Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 68 (9048 total)
284 online now:
nwr (1 member, 283 visitors)
Newest Member: Wes johnson
Upcoming Birthdays: Astrophile
Post Volume: Total: 887,582 Year: 5,228/14,102 Month: 149/677 Week: 8/26 Day: 8/2 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Biden Presidency
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(2)
Message 18 of 228 (884009)
01-21-2021 1:18 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by LamarkNewAge
01-21-2021 1:08 AM


Re: Biden's supporters better understand that an issue agenda is the be all and end all
I think we all get that you want a Trump dictatorship. That’s why disqualifying him from holding office in the future is important.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-21-2021 1:08 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 21 of 228 (884015)
01-21-2021 1:58 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by LamarkNewAge
01-21-2021 1:36 AM


Re: Biden's supporters better understand that an issue agenda is the be all and end all
Yawn. Just because Trump is careful to avoid explicitly calling for an attack doesn’t mean that he didn’t want it. He told them to be strong, that they could win. Futilely marching around the Capitol while Trump’s defeat was made final hardly qualifies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-21-2021 1:36 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-21-2021 2:17 AM PaulK has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 26 of 228 (884021)
01-21-2021 2:47 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by LamarkNewAge
01-21-2021 2:17 AM


Re: Biden's supporters better understand that an issue agenda is the be all and end all
quote:
So Trump possibly wanted an attack?

So, instead of answering the question you try and misrepresent the situation.

I guess the proves you have no honest defence.

Trump told them to attack, he just didn’t say so explicitlyl. There was no other way to win or to exert their strength that would affect the outcome. And you know that, that’s why you evade the point.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-21-2021 2:17 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-21-2021 2:54 AM PaulK has responded
 Message 40 by Percy, posted 01-21-2021 12:07 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 29 of 228 (884025)
01-21-2021 3:10 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by LamarkNewAge
01-21-2021 2:54 AM


Re: Biden's supporters better understand that an issue agenda is the be all and end all
In other words you have no honest answer.

Hardly a surprise.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-21-2021 2:54 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-21-2021 3:12 AM PaulK has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 33 of 228 (884029)
01-21-2021 3:34 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by LamarkNewAge
01-21-2021 3:12 AM


Re: Biden's supporters better understand that an issue agenda is the be all and end all
Oh look more dishonest evasion. What a surprise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by LamarkNewAge, posted 01-21-2021 3:12 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 36 of 228 (884035)
01-21-2021 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Phat
01-21-2021 8:47 AM


Re: Biden's supporters better understand that an issue agenda is the be all and end all
I think carrying on with the lies about fraud and insisting that they could still win - even after exhausting every legal and pseudo-legal and completely-made-up-but-we-pretend-it’s-legal avenue was more important. There was no way to win other than overthrowing the government.

And when you tell a bunch of violent white supremacist thugs that they can win if they are strong - and when they know that violence is the only way to win - what else can you expect?

Here is a transcript of the speech.

You should be aware that Pence had already (correctly) insisted that the Constitution didn’t allow him to send votes back. Even though Trump insisted otherwise in the speech. That McConnell had called for the votes to be accepted before the march. That the House could and would reject any objections. And - importantly - Trump did NOT go with the marchers.

While Trump called for peaceful protests - which they all knew - wouldn’t work - he also went and on about the alleged fraud. He fed the myth that Pence was a traitor, the myth that the Supreme Court was working against him.

We fight like Hell and if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.

So are the violent white supremacists going to waste time marching around outside - and being ignored by the Senators and Representatives - or are they going to “fight like hell”? Maybe if Trump was there they might have stayed more or less peaceful. But he wasn’t. He said he would be, but he left them to their own devices. Nobody should be surprised at the consequences.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Phat, posted 01-21-2021 8:47 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 67 of 228 (884254)
02-02-2021 2:00 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by AnswersInGenitals
02-02-2021 12:37 AM


Re: Hey buddy, can you spare a dollar?
Some Republicans seem to actively want to spread the disease. It’s insane, but that is where US politics is today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 02-02-2021 12:37 AM AnswersInGenitals has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by jar, posted 02-02-2021 7:07 AM PaulK has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 147 of 228 (888066)
09-01-2021 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by Phat
09-01-2021 3:43 PM


Re: Afhghanistan and Global Perspective
You do realise that’s nuts? No taxes mean no military - except for private militaries. No police. No Medicare or Medicaid. No Social Security. Just a different flavour of the Right.

It’s Liberty for the rich and the corporations (Jeffrey Epstein would be just fine). Oppression for people like you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Phat, posted 09-01-2021 3:43 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 160 of 228 (888630)
09-25-2021 2:29 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by Tanypteryx
09-24-2021 1:25 PM


Re: Arizona Election Audit Shows Biden Won by EVEN MORE VOTES
Rob Graham livetweets the official release of the report.

Earlier he tweeted on the leaked report (linked early in the thread).

TLDR: all the “evidence” of fraud isn’t. The auditors (hired for partisan views, not experience) don’t really understand how the system operates.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Tanypteryx, posted 09-24-2021 1:25 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 170 of 228 (888642)
09-25-2021 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by Percy
09-25-2021 12:28 PM


Re: Arizona Election Audit Shows Biden Won by EVEN MORE VOTES
There’s an official answer from Maricopa County, starting here:

In short, military and overseas voters are allowed to vote in Federal elections, the address on their ballot would be their last US address. Some people move house around the time of the vote. In addition college students and old folks heading south for the winter will be elsewhere.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Percy, posted 09-25-2021 12:28 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by dwise1, posted 09-25-2021 2:04 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 206 of 228 (888809)
10-07-2021 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by marc9000
10-07-2021 11:54 AM


Hunter Biden’s travels.
quote:
According to Secret Service records, the number of trips Hunter took with dad during his vice presidency was 411.

‘Breaking the News’ Reveals: Secret Service Records Show Hunter Biden Took at Least 23 flights Through Joint Base Andrews, Home of Air Force One and Two - Judicial Watch


It says that the Secret Service reported a total of 411 trips. It does not say how many were with his father at all. The majority of them were domestic trips, not to foreign countries (note that the list includes trips within foreign countries, too) and they certainly weren’t all flights. The article says that there were 23 flights from Joint Base Andrews, but it doesn’t mention that only 2 were to foreign countries.

It also says that he visited 29 countries. As Vice President Joe Biden visited 57 (National Geographic).

So it’s really not looking like Hunter Biden “flew on air force 2 with his dad hundreds of times to foreign countries” (Message 161). The list doesn’t even include hundreds of flights to foreign countries (more like 60, including trips from one foreign country to another, and assuming all such trips were flights). And we can certainly rule out 400 trips on Air Force 2.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by marc9000, posted 10-07-2021 11:54 AM marc9000 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by Percy, posted 10-07-2021 4:44 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(2)
Message 213 of 228 (888817)
10-08-2021 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by marc9000
10-08-2021 10:31 AM


Re: Gang gallop ?
Let us consider this alleged “gallop”

First, my invention was solely to examine your source, introducing no additional claims or arguments beyond that. That is hardly comparable to a Gish Gallop which is a barrage of assertions without investigating the evidence. The “gallop” seems to be more on your part.

Second, you asserted that

I can't provide enough proof and resources to make even one liberal concede a point, since that's something liberals don't do anyway
(Message 181)

My intervention did not make it any harder for you to muster actual proof. So unless you mean that you can’t get away with falsely claiming to have evidence this is hardly relevant.

Also about not conceding points…

You raised the assertion that

during his dad's 8 year vice presidency, he flew on air force 2 with his dad hundreds of times to foreign countrie
(Message 161)

And at that time you only had two people responding to you. Not much of a gang.

Even after it was pointed out that it was highly implausible you carried on with it, instead of dropping it to focus on stronger points.

In Message 171 you tried to support the claim with a video from Fox News claiming “hundreds of flights”

In Message 190 you tried to support your claim with this absurd argument:

U.S. vice presidents have more access to leisure time and air travel than most U.S. dads have to leisure time and car travel. 8 years is 2920 days. It's common for U.S. children to ride with their dads in cars hundreds of times over a period of 8 years.

Now I don’t doubt that children - as children - get driven on many short trips. However adult children do not, and short trips are hardly comparable to even a domestic flight. Unless you think that Joe Biden regularly too Hunter to church- for instance - on AirForce 2 it really doesn’t make a lick of sense.
Again, if the claim is unimportant and you feel overwhelmed it would make far more sense to drop it than to waste time with obvious nonsense.

To pile absurdity on absurdity in Message 193 you accused Pressi of not having read it, as if that would make the argument any less absurd.

In Message 203 - the message I replied to - you introduced the assertion that Judicial Watch supported the claim. In reality the article referred only to 411 trips - without specifying that they were either air trips or saying Joe Biden was present. (Indeed the only number for air trips it gave was 23).

In Message 205 you went on and claimed that the Fox video got the information on the number fo flights from Judicial Watch. When in fact the information on Judicial Watch contradicted it.

Again it seems a poor use of time to make two posts trying to back up a supposedly minor point - without even determining that the supposed evidence actually supported the point. It seems a rather clear example of the inability to drop even a hopelsssly implausible point.

And none of this is the fault of the “gang”. Your bad choices are all on you. You didn’t have to make the claim in the first place. You didn’t have to keep on trying and failing to support it. You didn’t have to grossly misrepresent Judicial Watch. And you did all those things before my post went through.

The problem isn’t the “gang”. The problem is you. Maybe you should try to fix it instead of blaming other people for your faults. That’s what it means to take personal responsibility.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by marc9000, posted 10-08-2021 10:31 AM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by marc9000, posted 10-08-2021 8:13 PM PaulK has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17007
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(3)
Message 219 of 228 (888831)
10-09-2021 1:59 AM
Reply to: Message 215 by marc9000
10-08-2021 8:13 PM


Re: Gang gallop ?
quote:
And your only reason for doing that was because you thought Percy might not be capable of doing it, or wouldn't think of doing it. Then when he said "I was gonna say that!!" you and him can then have a slap-on-the-back fest. Fun for you I guess, but doesn't appeal to me much personally.

My reason for doing it is that I checked your “evidence” and found it to contradict your assertions. Your invention has no basis in fact. Indeed the check is quite easy - you could have done it. And certainly Percy could.

quote:
I don't see how a "barrage of assertions" is a problem for a barrage of posters, a barrage of anger etc. But you're probably right, not comparable. (but the reverse of your opinion of which is more severe)

It is interesting that you see a victory for falsehood as the preferable state. But entirely consistent with your behaviour.

quote:
One of my several opponents (let's see....it was Percy) made a big deal of the number of trips Hunter took. From Message 183 -what I said there, to a message he didn't respond to.

Yet you didn’t follow up by dropping the claim. Indeed the real point was that you were insufficiently sceptical of an implausible claim. A point you have gone on to prove.

quote:
What evidence did I falsely claim to have?

The Judicial Watch report of course.

quote:
Do you, like the others, believe that the number of trips and their destination were a big part of my argument?

Nobody seems to think that, although you’ve certainly given it more attention than you say it deserves.

quote:
You, like all of them, missed my earlier paragraph that I re-quoted above? You, like the others, believe that I KNEW that not all of those 411 trips were with his father, that I thought if they were within the U.S. or without his father that they were irrelevant?

Apparently you missed the place in my post where I point out that you repeatedly returned to the claim. And indeed it is hardly likely that all of those trips are relevant at all. And if you knew that the 411 trips were mostly within the US and if you knew that there was no information on whether his father was with him or not would you really have written Message 203 or Message 205 ?

quote:
You made good points, I made a small mistake by saying they were all on Air Force 2, but it would have been a much bigger mistake if trips within the U.S., or trips without his father, automatically are always without suspicion, but they're not.

The idea that all trips should automatically be considered “suspicious” is far worse. And that’s what you’re pushing.

quote:
Does the fact that they weren't all trips with his father make you believe, like the rest of gang, that it's now clear that the mainstream media is entirely balanced in how they treat all presidential children? Here's a hint, much / most of the attacks against Trump's children were for when they were not with him, and were due to their activities that were confined within the U.S. border.

I think that Trump’s open nepotism goes far beyond anything that has been shown for Biden - and that is a relevant factor. Hunter Biden has not been given a cabinet position, for instance. And that is a relevant factor.

quote:
Two people responding yes, but how many more reading, and gathering up rage for future posts? Hard to keep count of such things when dealing with gang gallop.

And yet another ridiculous attempt to blame others. You weren’t “dealing with a gang gallop”. And you don’t have to deal with readers who aren’t responding. If you’re worried about “rage” maybe you could ease up on the nastiness, the dishonesty and the false accusations.

quote:
It was the strongest point my opponents were making!

If that was true it only makes your behaviour even more foolish. Why not drop a weak point if you have better ones? Why draw attention to it by writing two posts claiming to have the evidence - when you haven’t even looked at the supposed evidence ?

quote:
They don't? My elderly dad rode with me over a hundred times in the last 8 years of his life, mainly because his eyesight was failing too badly for him to be able to drive.

Again, hardly a comparable situation. And likely these, too, would have been mostly local trips.

quote:
It makes sense if they were involved in business deals in China and the Ukraine, with "big guy" Joe's political clout being involved.

No, the comparison still does not make sense. Nor does it make sense that the Vice President would make hundreds of trips to those two countries without it attracting wide attention.

quote:
Judicial Watch supported the "hundreds of trips" claim, that's all I was referring to

“Hunter Biden made hundreds of trips” is hardly a damning claim worth supporting. Further in Message 203 you were answering the assertion:

"Children" riding in cars with their dads "hundreds of times" does not translate to the Vice President's son flying to foreign countries hundreds of times with his father.

That Hunter Biden made “hundreds of trips” which were not even “flying to foreign countries” is not an answer to that point at all.

And in Message 205 you were expressly defending the Fox claim of hundreds of flights. I hardly think that you meant to indicate that Fox News were incompetents who seriously misrepresented Judicial Watch.

So no, this is just another dishonest excuse. You were claiming hundreds of flights, not just hundreds of trips.

quote:
"411 trips" - Judicial Watch. "traveled with his father, AND got secret service protection on hundreds of trips" - the Fox News chic. Where's the contradiction? The Fox news chic didn't lie, though she was being tricky. She's a commentator, not a reporter. Do you believe that Trump haters who masquerade as reporters, like Jim Acosta and Johathan Karl (to name only 2 of hundreds) don't get just a little tricky in some of their reporting?

So your defence of Fox News is that you badly misrepresented their claim. Because in Message 205 you indicate that Fox asserted 400 international flights. Not 400 trips of which only a small proportion (~15%) were international flights.

quote:
You're probably right, I guess I tend to do that because most of the points I make go un-responded to, by ANY gang member. See Message 183, and Message 204 as two examples.

I rather doubt that. Why waste time on a weak point - and embarrass yourself badly doing it - when you have stronger points? Indeed the number of responses is due to it being rather obviously implausible and the up fact that you made it despite that (and your uncritical acceptance of the Fox News claim - which you now say that didn’t even make!)

quote:
All I'd like to do, is get to a point where we can agree to disagree. So before I go, so I'm clear, you agree with the others that since I made a mistake about the destinations of Hunter's trips, that I LIED

I wouldn’t use that as an example of you lying. However it is certainly true that you made a false claim, tried to prop it up with a ridiculous analogy and when you claimed to have the evidence the actual evidence refuted the claim.

quote:
and because of that, my entire point is void, and that's proof that the mainstream media is perfectly balanced in how they cover / covered Trumps children versus how they treat Hunter Biden?

It is certainly a reason not to trust your unsupported assertions. As if we need another one. There have been rather a lot of examples.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by marc9000, posted 10-08-2021 8:13 PM marc9000 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by Percy, posted 10-09-2021 9:03 AM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021