Backintheday544
-
Posts
1,788 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Backintheday544
-
-
4 minutes ago, snafu said:
I edited my post while you were typing.
But in any event, voters are supposed to buy the Pelosi-esque “we have to elect him so we know what he will do” tactic?
That’s b.s. Presidents shouldn’t hide.
You can see his plans here: https://joebiden.com/joes-vision/#
-
2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
I know you are but what am I? Just because someone doesn’t agree with you, or isn’t willing to bend the knee to the latest liberal dogma line, doesn’t make them a liar. But you know that.
Yes....worse than that. But that’s not how that transcript reads.
You don't need a transcript of you watch the exchange. He said a quick sure like a little kid who gets yelled at promising to not do it again. Then when repeatedly asked to just do it, he tells the proud Boys to stand down and stand by.
-
12 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
I beg to differ. By far, the worst thing that happened in that debate was a major candidate called the President of the United States a clown. That is and always will be unacceptable on EVERY level.
Worse than an acting President not saying he condemned white nationalists?
-
Just now, Rob's House said:
Except you conveniently cut out the answer to Wallace's first question, which was "sure."
Then when they followed up and he asked them which group they wanted him to tell to "stand down" they said Proud Boys (not a white supremacist or militia group, BTW) and he told them to stand down.
The big "gotcha" that you're clinging to is that he also said "stand by."
I guess you gotta take your talking points where you can get them.
Sure didn't denounce anything. He flippantly was like sure
He said stand down and stand by. Why you leave out the stand by? Proud Boys has ties to white supremacists don't know how that's debatable.
He also never said, i condemn white nationalist. It's not like it's a new thing for him. He has frequently not done so.
-
1 minute ago, Rob's House said:
Wallace: Will you condemn white supremacists ...?
President Trump: Sure
Liberals: THE PRESIDENT REFUSED TO CONDEMN WHITE SUPREMACISTS!!!
For the real quote;
During a segment dedicated to race, Chris Wallace, the moderator, asked Trump, "Are you willing, tonight, to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down?"
Trump tiptoed around the question and instead doubled down that "almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right wing."
Wallace pushed back on Trump, along with former Vice President Joe Biden, and again asked him to address right-wing violence
"What do you want to call them?" Trump asked. "Give me a name, give me a name."
"Proud Boys," Biden said, referring to a far-right group.
"Proud Boys, stand back and stand by," Trump responded.
-
1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said:
The problem for Trump on these numbers: third party candidates got almost 5% of the vote in 2016. They will probably get more on the order of 1% this year.
Hard to imagine that those people will break for Trump in anything more than, say, a 2 (Biden) to 1 (Trump) ratio. Most of these people were anti-Hillary but not pro-Trump, and there's little reason they'd be converted to Trump now.
So that means Trump stuck at 47 max probably gets Biden to his 5 point margin. And that's very likely to result in an electoral college victory too.
That seems to be a good reason why the Republican lawyers are helping Kanye so much.
-
1 minute ago, Big Blitz said:
Yup. Biden can win by 4 and its basically 50/50.
He lost to Hillary by 2 million plus. He can lose by 5 million and still win:
"But the concentration of demographic change in noncompetitive states, particularly California and Texas, threatens to further widen the chasm between the popular vote and the Electoral College, easing his path. Trump could once again win with less than 47 percent, a victory threshold far below the share of the popular vote the Democratic nominee might need.
The ultimate nightmare scenario for Democrats might look something like this: Trump loses the popular vote by more than 5 million ballots, and the Democratic nominee converts Michigan and Pennsylvania back to blue. But Trump wins re-election by two Electoral votes by barely hanging onto Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Maine's 2nd Congressional District — one of the whitest and least college-educated districts in the country."
AZ is going Biden it looks like. FL, NC are who knows. WI seems good for Biden but it was one of the few states final polls were way wrong about.
That Maine 2nd District may decide things
-
Just now, IDBillzFan said:
That's all he ever does. Same few, stupid comments. Over and over. Put him on ignore. Pure addition by subtraction.
He's saying it over and over again, but I think and this is my opinion.... We know the the policy points going into it. The debate lets us see the person and what they stand for.
If you were undecided going in, can you vote for a person that had such a hard time and eventually couldn't condemn white nationalism?
-
1 minute ago, Big Blitz said:
Guess what.
Millions of others saw this to.
And Team Trump knew that would happen. That plays into his bull in a China shop approach.
Mitt played smart nice and reasonable. Didn't matter did it. And I thought he outclassed Obama at each debate. Didn't matter. No one really liked him.
The moderators will not ever let their guy or gal hang out to dry. And the media will tell you the next day why no matter what their guy won.
I thought Kerry beat Bush pretty good in debate 1. Didn't matter.
They only matter if you have a nation full of undecideds. And we just don't. These debates are officially outdated. Trump uses them for the right reasons.
Agreed. Debates aren't really needed anymore with the level of access.and information the American population have now.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said:
The Mueller investigation already had full access to them.They weren't auditing them and I've said it a couple times, Americans don't need tax returns to search for fraud, they need it to see where income comes from and conflict of interest. We still hear how did the Clinton's get all that money? Well you can look at their return and see their royalty income from speaking and writing. It doesn't show if they fudged deductions or are hiding illegal money from the Clinton Foundation, but we can at least see where the income is from per their word.
-
4 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:
Now there's a stretch. @Backintheday, would you expect to see that level of granularity in these filings?
No. There is not. Americans shouldn't look at tax filings to find a bad I gotcha. They should look at them for things like conflicts of interest.
-
3 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:
Here’s the thing though, most people, nearly all in fact, don’t understand the complexities of tax filings far less complex than the President’s.Heck, most people don’t understand a document as simple and straightforward as a 1099R.
They literally have no ability to comprehend them, and so their understanding becomes whatever a hostile press tells them their understanding is. In this case they buried the fact that his tax filings conclusively reveal no troublesome financial dealings with Russia, but pushed the false notion that the President doesn’t pay taxes.There is no political upside to releasing them, since the media won’t cover them honestly anyhow.
No one has seen the filings so to say conclusively is a stretch. It's not like he would disclose under Other Income - Bribe from Putin. Which is why I said filings won't show anything bad until the SDNY investigation.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:
Because the only people that actually think he's racist are leftists that hate him....he became racist the minute he ran for president.
Its ridiculous and if you think him denouncing them would have changed any minds or comforted people really on edge about racism in America and would suddenly stop these same people leveling these racist charges against him from doing so....lol... ....um....no.
How easy is the question, do you condemn white nationalism? Any person can answer that, Yes I do condemn white nationalism. Why did Trump flub it?
3 minutes ago, Sherlock Holmes said:Well he was getting tagteamed so he had to drop the gloves...
Watch the first.lime 510mins again. Trump came out talking over everyone.
-
1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said:
The President did exactly this with his election filing, as he mentioned.The taxes bit is about “showing” people who are ignorant of real estate and corporate accounting practices that the “President only paid $750 in taxes, while you paid thousands, and he’s a billionaire!!! How outrageous!!! He’s a tax avoiders!!!”
Which is exactly why Democratic talking points uniformly lined up that way.
Trump can be like, loom NYT you're fake news. Here's my taxes. It shuts down that point so fast.
Taxes show a ton of things. I for one would love to see the foreign disclosures. It doesn't show what the left wants them to show tho.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:
The point of the debates isn't to win people over. This is 2020. The media has decided for you who they know wins and has the correct positions and will be coddled accordingly.
What Trump has understood since 2015 is that these debates need to fire up your base going into the election.
Trump massively fired up his base tonight. The only mistake he made was in response to the Racism question he didn't bring up Joe's "You ain't black" and the "Latinos are more creative" comments. But that's ok we all know this. Love how Wallace demanded Trump denounce White Supremacists causing all the raucous in our cities but refuses to press Biden on Antifa.
Biden said he opposes the Green New Deal, doesn't want to change or see Obamacare go either via SCOTUS or Trump....but then says it has to be improved. Then refused to embrace BLM. He couldn't have tried harder to distance himself from Bernie Sanders.....
And that's where he made the biggest miscalculation of the night....he called it HIS Democrat party....and bragged about beating Bernie. Yup. I'm sure the defeated true believers loved hearing that.
No. Biden failed in energizing anyone tonight. And if you're one of the 50 undecided voters in America you were given no reason to vote Democrat.
Trump did.
How is your Trump's biggest mistake wasn't condeming white nationalism? I thought you were there when you brought up the racism question, them you just surprised me!
4 minutes ago, JetsFan20 said:
The whole interaction was cringe worthy. All both candidates had to say was they respect their constitutional Right to protest but disavow any damage to property and violence towards humans.There's good people on both sides.
-
1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said:
So, here’s the thing about the President’s taxes. The whole purpose of presenting them was for folks like Bernie Sanders to get on a pulpit and grumble about “Merbilgerbilgerbil-millionaires brable-and bribilliones!!!” so they could call The President a “tax avoider” on the Sunday circuit, trying to equate that with tax evasion, in order to cast the President as a criminal.
The President has been under audit for a decade. This means that the Obama IRS, which had been weaponised against his political enemies, had been investigating the President for financial crimes and tax fraud for 6 years. This information was within the purview of the Mueller investigation, whom we know was actively searching for criminality in the President's taxes because Michael Cohen was taken down due to tax fraud related to taxi medallions as part of the probe.
After having a 10 year audit conducted by a hostile IRS, and a special council shoved up your ass with the intention of finding even a hint of wrong doing; and both come away with nothing?
There’s nothing there to find.
It's not. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham just complained about a Democrat he's running against for not showing his taxes. It's important to show where people have income from and possible conflicts of interest.
-
2 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:
And Trump actually flubbed his Hunter Biden moment by not waiting for the right opportunity. He stepped all over Joe's fake indignation over Beau, and the entire thing got drowned out by his own inability to present a disciplined message. I doubt anyone unfamiliar with the whole story (and let's fact fact, people who bother to post here are in the 1% tail of political junkies) even comprehended what was going on.
Trump knew he flubbed that so that's why he went back to it randomly later on.
-
3 minutes ago, Sherlock Holmes said:
of Biden... He couldn't stop arguing with Trump when it was his turn to speak... complete disgrace
It was hard to tell whose turn it was to talk with Trump always interrupting so that may have prejudiced your opinion.
-
1
-
-
Just now, dgrochester55 said:
I feel like Biden had nothing to say and was classless in his own way(telling Trump to shut up, calling him names four times), but Trump blew it by being too aggressive. It was the football equivalent of running an exotic scheme with heavy blitzing against a team with Nathan Peterman or Ryan Leaf as quarterback. Sometimes it is better just to dial it down and let the other side get the turnovers.
Don't forget Trump dropped Pocahontas in there as well among some others. It's not like Trump didn't use any of his Twitter name calling.
-
1 minute ago, Joe Miner said:
Fine, which presidents returns for you prefer?
-
2 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:
He’s been under audit since 2010, which was one of the biggest takeaways from the NYT article.Another of the biggest takeaways was that Trump made large tax payments based on estimates which were later to be partially refunded due to overpayment. He elected to let the Treasury keep that money in prepayment of future tax bills due. The $750 due in 2017 reflects his tax bill, not his tax liability, most of which he had already paid in prior years.
He's probably under the constant audit regime you get with LB&I. They audit more on a transactional basis than a return basis. It's common for all the biggest companies in the US.
The 2017 breakdown of Trump's return showed business losses that exceed income per NYT, but that's not taking into count passive/no passive where I'd think a lot of Trump income is passive.
-
1
-
-
Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
Oh, ok..well thanks for the insight. What was the part about the football teams, the Patriots getting penalized? Is Wallace a Pats fan? If so, he’s dead to me.
Probably, he seems like a Pat's fan.
-
1
-
-
Just now, The Frankish Reich said:
So I'm interested in your opinion here. Why would the Trump Org pay a consulting fee to Ivanka?
It happens all of the time. The bigger thing is if Ivanka picked it up as income, which I assume she did. So it's getting taxed one way or another. Based on the NYT it's probably being taxed at a higher tax rate as well.
On the tax side, I think the Trump Foundation is more interesting with the self-dealing and issues they already had with the Tebow helmet and picture.
Nothing important will come from the Trump tax returns until the SDNY investigation is done except good quotes like the teachers paid more taxes than you.
-
1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:
Did you see my posts as a call for no moderator?
No, I saw it as you not understanding what a moderator does.
-
1
-
Presidential Debates 2020
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
It's the plan of the person who is leading the polls currently. No one cares who made the plan. It's the plan the former Vice President is running on.