***Official Here we go Debate Thead***

[The Elevator Killer 497]

2 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Just messing with you.... 

I am just jazzed about the potential to restore minority employment, rework trade deals, and pull troops back.....as long as THAT continues I dont much care who is president....

As long as he has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize at least 3 times.

[BirdGang 312]

7 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

He's still losing, but nice jab from left field I guess?

Upper cut laid you out...stay down. 

[Electric Mayhem 35]

3 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Just messing with you.... 

I am just jazzed about the potential to restore minority employment, rework trade deals, and pull troops back.....as long as THAT continues I dont much care who is president....

Those all sounds like good things, but I just don't see Trump as the one to promote them.  I'd like to see hard numbers (not Trump 'promises' or claims, actual numbers) comparing troop deployment levels now vs 2016 (keeping in mind that I wholeheartedly believe he would only reduce US military presence in areas that benefit Putin), and an independent comparison of  the old pre-Trump trade deals to what we have now.

As for restoration of minority employment - not really sure what you mean here (restoration from when?), but happy to hear more as it sounds like something I would be behind.

[Strike 3,982]

God, we are so screwed as a country.   This is the next generation of "leaders" of our country:

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=15790

[RLLD 3,455]

2 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

Those all sounds like good things, but I just don't see Trump as the one to promote them.  I'd like to see hard numbers (not Trump 'promises' or claims, actual numbers) comparing troop deployment levels now vs 2016 (keeping in mind that I wholeheartedly believe he would only reduce US military presence in areas that benefit Putin), and an independent comparison of  the old pre-Trump trade deals to what we have now.

As for restoration of minority employment - not really sure what you mean here (restoration from when?), but happy to hear more as it sounds like something I would be behind.

Prior to the virus emigrating here from China, minority employment was outstanding, I think Trump can restore it back to that level. And no government program will improve the life of impoverished Americans like having a job.

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/30/troop-deployment-overseas-fell-sharply-past-decade/

Quote

The total number of American troops deployed across the globe has dropped at a rapid rate over the past decade, with the Trump White House poised to accelerate the trend by drawing down major U.S. combat operations worldwide.

 

Trump has already shown success on these fronts, and I want more.  Now... I REALLY want to see some spending cuts too.

[Electric Mayhem 35]

2 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Prior to the virus emigrating here from China, minority employment was outstanding, I think Trump can restore it back to that level. And no government program will improve the life of impoverished Americans like having a job.

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/30/troop-deployment-overseas-fell-sharply-past-decade/

 

Trump has already shown success on these fronts, and I want more.  Now... I REALLY want to see some spending cuts too.

So the troop reduction article clearly says that reductions are from 2008-now, so this doesn't seem to be Trump thing as much as a Pentagon thing.  I see no reason why troop deployments would go up under a Biden Presidency.

How have the minority employment numbers been trending since 2009?  Again, I'd like to see how much this was Trump-led thing vs just a continuation of what Obama started, and any reason to believe this wouldn't also be supported by Biden.

As for spending cuts, where do you want them?  I'm for spending cuts as well, but I'm guessing in different areas than you  (hint: Military spending makes up over half of federal discretionary spending).

[Meglamaniac 380]

1 minute ago, Electric Mayhem said:

So the troop reduction article clearly says that reductions are from 2008-now, so this doesn't seem to be Trump thing as much as a Pentagon thing.  I see no reason why troop deployments would go up under a Biden Presidency.

How have the minority employment numbers been trending since 2009?  Again, I'd like to see how much this was Trump-led thing vs just a continuation of what Obama started, and any reason to believe this wouldn't also be supported by Biden.

As for spending cuts, where do you want them?  I'm for spending cuts as well, but I'm guessing in different areas than you  (hint: Military spending makes up over half of federal discretionary spending).

Seems everything you post has a 'but Trump' lean, wonder why that is?

This need to refute anything even remotely positive in regards to President Trump is just sad.

[fricker66 91]

5 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

So the troop reduction article clearly says that reductions are from 2008-now, so this doesn't seem to be Trump thing as much as a Pentagon thing.  I see no reason why troop deployments would go up under a Biden Presidency.

How have the minority employment numbers been trending since 2009?  Again, I'd like to see how much this was Trump-led thing vs just a continuation of what Obama started, and any reason to believe this wouldn't also be supported by Biden.

As for spending cuts, where do you want them?  I'm for spending cuts as well, but I'm guessing in different areas than you  (hint: Military spending makes up over half of federal discretionary spending).

Hi.  Don't care about politics, but good to see you.  

[RLLD 3,455]

2 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

So the troop reduction article clearly says that reductions are from 2008-now, so this doesn't seem to be Trump thing as much as a Pentagon thing.  I see no reason why troop deployments would go up under a Biden Presidency.

How have the minority employment numbers been trending since 2009?  Again, I'd like to see how much this was Trump-led thing vs just a continuation of what Obama started, and any reason to believe this wouldn't also be supported by Biden.

As for spending cuts, where do you want them?  I'm for spending cuts as well, but I'm guessing in different areas than you  (hint: Military spending makes up over half of federal discretionary spending).

We can agree to disagree on whether Biden would increase troop presence elsewhere, I doubt he continues the pullback.

Regarding Obama vs Trump and employment. It would be suspect, at best to suggest that anything Obama or Trump or Clinton did, is manifesting in jobs right now.  The most relevant influences to employment are far more recent, which is why it is measured at its current frequency.

I know it is often the case that individual bias tends to want to attribute negative outcomes to others and positives to that person you like, if you have competing sources please provide evidence that anything which happened before Trump delivered the increases in employment.

I do think we need to lower our military expenses.

[Electric Mayhem 35]

2 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

Seems everything you post has a 'but Trump' lean, wonder why that is?

This need to refute anything even remotely positive in regards to President Trump is just sad.

You're taking it wrong.  I'm open to seeing evidence that Trump actually did something on his own instead of just riding a wave that Obama set into motion.

I mean, RLLD is saying Trump is responsible for troop deployments declining, then evidence is an article saying they have been reducing for a decade, and quotes numbers comparing 2008 (beginning of Obama) to 2017 (8 years Obama, 1-2 years Trump).

[Reality 2,710]

So, once again, things Biden blatantly told us last night.... He will close the country and raise our taxes. He also doesn't support law enforcement and doesn't condemn the destroying of our cities by antifa and the left wing.

If you think that's good for the country, then knock yourself out.

I'll be voting for Trump and I believe hard working law abiding citizens, who are the silent majority, will do the same.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,670]

45 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

I'm not going to pretend that I'm a constitutional scholar.  I will say that in my lifetime there has been norms and courtesies assumed in gov't.  Vetoes, executive orders, and the like have been used by the President in the past.  Filibusters would entail an actual person reciting gibberish for hours to make a political stand against what they felt was an injust bill.

Now EOs are more the norm and filibusters are just a rule used like a playing card whenever the situation calls for it.  SCOTUS nominations have ALWAYS been a smooth process regardless or who was POTUS, until this cycle.  Think of the precedent this now sets.  Open seats remain open until one party holds the WH and Senate?  Is this what the framers intended?

So do I think that McConnell went against the Constitution by denying Obama's pick?  I think he saw an opportunity to grab power by interpreting the Constitution in a way beneficial to him at the time.  And this is more apparent now that he is re-defining his original stances now that he can benefit by doing so.

So now it’s his interpretation. Before you said it was unconstitutional. Got it. 

[Electric Mayhem 35]

4 minutes ago, fricker66 said:

Hi.  Don't care about politics, but good to see you.  

FRICKER!

Hope you and the fam are well.

[Meglamaniac 380]

9 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

You're taking it wrong.  I'm open to seeing evidence that Trump actually did something on his own instead of just riding a wave that Obama set into motion.

I mean, RLLD is saying Trump is responsible for troop deployments declining, then evidence is an article saying they have been reducing for a decade, and quotes numbers comparing 2008 (beginning of Obama) to 2017 (8 years Obama, 1-2 years Trump).

It's the oldest and most tiresome of all of the claims

"just riding a wave that Obama set into motion."

It tells everyone everything they need to know on your stance and your willingness to see facts for what they are 

[The Elevator Killer 497]

15 minutes ago, fricker66 said:

Hi.  Don't care about politics, but good to see you.  

Onions?

[Electric Mayhem 35]

8 minutes ago, RLLD said:

We can agree to disagree on whether Biden would increase troop presence elsewhere, I doubt he continues the pullback.

Regarding Obama vs Trump and employment. It would be suspect, at best to suggest that anything Obama or Trump or Clinton did, is manifesting in jobs right now.  The most relevant influences to employment are far more recent, which is why it is measured at its current frequency.

I know it is often the case that individual bias tends to want to attribute negative outcomes to others and positives to that person you like, if you have competing sources please provide evidence that anything which happened before Trump delivered the increases in employment.

I do think we need to lower our military expenses.

re: troops - fair enough

re: employment - agreed, but with that said I don't think you can say either candidate is better for minority employment numbers unless you bring in the discussion on covid response as a major influencing factor.

Take a look at this site (Chart 16):

https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cps_charts.pdf

You can see that minority unemployment numbers began to significantly reduce in Obama's second term, and have continued into Trump's first.  To your point, it's hard to say what policies can be attributed to the declines, but the obvious linear trend infers that Trump's election had no additional impact.

[Electric Mayhem 35]

3 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

It's the oldest and most tiresome of all of the claims

"just riding a wave that Obama set into motion."

It tells everyone everything they need to know on your stance and your willingness to see facts for what they are 

Which is (YET AGAIN) why I'm open to seeing evidence of the contrary.  Just show me some number stuff.  I like number stuff.

[OldMaid 1,838]

Hey Mayhem! Nice to see you! 

 

Like Fricker, I don’t care to get into this particular discussion... but I know the folks at the Sanctuary would be glad to hear from you.

[Electric Mayhem 35]

12 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

So now it’s his interpretation. Before you said it was unconstitutional. Got it. 

So do you think Article II of the Constitution, related to appointments of Justices, is meant to mean that POTUS can only fill seats when their party also holds the Senate majority?

[RLLD 3,455]

13 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

You're taking it wrong.  I'm open to seeing evidence that Trump actually did something on his own instead of just riding a wave that Obama set into motion.

I mean, RLLD is saying Trump is responsible for troop deployments declining, then evidence is an article saying they have been reducing for a decade, and quotes numbers comparing 2008 (beginning of Obama) to 2017 (8 years Obama, 1-2 years Trump).

That is a slight misrepresentation, my article clearly notes how Trump accelerated it, and I am all about that. It also feeds into my desire to lower costs, notably in the area of military spending.

I think Trump's economic decision have certainly led to immediate results, simple lines can be drawn.  In the absence of Chinese villainy, it would continue.

I think four more years of Trump's policies would be truly beneficial to all Americans. I am sure I would detest him as a person, he is a blustering dooshbag, but I dont need a nice guy, I need an effective guy

[Meglamaniac 380]

2 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

Which is (YET AGAIN) why I'm open to seeing evidence of the contrary.  Just show me some number stuff.  I like number stuff.

12, 17, 348, 20014, 1

[Electric Mayhem 35]

1 minute ago, OldMaid said:

Hey Meyhem! Nice to see you! 

 

Like Fricker, I don’t care to get into this particular discussion... but I know the folks at the Sanctuary would be glad to hear from you.

I should pop in to say hi - I got burnt out with some of the discussions there and took a break, and then it became so long that I kinda felt embarrassed for not 'saying goodbye' or whatever.

[OldMaid 1,838]

Just now, Electric Mayhem said:

I should pop in to say hi - I got burnt out with some of the discussions there and took a break, and then it became so long that I kinda felt embarrassed for not 'saying goodbye' or whatever.

Yeah, I took a break for a bit, too, but decided to go back and check in after Covid. It was like coming home to family.

[Electric Mayhem 35]

4 minutes ago, RLLD said:

That is a slight misrepresentation, my article clearly notes how Trump accelerated it, and I am all about that. It also feeds into my desire to lower costs, notably in the area of military spending.

I think Trump's economic decision have certainly led to immediate results, simple lines can be drawn.  In the absence of Chinese villainy, it would continue.

I think four more years of Trump's policies would be truly beneficial to all Americans. I am sure I would detest him as a person, he is a blustering dooshbag, but I dont need a nice guy, I need an effective guy

Here are quotes from the article:

"The reductions reflect a strategic change at the Pentagon and White House, as Washington as pulled away from large-scale military operations like those in the Middle East and Southwest Asia, in favor of smaller-scale military adviser missions — backed by local forces and allied nations — in Syria, Yemen, Libya and elsewhere."

"The largest reduction in forces took place in Iraq and Kuwait. Just over 16,000 U.S. troops were stationed in both countries in the fall of 2017, nearly a 90 percent decrease from 153,000 nine years earlier."

"Afghanistan also saw a 10,000-troop reduction between September 2008 to 2017, with a majority of those forces pulling out after the official end of U.S. combat operations in 2014."

Also it says Trump is 'poised' to further accelerate, not 'accelerated'.

I don't see how you read that article and come away with "thanks to Trump we have less troops deployed".

[RLLD 3,455]

10 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cps_charts.pdf

You can see that minority unemployment numbers began to significantly reduce in Obama's second term, and have continued into Trump's first.  To your point, it's hard to say what policies can be attributed to the declines, but the obvious linear trend infers that Trump's election had no additional impact.

When one views Opiod overdose deaths there is a notable increase in 2014, followed by a considerable increase in 2016 and 2017.....shall we then attribute those deaths to Obama? Or are those Trumps "fault"?

My point is this, we should stop shifting things around between presidents where it suits our individual confirmation biases....

[Electric Mayhem 35]

2 minutes ago, RLLD said:

When one views Opiod overdose deaths there is a notable increase in 2014, followed by a considerable increase in 2016 and 2017.....shall we then attribute those deaths to Obama? Or are those Trumps "fault"?

My point is this, we should stop shifting things around between presidents where it suits our individual confirmation biases....

Are we moving on to Opioid deaths now?  I'm willing to have that conversation, but I'd like to agree at least that when deciding a candidate for 2020, no one in good faith can attribute low troop deployment numbers or low minority unemployment percentages to Trump, and that he is just a beneficiary of circumstance.

[fricker66 91]

21 minutes ago, The Elevator Killer said:

Onions?

IT GOES TO THE ONION THREAD OR IT GETS THE HOSE!

[RLLD 3,455]

3 minutes ago, Electric Mayhem said:

Are we moving on to Opioid deaths now?  I'm willing to have that conversation, but I'd like to agree at least that when deciding a candidate for 2020, no one in good faith can attribute low troop deployment numbers or low minority unemployment percentages to Trump, and that he is just a beneficiary of circumstance.

We can if you like, though as noted I am using it as an example of why it is not suitable to shift things between presidents. Some statistics will make your preferred person look good, but if you attempt to remain philosophically honest that same standard could hurt as well.  So its best to not diminish the success of one and attempt to shift it elsewhere.

[The Elevator Killer 497]

4 minutes ago, fricker66 said:

IT GOES TO THE ONION THREAD OR IT GETS THE HOSE!

Promises Promises. 

[peenie 1,691]

Imagine, if you are a citizen who is happy the leadership has increased jobs, the wealth of the nation, the military and pride in the country but your leader is Hitler and you are a Jew. Should you still vote for Hitler???

It's the same issue here for me. It doesn't really matter if the country is successful if there is still the sentiment that black lives don't matter.

[The Elevator Killer 497]

3 minutes ago, peenie said:

Imagine, if you are a citizen who is happy the leadership has increased jobs, the wealth of the nation, the military and pride in the country but your leader is Hitler and you are a Jew. Should you still vote for Hitler???

It's the same issue here for me. It doesn't really matter if the country is successful if there is still the sentiment that black lives don't matter.

Do you really believe they matter to Biden? Have you seen his track record? 

[peenie 1,691]

3 minutes ago, The Elevator Killer said:

Do you really believe they matter to Biden? Have you seen his track record? 

And that whole green thing he was talking about, tearing down buildings and rebuilding them sounded nuts. That alone was a reason for me not to vote for Biden.

I just think that you all are happy he is on your side and you don't care about anyone else. He efforts work for your benefit and there is an ignoring of black issues. (other than jobs)

[drobeski 3,061]

6 minutes ago, peenie said:

Imagine, if you are a citizen who is happy the leadership has increased jobs, the wealth of the nation, the military and pride in the country but your leader is Hitler and you are a Jew. Should you still vote for Hitler???

It's the same issue here for me. It doesn't really matter if the country is successful if there is still the sentiment that black lives don't matter.

You're Bidens slave... he told you your not black if you don't vote for him, basically to your face. 

Good job keeping yourself on the plantation.  

[The Elevator Killer 497]

Just now, peenie said:

And that whole green thing he was talking about, tearing down buildings and rebuilding them sounded nuts.

It is. Trumps proven he can jump start the economy. Biden hasn't. And the things he says he will do don't really sound like it's going to work. And if it does, it will take a while. We need to get people back to work ASAP. But I was talking about his past racist comments. 

[peenie 1,691]

Just now, drobeski said:

You're Bidens slave... he told you your not black if you don't vote for him, basically to your face. 

Yeah, that wasn't very correct.

[peenie 1,691]

Just now, The Elevator Killer said:

But I was talking about his past racist comments. 

I don't care what he said in the past. Lots of people say mean things. I forgive his and Trumps mean comments.

[The Elevator Killer 497]

Just now, peenie said:

I don't care what he said in the past. Lots of people say mean things. I forgive his and Trumps mean comments.

Fair enough. So you have to decide what's important to you and who you think will be able to deliver it. 

[Strike 3,982]

34 minutes ago, peenie said:

I just think that you all are happy he is on your side and you don't care about anyone else. He efforts work for your benefit and there is an ignoring of black issues. (other than jobs)

Trump has done more for blacks than almost any other President, especially Obama.  You'd think the first black president would have actually done something to help his race.  We've detailed everything Trump has done for blacks repeatedly and you've never disagreed.  So, why do you bring out the same tired, debunked, stance in every thread? 

[Mookz 1,287]

2 hours ago, peenie said:

Just a few words of encouragement, my child's father died in the hospital of organ failure due to his inability to stop drinking. Here's the thing, he wouldn't even ever admit he drank or had a problem. So you can see how he was a prime example of admitting you have a problem is the first step. You have really accomplished a lot mob_deep and I'm really proud of you. No matter what happens, keep trying each day. We all have addictions, just some are more apparent than others. Peace and blessings!

 

I just joined Cashewholics Anonymous. 

[DexterM1776 79]

1 hour ago, peenie said:

And that whole green thing he was talking about, tearing down buildings and rebuilding them sounded nuts. That alone was a reason for me not to vote for Biden.

I just think that you all are happy he is on your side and you don't care about anyone else. He efforts work for your benefit and there is an ignoring of black issues. (other than jobs)

Y'all don't want people to actually see black issues. Trust me on that.