chewy would vote for a monkey wearing a red rosette.

No no he’s explained many times that he believes constant flip flopping is the only way for politics to work so he always votes for which ever party is not in power.

Unless it is the Democrats. 😉

Many people vote for the party not the candidate, people vote tactically against a candidate/party

Yeah of course.

And obviously not everyone can agree with everything a candidate stands for.

But even as a tactical vote I wouldn’t vote for someone whose views I found repugnant.
But Chewkw seems to be suggesting that doesn’t matter, which is what I am querying.

GrahamS – Member
Jesus just watch the interview – he is Moore’s friend. He wrote articles in support of him.

I don’t want to read his article or anyone unless I want to. Is that allowed? Is there something new about the world? The people? 😀

That’s exactly why I was asking you chewkw.

Is my opinion important?

Another word I see what I want to see and think what I want to think. Guess again. 😀

Are you saying that keeping the Democrats out is so important to you that you would vote for someone whose views you find repugnant?

The objective is to keep Democrats out regardless while the rest can be dealt with later. Democrats must be kept out at all cost.

Or are you just saying you support those views?

That depends on how twisted others consider reality. They are who they are because that’s their identity and their belief. If people don’t agree then don’t vote for that candidate. How hard can that be? 😆

Oh ya, whether I support or reject that candidate is irrelevant. 😆

GrahamS – Member
For the record, the exit polls showed 9% of the Republican voters polled didn’t vote for Moore:

Your point? Does that mean Republican is not the bogeyman everyone makes them out to be? 😛

aracer – Member
Do keep up chaps, chewy would vote for a monkey wearing a red rosette.

That is gazillion times better than being told how to think. Think for yourself rather than being told how to think. 😆

But even as a tactical vote I wouldn’t vote for someone whose views I found repugnant.

Whereas taking us into an illegal war in iraq……

Oh look, a squirrel

GrahamS – Member
No no he’s explained many times that he believes constant flip flopping is the only way for politics to work so he always votes for which ever party is not in power.

Unless it is the Democrats.

Yes, that’s true in many cases.
Fortunately this is the time to keep Democrats out. They need to wait for their flip flopping turn for many terms. Not their time. World has changed. They messed up.

But even as a tactical vote I wouldn’t vote for someone whose views I found repugnant.
But Chewkw seems to be suggesting that doesn’t matter, which is what I am querying.

You keep making the assumption that the person is guilty based on all the allegations.

You are using that allegations as truth to forward your views?

Unless you can proof that the “allegations” are true, you have just “judged” someone by hearsay. Therefore, in your view “allegations” can now be considered as truth. Where is the line regarding allegations? 😯

Is my opinion important?

We’re having a discussion. I kinda think the opinion of the people I’m having a discussion with is pretty much the point of a discussion.

Sorry you value yours so poorly.

Whereas taking us into an illegal war in iraq……

Did he campaign on “Vote for me and I’ll take us into an illegal war in Iraq”?

I must have missed that particular Party Political Broadcast. 😀

You keep making the assumption that the person is guilty based on all the allegations.

Cite

I have repeatedly said ignoring the allegations, his stated views are repugnant to me.

But Chewkw seems to be suggesting that doesn’t matter, which is what I am querying

so you are querying his reasoning

Can I bet one whole pound his reason is equally unclear – by which i mean completely incomprehensible.

GrahamS – Member
We’re having a discussion. I kinda think the opinion of the people I’m having a discussion with is pretty much the point of a discussion.

Does opinion matter in discussion? Do people really want to understand others or are they merely there to “educate” others? I see people as they are with their own opinions and their identities. I prefer them exactly as they are.

Sorry you value yours so poorly.

Interesting to see the usage of the term “value”. Is there a “dominant” value? Is value the cause world problems? Let’s give it a thought. 😀

GrahamS – Member

You keep making the assumption that the person is guilty based on all the allegations.

Cite [/quote] 😯

Actually he has been relatively clear Junky. I’ll quote him as I know you have him blocked.

The objective is to keep Democrats out regardless while the rest can be dealt with later. Democrats must be kept out at all cost.

Which to be fair seems to be in keeping with the exit polls where 8% of those polled who voted for Moore did so despite thinking it was definitely or probably true that he was a child molester.

Are those exit polls reliable?

GrahamS – Member

Actually he has been relative clear Junky. I’ll quote him as I know you have him blocked.

Opps quickly delete my response to …

I thought everyone was having a deep conversation with me. 😆

Are those exit polls reliable?

They reflect the stated views of the 2,387 randomly selected voters who were interviewed.

Not sure we can say much more than that. That’s why I am always careful to say “of those polled”.

Though unless people were lying (and there appears no obvious reason to lie in a way which make you appear worse than you are) then we know that some people voted for Moore despite believing the allegations.

In the meantime, it appears that the Orange Buffoon and his fellow-travellers are trying to edit some words…

Banned

Next stop books, perhaps. Nice big bonfires…

Tells you everything you need to know, they have to hide the truth and deny it exists as their policy and ideology is based on hate, anger and greed. Like the 1 page budget summary and much more.

Has the Chekbot got a performance review coming up ?
He seems to have sprung into action after a period of inactivity.
I just hope his review is based upon number of words rather than content as his last few posts have been incoherent, rambling and painful to read (even by his standards)

I’m not sure you can defend Trump with coherent structured arguments.

akira
I’m not sure you can defend Trump

EFA.

Nice to see that the President’s use of ‘all the best words’ is trickling down into the world of science.

CDC told to stop using the term ‘evidence based’ in its reports

So, you’re not actually following the thread, then… 😐

So, you’re not actually following the thread, then…

Oh, missed that, must’ve skipped some Chewk-contributions and your post was collateral damage.

Well, I AM just a maggot… 😉

It’s better then being a bawbag!

One up from a zombie maggot

Boingboing’s take on the CDC depacle:
https://boingboing.net/2017/12/16/party-over-pathogens.html
The world is truly going to Sheol in a handcart…
😐

In a highly ironic twist, Trump’s team are squawking about the handover of a trove of potentially dodgy emails from the transition.

This is a fairly concise sum-up of how their former Halliburton/Giuliani stooge lawyer carelessly got ill and died rather than doing his job of keeping Mueller away from them.

Settle in, politikids.

You're going to enjoy this…

I've read the full letter Trump transition team attorneys sent to legislators re: Mueller obtaining their emails.

It has a delicious reveal.

1/https://t.co/gHZPrX3CVn

— The Hoarse Whisperer (@HoarseWisperer) December 17, 2017

IS that definitely true though it seems to be a claim

It would be deightful if it was true though

This didn’t go well:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-42360539/matthew-petersen-trump-s-nominee-for-judge-flubs-law-test

jeez, that was painful…..

that was a proper kicking

Have you ever been a lawyer – erm not really

DO you know the law ….erm not really

No one needs judges on a steep learning curve about the law !!

TBH US judges are very different from hours. Just look at Disgraced Former Chief Justice Roy Moore.

Are they any good at taking minutes?

I did smile at that, but only for a second

Is that even relevant? The purpose of voting for Republican Repugnicants is simply to keep Democrats out,

There, FTFY.

Ah well. Thyme files.

Psst! Mueller out on 22nd. Pass it along!

Psst! Mueller out on 22nd. Pass it along!

Mueller already has 50k+ emails that the Trump team thought they had withheld. He’s interviewed the whole team while already knowing the answers and by the time Trump can legally fire him he could have most of his team/family arrested. This coming weeks going to be interesting!

It’s possible they may undercut him a little by taking out Rosenstein, who appointed him in the first place.

Trump has basically screwed himself the moment he impulsively fired Comey, who was already politically compromised and could be discredited when it suited, which, coupled with Sessions getting himself recused and Rosenstein not being the patsy he was hoping, led to a far more vigorous investigation which can only be derailed at massive political cost.

That, and possibly his associates being arrogant and dumb enough to commit incriminating emails to a .gov server. 😀

That, and possibly his associates being arrogant and dumb enough to commit incriminating emails to a .gov server

A combination of arrogant, stupid and terrible legal advice.
I think the bannonites really did believe his alt-right fantasies of how unnecessary and incompetent civil servants are, maybe they should watch yes minister to find out who the smartest guys in the room are.