(August 2, 2016 at 1:22 pm)Mathilda Wrote:

(August 2, 2016 at 1:10 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: I agree with everything you say (minus Trump bringing about nuclear Armageddon, which is silly)

Yeah I stopped being serious at the point where I started talking about the end of the world.

Hmm, I should have pretended that I was serious ...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-04/do...al/7688522

Quote:Several months ago, a foreign policy expert, on the international level, went to advise Donald Trump, and three times he asked about the use of nuclear weapons," Scarborough said on his program Morning Joe.

"Three times he asked. At one point, 'If we have them, why can't we use them?'" Scarborough continued.

"The whole idea behind nuclear deterrence is that you don't use the damn things," he wrote, after mentioning his own training and experience in ICBM facilities.

"The nuke triad, which Trump doesn't have a clue about, has been the single greatest contributor to global peace for decades."

While saying that he does not know if Scarborough's report is true, he said Mr Trump "would be undoing six decades of proven deterrence theory" and would be "so damn dangerous".

In one simple sentence you can tell someone that if you use your weapons, then they no are longer a deterrent.

Quote:Towards the end of May, Mr Trump said that if the Islamic State group was to attack the US, he might return fire with a nuke

Because hey, it's not like Muslims have a martyr complex or anything ...


Time to crack out the Star Trek captain facepalm memes I think ...

Donald Trump refuses to rule out using nuclear weapons against Europe

Can someone tell me if the replacement for Trident will be truly independent of America's services?

(August 3, 2016 at 4:48 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(August 3, 2016 at 2:35 pm)Constable Dorfl Wrote: Republicans have rigged two presidential elections already this century.

*Eyeroll* If you are talking about things like trying to manipulate the number of voters that come out in certain places and stuff like that, that happens on both sides every election, it's hardly the same as rigging an election. What Hillary did with superdelegates all being declared for her early is more then any general election shenanigans, so we know she's not beyond it morally.  I'm talking about genuine fraud with voting machines and the like.

Since Trump wasn't clear what he meant by rigged, we can't be sure either.

No I'm talking about the disenfranchisement of a170,000 voters from demographics who vote Democrat by large majorities in Florida in 2000, all of which happened in the year leading up to the election, at least half of whom were removed fraudulently under Florida state law. Shrub's "margin of victory" was c. 500 votes, yet there were nearly 90,000 voters illegally stopped from exercising their democratic rights. So yeah, saying 2000 wasn't stolen is not looking at the facts as they stand.

And then in 2004 Floridan tactics were spread to other Republican states (and New Mexico, whose Democrat party was fighting a vicious civil war between the Richardson Mexicans and the actual minorities), plus you've got the whole problem of Ohio, where in addition to voter scrub lists, faulty machines and fewer booths in Democrat leaning districts which had larger populations of voters than Republican leaning districts you had such democratic practises as counties returning a >100% vote for Shrub and recorded instances of zombies rising from their graves in favour of Shrub. So yeah, on any objective reading of the evidence available that's two elections stolen.

And note I haven't even mentioned the baseless lies denigrating opponents spread by the Shrub camp in either election. Even if there wasn't any active fraud taking place on the electoral process, that alone is enough to prove that the Shrub camp engaged in criminal activities to influence the election.

It's over - Clint Eastwood has endorsed the Donald!

(August 4, 2016 at 9:30 am)Alex K Wrote: It's over - Clint Eastwood has endorsed the Donald!

First he talks to an empty chair. Now he endorses an empty suit.

Stick to making movies, Clint.

Ssht, I'm still hoping for a Hillary's Chair performance.

(August 4, 2016 at 10:02 am)Alex K Wrote: Ssht, I'm still hoping for a Hillary's Chair performance.

Damn. For just a moment, I had a vision of Hillary performing a lap dance. 

Brain bleach, STAT!

(August 4, 2016 at 10:14 am)Crossless1 Wrote:

(August 4, 2016 at 10:02 am)Alex K Wrote: Ssht, I'm still hoping for a Hillary's Chair performance.

Damn. For just a moment, I had a vision of Hillary performing a lap dance. 

Brain bleach, STAT!

Why? Why did you do this to me?

Why?

(August 4, 2016 at 11:26 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(August 4, 2016 at 10:14 am)Crossless1 Wrote: Damn. For just a moment, I had a vision of Hillary performing a lap dance. 

Brain bleach, STAT!

Why?   Why did you do this to me?

Why?

Because 

Quote: The superdelegates aren't supposed to declare until the convention.

I don't know where you got that idea from.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

Quote:By contrast, the unpledged PLEO delegates (Rule 9.A) are seated without regard to their presidential preferences, solely by virtue of being current or former elected officeholders and party officials. Many of them have chosen to announce endorsements, but they are not bound in any way. They may support any candidate they wish, including one who has dropped out of the presidential race.[

(August 4, 2016 at 9:25 am)Constable Dorfl Wrote:

(August 3, 2016 at 4:48 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: *Eyeroll* If you are talking about things like trying to manipulate the number of voters that come out in certain places and stuff like that, that happens on both sides every election, it's hardly the same as rigging an election. What Hillary did with superdelegates all being declared for her early is more then any general election shenanigans, so we know she's not beyond it morally.  I'm talking about genuine fraud with voting machines and the like.

Since Trump wasn't clear what he meant by rigged, we can't be sure either.

No I'm talking about the disenfranchisement of a170,000 voters from demographics who vote Democrat by large majorities in Florida in 2000, all of which happened in the year leading up to the election, at least half of whom were removed fraudulently under Florida state law. Shrub's "margin of victory" was c. 500 votes, yet there were nearly 90,000 voters illegally stopped from exercising their democratic rights. So yeah, saying 2000 wasn't stolen is not looking at the facts as they stand.

And then in 2004 Floridan tactics were spread to other Republican states (and New Mexico, whose Democrat party was fighting a vicious civil war between the Richardson Mexicans and the actual minorities), plus you've got the whole problem of Ohio, where in addition to voter scrub lists, faulty machines and fewer booths in Democrat leaning districts which had larger populations of voters than Republican leaning districts you had such democratic practises as counties returning a >100% vote for Shrub and recorded instances of zombies rising from their graves in favour of Shrub. So yeah, on any objective reading of the evidence available that's two elections stolen.

And note I haven't even mentioned the baseless lies denigrating opponents spread by the Shrub camp in either election. Even if there wasn't any active fraud taking place on the electoral process, that alone is enough to prove that the Shrub camp engaged in criminal activities to influence the election.

Voter suppression happens all the time on both sides. The same year that Bush's team clearly did voter surpression in Florida, so did Al Gore. Before people in the panhandle, which overwhelmingly leans Republican, Al Gore had falsely claimed victory, which CNN had reported. How many people didn't go out and vote because of that? That shit happens every year by both sides. You'd have to be naive in the extreme to think only one side does it. Hillary Clinton did it to Bernie Sanders voters by pretending that the election wasn't that close constantly on the news. I know Republicans who believe only Democrats do it. In fact there was a whole book written about Democrats and voter suppression tactics. The fact that you only know the Republican side of things is kind of telling.

That's not what I'm talking about anyway.