General Presidential Campaign: Trump vs Hillary

Joe Fan,

I have been avoiding most of your posts since I returned from my hiatus. I love to have reasonable debates with people I disagree with, and I do it all the time. But I don’t like to debate with people who rely on facts that aren’t, well, facts, and who draw conclusions that are utterly ridiculous. Because almost everything you post falls into that category, I no longer read them.

Unfortunately, I made the mistake of reading your post complaining that nobody was taking you on about the Podesta / Kadzik stuff. I will engage ever so briefly with you on this point, but not for the point of engaging. Rather, it is for the point of explaining to you (and everyone else) why I no longer bother engaging with you. In short, your posts about the Kadzik emails are misleading at best, and outright lies at worst. Just a few quick points before I got back to ignoring you:
  1. You say that Podesta and Kadzik had a very close relationship, and that they are "BFFs”. Yes, they went to law school together and are friends to some degree, but they don’t seem to see much of each other. The Wikileaks emails sound like they are casual friends who wanted to catch up after not seeing each other for an extended time. I have not seen anything suggesting a close friendship.
  2. You contend that Kadzik is an unqualified “political hack” who was appointed to a senior DOJ position only because he is Podesta’s friend. Kadzik was a partner in a major law firm and a good lawyer with a proven track record in handling governmental affairs matters. In particular, Kadzik did a good job as Podesta’s attorney in a high-profile governmental case. Doesn't this make Kadzik at least somewhat qualified for a DOJ job?
  3. Regardless, you ignore the fact that all senior appointments to government jobs are political. Everyone who worked in senior positions in the DOJ in my lifetime (that’s Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, and Nixon, btw) has been a political appointment, and they all have owed their job to the president. Most (all??) had prior connections to either the president or someone close to the president. Thus, it is unsurprising that someone with connections to a key advisor to the Secretary of State was appointed to a senior DOJ position. If Trump becomes president, every senior position in the DOJ will be filled by someone loyal to Trump and/or connected to Trump’s machine. That is just the way it is. I don’t like it, and I would love to see it change -- but (a) it will never change, and (b) it isn’t something that paints Clinton or Obama as uniquely or massively corrupt.
  4. You and the “sources” you cite make a big point of the “fact” that Kadzik has a conflict of interest in his role as leader of the DOJ’s investigation into the Clinton/Podesta issues. Yes, he worked for the DOJ. However, I have not seen anything credible suggesting that he played any role, much less a major one, in the DOJ investigation into Clinton and Podesta. The fact that you and the blogosphere say it over and over and over doesn’t make it true.
  5. Yes, it was improper for Kadzik to communicate with the Clinton campaign about DOJ business. He clearly knew it was improper because he used his personal email. I have been pointing that fact out to all of my friends who think Hillary is an angel who can do no wrong. However, the information Kadzik “disclosed” was neither critically important nor confidential. In fact, the information was already in the public domain and it seems very likely that Podesta and Clinton already knew about it. All that Kadzik seems to have done was give Podesta a “head’s up” to make sure he knew about this public information. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying Kadzik was right to send the emails. He wasn’t. I just don’t think this is the stuff of a massive criminal conspiracy.
  6. All of the stuff about the FBI being on the verge of indicting this person or that person is interesting, but it’s all rumor and inference. Until I see something credible, I’m not going to give this stuff any credence.
I have many more points to make, but neither the time nor an inclination to continue making them. Bottom line -- I don’t trust anything you say, so I don’t plan to continue debating fantasy with you.
 
Joe Fan said:
Ted Cruz has hit the campaign trail for Trump
At joint events today with Pence in Iowa and Michigan.....
Click to expand...

With this -- it means former rivals Cruz, Walker, Rubio, Carson, Christie, Rand Paul, Perry, Huckabee, Santorum and Jindal have all been out there actively supporting Trump
 
NJlonghorn said:
Joe Fan,

I have been avoiding most of your posts since I returned from my hiatus. I love to have reasonable debates with people I disagree with, and I do it all the time. But I don’t like to debate with people who rely on facts that aren’t, well, facts, and who draw conclusions that are utterly ridiculous. Because almost everything you post falls into that category, I no longer read them.

Unfortunately, I made the mistake of reading your post complaining that nobody was taking you on about the Podesta / Kadzik stuff. I will engage ever so briefly with you on this point, but not for the point of engaging. Rather, it is for the point of explaining to you (and everyone else) why I no longer bother engaging with you. In short, your posts about the Kadzik emails are misleading at best, and outright lies at worst. Just a few quick points before I got back to ignoring you:
  1. You say that Podesta and Kadzik had a very close relationship, and that they are "BFFs”. Yes, they went to law school together and are friends to some degree, but they don’t seem to see much of each other. The Wikileaks emails sound like they are casual friends who wanted to catch up after not seeing each other for an extended time. I have not seen anything suggesting a close friendship.
  2. You contend that Kadzik is an unqualified “political hack” who was appointed to a senior DOJ position only because he is Podesta’s friend. Kadzik was a partner in a major law firm and a good lawyer with a proven track record in handling governmental affairs matters. In particular, Kadzik did a good job as Podesta’s attorney in a high-profile governmental case. Doesn't this make Kadzik at least somewhat qualified for a DOJ job?
  3. Regardless, you ignore the fact that all senior appointments to government jobs are political. Everyone who worked in senior positions in the DOJ in my lifetime (that’s Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, and Nixon, btw) has been a political appointment, and they all have owed their job to the president. Most (all??) had prior connections to either the president or someone close to the president. Thus, it is unsurprising that someone with connections to a key advisor to the Secretary of State was appointed to a senior DOJ position. If Trump becomes president, every senior position in the DOJ will be filled by someone loyal to Trump and/or connected to Trump’s machine. That is just the way it is. I don’t like it, and I would love to see it change -- but (a) it will never change, and (b) it isn’t something that paints Clinton or Obama as uniquely or massively corrupt.
  4. You and the “sources” you cite make a big point of the “fact” that Kadzik has a conflict of interest in his role as leader of the DOJ’s investigation into the Clinton/Podesta issues. Yes, he worked for the DOJ. However, I have not seen anything credible suggesting that he played any role, much less a major one, in the DOJ investigation into Clinton and Podesta. The fact that you and the blogosphere say it over and over and over doesn’t make it true.
  5. Yes, it was improper for Kadzik to communicate with the Clinton campaign about DOJ business. He clearly knew it was improper because he used his personal email. I have been pointing that fact out to all of my friends who think Hillary is an angel who can do no wrong. However, the information Kadzik “disclosed” was neither critically important nor confidential. In fact, the information was already in the public domain and it seems very likely that Podesta and Clinton already knew about it. All that Kadzik seems to have done was give Podesta a “head’s up” to make sure he knew about this public information. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying Kadzik was right to send the emails. He wasn’t. I just don’t think this is the stuff of a massive criminal conspiracy.
  6. All of the stuff about the FBI being on the verge of indicting this person or that person is interesting, but it’s all rumor and inference. Until I see something credible, I’m not going to give this stuff any credence.
I have many more points to make, but neither the time nor an inclination to continue making them. Bottom line -- I don’t trust anything you say, so I don’t plan to continue debating fantasy with you.
Click to expand...

If you have issues with him why don't you put him on ignore?
 
I've been updating my electoral map each day this week using the most recent polling results after the FBI news broke.

In states where no post-FBI polls were released I went with the latest ones.

The last few days it's been holding steady at 273-265 Clinton. To get there the toss-ups were allocated as such...

Clinton: PA, CO, NH, VA, ME CD2
Trump: OH, FL, NC, NV, IA, AZ

Of course FL and NC are the elephants in the room as the latest polls are split.

For Trump to win I assumed he'd have to hold the states above plus flip PA or CO. I wasn't even considering NH since the last poll (pre FBI) before today was HRC +7.

With NH now favoring Trump in both new polls since FBI news, the result I felt was far-fetched is now exactly what my model says...

269-269 TIE
 
Last edited:
NJlonghorn said:
Joe Fan,
I have been avoiding most of your posts since I returned from my hiatus. I love to have reasonable debates with people I disagree with, and I do it all the time. ......
Click to expand...

I have not found this to be true
The pages of this thread demonstrate as much
Hillary supporters, leftists, liberals, socialists, progressives and so on are all hiding from this information
They do not want to know
They prefer not to know the truth
If they come here, they know they will see it, so they just dont come here anymore.
Just like they refuse to read the Wikileaks. Many even pretend Wikileaks does not exist. Or maybe they assume, for the sake of their own convenience, they are fake.
These people prefer ignorance and darkness

From my perspective, you guys are the characters of the film "Idiocracy" come to life. The willfully ignorant, dependent upon the Nanny State. You do not want to know how the sausage is made, you just want to be taken care of. As long as that happens, you are willing to accept any level of malfeasance from your elected officials and their people. You dont care how it happens or who has to suffer to get it or how it gets paid for, you only care about that one thing.

When I was young, it was Republicans who were seen as selfish. The main idea was simple enough -- the Rs wanted lower taxes. They wanted to keep what they earned or as much as possible. This was portrayed as being greedy.

But now the script has flipped.

Now it is the leftists who are the greedy ones. They want what they want, and are going to throw a fit if they dont get it. As this election season has exposed for all willing to look, the Left is corrupt. In 2016 America, it is the Republican voters who care most about the country itself and are willing to make personal sacrifice to see to its success. It is the left who has been shown to be selfish, greedy narcissists.
 
I think the thing that these emails show more than anything is that Hillary has no strongly held values. Her values are whatever is going to get her the most support at the moment.

As Bernie gained more and more momentum, she chased him, offering whatever he did, even though, as the "basement tapes" showed, she knew it was a Leftist pipe dream.

If Obama was a gun grabber, she was going to position herself as a moderate on gun control. Eight years later, she's a gun grabber.

She was for controlling the borders, but now she's an open borders globalist, who wants to increase muslim immigration.

She's a bobble head doll bouncing in whatever direction will get her into the WH.
 
Seattle Husker said:
When lies and/or misinformation is spread as truth shouldn't it be pointed out? To ignore it allows the conspiracy theory to be perceived as "facts".
Click to expand...

When did you two become the truth police? From what I've seen you two are so damn uninformed/wrong on most matters that even if you're right I wouldn't take your opinions that seriously.
 
Brad Austin said:
I've been updating my electoral map each day this week using the most recent polling results after the FBI news broke.......
Click to expand...


I play around with the electoral map all the time, since the tool is so user friend
But it really seems to bother some people here when that is done
Why?
It seems to be that because you have to make certain assumptions
Those assumptions are what drive some people here to lunacy
But,as you know, you cant complete to map without the assumptions
If someone wants to make his own map & assumptions, he can
But they dont do that
Instead, they just whine about the assumptions I made
I just dont get it
 
Garmel said:
If you have issues with him why don't you put him on ignore?
Click to expand...


Thanks but dont worry about it
They always want to make it personal - attack on the personal level
It's a microcosm of the Hillary 2016 Campaign
Ignore the message, attack the messenger
Doesnt bother me
I always take it as a sign I have won the argument on the merits
 
Joe Fan said:
With this -- it means former rivals Cruz, Walker, Rubio, Carson, Christie, Rand Paul, Perry, Huckabee, Santorum and Jindal have all been out there actively supporting Trump
Click to expand...

This showing by so many different folks disproves the idea that the R-party has been shattered by Trump.

That handful of Rs who have not come around on Trump (Kasich, Jeb Bush, Graham, Pataki) are now unpopular with the base.
 
More Podesta -- here on Bernie
These people are stone cold killers -- "I agree.... Where should we stick the knife in?
And admitting their primary positions are bull
Click once to enlarge


CwWjUMVWEAAjHA6.jpg
 
Heck, I like reading all you guys and although SH sometimes makes me grit my teeth I am in agreement to what has been oft said on here, "it is a very intertaining election". But scary as ****.
 
Clean said:
I think the thing that these emails show more than anything is that Hillary has no strongly held values. Her values are whatever is going to get her the most support at the moment.

As Bernie gained more and more momentum, she chased him, offering whatever he did, even though, as the "basement tapes" showed, she knew it was a Leftist pipe dream.

If Obama was a gun grabber, she was going to position herself as a moderate on gun control. Eight years later, she's a gun grabber.

She was for controlling the borders, but now she's an open borders globalist, who wants to increase muslim immigration.

She's a bobble head doll bouncing in whatever direction will get her into the WH.
Click to expand...

There is nothing here I disagree with.
 
Joe Fan said:
Vizsla
And no, they are not diggers - and they dont range
They were the palace dogs of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and expect everyone to know and recognize that history
Click to expand...
Yes, Mao's running dogs of capitalism/ imperialism
 
NJlonghorn said:
Joe Fan,

I have been avoiding most of your posts since I returned from my hiatus. I love to have reasonable debates with people I disagree with, and I do it all the time. But I don’t like to debate with people who rely on facts that aren’t, well, facts, and who draw conclusions that are utterly ridiculous. Because almost everything you post falls into that category, I no longer read them.

Unfortunately, I made the mistake of reading your post complaining that nobody was taking you on about the Podesta / Kadzik stuff. I will engage ever so briefly with you on this point, but not for the point of engaging. Rather, it is for the point of explaining to you (and everyone else) why I no longer bother engaging with you. In short, your posts about the Kadzik emails are misleading at best, and outright lies at worst. Just a few quick points before I got back to ignoring you:
  1. You say that Podesta and Kadzik had a very close relationship, and that they are "BFFs”. Yes, they went to law school together and are friends to some degree, but they don’t seem to see much of each other. The Wikileaks emails sound like they are casual friends who wanted to catch up after not seeing each other for an extended time. I have not seen anything suggesting a close friendship.
  2. You contend that Kadzik is an unqualified “political hack” who was appointed to a senior DOJ position only because he is Podesta’s friend. Kadzik was a partner in a major law firm and a good lawyer with a proven track record in handling governmental affairs matters. In particular, Kadzik did a good job as Podesta’s attorney in a high-profile governmental case. Doesn't this make Kadzik at least somewhat qualified for a DOJ job?
  3. Regardless, you ignore the fact that all senior appointments to government jobs are political. Everyone who worked in senior positions in the DOJ in my lifetime (that’s Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, and Nixon, btw) has been a political appointment, and they all have owed their job to the president. Most (all??) had prior connections to either the president or someone close to the president. Thus, it is unsurprising that someone with connections to a key advisor to the Secretary of State was appointed to a senior DOJ position. If Trump becomes president, every senior position in the DOJ will be filled by someone loyal to Trump and/or connected to Trump’s machine. That is just the way it is. I don’t like it, and I would love to see it change -- but (a) it will never change, and (b) it isn’t something that paints Clinton or Obama as uniquely or massively corrupt.
  4. You and the “sources” you cite make a big point of the “fact” that Kadzik has a conflict of interest in his role as leader of the DOJ’s investigation into the Clinton/Podesta issues. Yes, he worked for the DOJ. However, I have not seen anything credible suggesting that he played any role, much less a major one, in the DOJ investigation into Clinton and Podesta. The fact that you and the blogosphere say it over and over and over doesn’t make it true.
  5. Yes, it was improper for Kadzik to communicate with the Clinton campaign about DOJ business. He clearly knew it was improper because he used his personal email. I have been pointing that fact out to all of my friends who think Hillary is an angel who can do no wrong. However, the information Kadzik “disclosed” was neither critically important nor confidential. In fact, the information was already in the public domain and it seems very likely that Podesta and Clinton already knew about it. All that Kadzik seems to have done was give Podesta a “head’s up” to make sure he knew about this public information. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying Kadzik was right to send the emails. He wasn’t. I just don’t think this is the stuff of a massive criminal conspiracy.
  6. All of the stuff about the FBI being on the verge of indicting this person or that person is interesting, but it’s all rumor and inference. Until I see something credible, I’m not going to give this stuff any credence.
I have many more points to make, but neither the time nor an inclination to continue making them. Bottom line -- I don’t trust anything you say, so I don’t plan to continue debating fantasy with you.
Click to expand...
Do you believe Kadzick wrote an email from a personal account to inform him of the investigation or do you believe the wiki leaks is fabricated? I honestly know very little about Kadzick and you apparently know a lot about him. Just curious, would it be appropriate for him to communicate with Clinton operatives and have dinner with them?
 
theiioftx said:
Do you believe Kadzick wrote an email from a personal account to inform him of the investigation or do you believe the wiki leaks is fabricated? I honestly know very little about Kadzick and you apparently know a lot about him. Just curious, would it be appropriate for him to communicate with Clinton operatives and have dinner with them?
Click to expand...
One defense I read was that the info in the email was public at the time.
 
NJlonghorn said:
But I don’t like to debate with people who rely on facts that aren’t, well, facts, and who draw conclusions that are utterly ridiculous. Because almost everything you post falls into that category, I no longer read them.
Click to expand...

WOW! CNN could use you as their spin expert.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top