one takes the time to look at the regular voting patterns of the swing states,  it becomes clear that Social conservatism doesn't get you anywhere in those places.  It is in fact,  a detriment in places like Ohio,  Pennsylvania,  Wisconsin  and Michigan.   

 

Okay, we'll be sure to tell John Kasich and Scot Walker this, they have led the nation in pro-life legislation, other states can be included in this. I think Michigan has done some too. Not sure about Pa. but I consider your remark uninformed. Kasich's and Walker's states have done wonders for the pro-life movement. Your statement might be more accurate to say, "blue collar voters" might not have voted for Trump and per the poll yesterday posted here, blue collar voters might have preferred Bernie over Trump. Have you actually been to Ohio or Wisconsin to say such?

https://theslot.jezebel.com/john-kasich-wants-everyone-to-take-a-chill-pill-about-a-1820018997

Stephen King in Iowa too.

[DiogenesLamp]

Don't worry about the critics.  They call recounting facts about Hillary in some detail 'hyperbole.'  It is not.  It's probably on the mild side.

I don't buy into the Arkancide theories out there,   but there are a lot of people dying around these two.    People that needed to die,  if you know what I mean. 

OMG, remember the pink dress interview?

It sounds vaguely familiar,  but i'm having trouble recalling any details about it.   Could you refresh my memory?   Is this when she was defending Bill's womanizing?   

[DiogenesLamp]

Comparing Trump to Hillary is not 'apples and oranges,' ... it is apples and bovine excrement.

Apples taste good.   For the sake of the Trump haters,  I would say a comparison between Radishes and bovine excrement is a closer fit.    (I don't care for radishes. :) )   

[musiclady]

No it isn't,  it is childishly silly,  and unworthy of further consideration.

Good.

Then don't consider it further, and let the rest of us without crushes on Donald Trump continue to discuss the reality of the horrific choice we were forced to make last November......

It would be refreshing for most of us to not have to read your hyperbolic nonsense about saving the world by voting for a reprobate.

[DiogenesLamp]

Fully agree. I am now an follower of Scott Adams, and his "Master Persuader" depiction of Trump.

Check out his new best-selling book "Win Bigly."  Like Trump or not, he won and did so with a different paradigm.

And he is doing most of the things, that conservatives have said they wanted, for years.

Scott Adams does indeed have some interesting insight into this phenomena known as "Trump."    And Yes,  Trump is doing stuff our morally upright surrender monkeys never did for us.   

[truth_seeker]

Loved Scott Adams and Dilbert.  But I have a slight caveat about his depiction of Trump as a 'Master Persuader."

The thing that made Trump persuasive was that he tapped into a lot of feelings that people had but hadn't been able to express.

People were sooo tired of Obama and his open door policy to immigrants and his fostering of racism.

People wanted a stronger policy on illegal immigration.  They wanted America respected.

They wanted MAGA.

Bigly.

So, yeah, Trump was able to persuade but it was by advocating what people already wanted.

I have not read that book yet, but I have been listening to his periscopes for awhile. Much impressed by his insightful analyses.

For the most part, mainstream political commentary is predictable and repetitive. Evidence is this forum, day-in-and-day-out.

Yet Adams perspective is unusual and generally accurate.

He does NOT say Trump won because of policies 1,2,3,4 etc. He says Trump won because he got through to people. Convinced, changed minds, got attention, was persuasive. 

[DiogenesLamp]

I have stated repeatedly for years here, that for some so-called conservatives "logic and math" are not part of their skillsets.

I am considering adding "common sense" and "judgment."

I used to believe that we conservatives were common sense sort of people.   Then I encountered the Trump Groupies over at TOS who suddenly turned on Cruz for the most ridiculous of reasons,   and later  I encountered the Trump haters over here,  who struck me as just as foolish in the opposite direction.   


I now realize that illusory thinking is common across the political spectrum.  (Though I think the liberals have more of them than do we.)


 As Churchill supposedly pointed out:


“The best argument against Democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”

[Bigun]

I have been pleasantly surprised by Trump's performance in office to date ad if he continues to do as he has done for the next 3 years I ill likely vote for his re-election should he want it!

My saying that does not change a thing about my past choice to vote for someone other than him or Hillary!