Political Processes - Can we talk?

[Frybabe]

I've been following the conversation with interest. While I side with gun rights in general, I do think there needs to be a better system of checks and balances.

I was curious to see if what gun laws look like in other countries. Wikipedia has an extensive, if flawed (no or not enough citations), article plus a comparison chart at the bottom. Someone went to a lot of trouble to gather this info and post it.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation  Although Wikipedia cites a number of the sections for no or little reference material, there are still a lot of links for those who care to follow up.

[BarbStAubrey]

Goodness - right or not this nation was settled by those pushing into the wilderness with guns - trekking across the great plains with guns - homesteading with guns - ranching with guns - searching for gold in California and Alaska with guns - and so whatever Hoover had to say about the legality of individual gun ownership was silly.

Personally my take is if there is a ban on assault rifles then it needs to be a total ban so the balance of power keeps this nation from too easily slipping into a police state. And in fact a ban that includes international trade. How that goes down with so many nations depending on US manufacturers I do not know but here are the problems that I know about and there may be many more. 

A big issue is unless you are living on a ranch where wild hogs and boars are invading and destroying fences, crops and the very soil - or at least you've seen the wild hogs descend on a ranch or farm, then and only then can anyone talk of eliminating the personal ownership of automatic weapons - these wild creatures come in packs and there is no way you can get neighbors to create a line of shooters in under 45 minutes and for many over an hour - a whole crop can be decimated in that time - a whole section of fencing can be destroyed in that time - if a rancher takes one shot the herd scatters making it harder to kill this huge increase in animals that scattered will create even more damage -

50 years ago these destructive wild animals were not the huge herds of today causing this problem - a sow births 5 or 6, twice a year - you do the math - 5 sows in 3 years with multiple births and each successive sow the population is over 10,000 in less than 2 years. Wild hogs can weigh over a half a ton, move in groups 30 deep and they fear no man, God or machine that gets between them and their food, which could easily be you, your dog or your rose bushes.  They cause $1.5 billion worth of damage to crops and other infrastructure annually, push farther north everyday and not a single one of the estimated 5 million belongs here.

A single rancher needs an automatic weapon to handle an onslaught of wild hogs - there either has to be an exclusion clause or another way to stop the gun violence. Because folks do not like certain guns and they want deaths by guns to stop  (the cause of the violence is not yet understood) they are blaming guns that granted, are not needed in most areas of the nation however, there cannot be a law that puts a rancher and his family at risk. Ranchers and farmers cannot take the brunt of such huge losses, nor can we afford the destruction of huge tracts of land that would become useless.

Our history as a nation shows us that once we start making a product illegal we end up with a worse problem as the illegal sales and illegal shipment across our border creates another non-taxable industry that needs federal troops to setup an equal size force to catch the smugglers - illegal sales have no controls - all those we hoped to keep out of their hand whatever the product have a free hand to buy and use.

Then we have the current situation where drug cartels ship across our southern border using private ranches for their route - the personnel transporting the drugs are usually heavily armed and ranchers on the border need to protect themselves and their family - again it would take the Sheriff an hour or more to get there to provide protection.

We already have 70% of the guns owned, used and confiscated by the AFT (U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) and DTO (Mexican drug trafficking organization) from those running the drug trade are made in the US which says our own gun manufacturers have already expanded their market beyond our borders - makes it easy to realize guns will be purchased regardless of any law.   

Even I had experienced what it was like to protect ourselves with weapons - I was working at the Girl Scout Camp located about 2 hours from Austin - after midnight a man came up from the lake - actually the Colorado river - walking through camp with a rifle on his shoulder - thank God the director and several of the counselors had their guns that we surprised the guy and held him with 5 guns pointing at him till the Sheriff came - it took the Sheriff 45 minutes and for the last 20 minutes you could hear his siren as he sped along these narrow roads at top speed - so no - he nor were we armed with automatic firearms but then that was over 30 years ago - and now there are two Sheriffs in that county each operating from the opposite end however, it still takes 30 to 40 minutes when you are responsible to protect yourself and those who are in your care.

Even in that situation an automatic rifle is not necessary - however, if the trespasser has an automatic gun or if there is more than one and they are automatically armed then you are at a disadvantage -

In towns and cities you are not responsible for you own protection for a half hour or more, so yes, I agree - folks living in cities or suburbs with a police force that can respond within 10 minutes or less do not need automatic rifles - hunters do not need automatic rifles - sad to even have to say it but the police guarding a protesting population do not need automatic rifles however, there are some folks who legitimately need automatic weapons and so if the questions keeps being asked how come more severe gun laws are not passed it is because there are legitimate reasons - just as we as a nation would not want to have less ability to wage war and depend on others because our military equipment does not keep up so too do those fighting wild boars and hogs and drug cartels have a right to protect their life, livelihood and the land.     

See this problem in person and then you can be part of the solution - ranchers are not dumb - some back woods, uneducated sons of the soil - most today have a collage degree - they are sincere but cannot afford the losses that would result from making automatic guns illegal -

http://wildpiginfo.msstate.edu/damage-caused-by-pigs.html

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/11/27/3002821/wild-pigs-hogs-invasive-desctruction/

http://www.grandviewoutdoors.com/big-game-hunting/wild-hogs-threaten-mississippi-economy/

http://dailynightly.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/26/16047580-faced-with-gun-toting-drug-smugglers-arizona-ranchers-demand-security-at-the-border?lite

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/dec/08/us-guns-mexico-drug-cartels

http://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/the-battle-for-the-border/

[Dana]

I've been reading more about Hoover and I think I got it wrong above--he advocated for the FBI to bear arms in 1927 it seems.  I don't know the story, will have to get a biography, he interests me since I saw that movie (Edgar).
 Re guns......I usually don't comment in the US because I know that Americans have a mental block where guns are concerned and nothing is going to change......so I will stop!

[bellamarie]

Barb, you make excellent arguments for why we need guns for protection of land, and life.

Dana,

Then sometime along the way the NRA managed to muscle in and exert their control over the minds of citizens and politicians.  What I can't understand is, how can the general public be so dumb that they don't get that the NRA is only in it for the money.

With all due respect, I don't see the general public being dumb or citizens and politicians allowing the NRA to exert control over their minds.  That sure doesn't give millions of people credit for knowing what they personally think and feel.  They are well aware of the NRA profiting from the sale of guns.  Even if there  were no NRA, people would still want to exercise their rights to: The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution..... "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

[marjifay]

                                                                                                                                                                                      Hooray!  I just heard that the Supreme Court ruled that domestic abusers can't have guns!

I don't know what's happening to the Court, but IMO they're finally making some decisions that make sense, after also recently thrown out a Texas law that would have made it all but impossible for Texas women to obtain an abortion.

Marj

[marjifay]

Someone here was bemoaning their opinion that Clinton would carry on Obama's policies if she were to become our president.

I am not religious, but I pray that Clinton beats Trump.

Marj

[bellamarie]

I AM religious, and I pray Trump beats Clinton. 

I am neither a republican or democrat, I see both ideologies, and their policies, and Clinton will be the same as the past eight years, we NEED change! 

My heart hurts knowing there are over 300,000 abortions performed by Planned Parenthood annually, with taxpayer money.  We need a Supreme Justice appointed that will give hope to end this atrocity.  People moan about gun control while they sit back and have NO problem at all with Planned Parenthood butchering unborn babies and selling their body parts.  What has this world come to?

[marjifay]

I find it amazingly sad that anyone would want to see Trump be our president.  Most Republicans feel that way also, and Trump cannot find any Republicans who would speak in support of him at their convention in Ohio.  Thankfully, it looks as if he won't be our next president.

Marj

[BarbStAubrey]

I wouldn't be too confident Marjifay - traditional Republican states cannot see voting anything but Republican which is what I see here in Texas - when I mention Trump they simply shrug their shoulders and talk about the next subject. With all the counting and polls for the past 5 presidential elections it appears the voting that makes the difference is down to about 5 states - the others pretty much follow party lines - as I understand it is Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Nevada and North Carolina that actually choose our president. This year I understand there are a few more swing states like Colorado, New Mexico, Wisconsin and Iowa.

I think it is the Dems chosen candidate that will tell us if Trump has a chance - so much that Hillary is just pushing through that could still be a toss up with Sanders at the convention. There are several law suites now in progress about how the primaries were fixed and placed on her doorstep and only the President and Lynch are keeping her from being indicted over her email server - and there are huge numbers of folks who will not vote for her - they may not vote at all or leave that part of the ballot blank and that leaves the door open for Trump.  Surety is nice but I think we are still too early for a good read on this.

By the way did you know - because I did not know - that Trump's sister is a well respected District Judge, I think on the Appellate court, who the gossip is if he were to become president he would choose her as his candidate for the Supreme Court. I'm just preparing myself in case he does pull this off -

[mogamom]

The second amendment is a right we have as citizens.  And concern about the federal government becoming too powerful was a reason for establishing it.  If you check what congress has deemed an 'assault weapon' you will see that it encompasses many guns used for sport and hunting.  The term 'assault weapon' was a label they put on them.  Many people are not willing to give up their rights in a free society for someone's mis-guided concept of 'security', which is a false security.  I am personally  not willing that the government should take our right to due process in order to - supposedly - keep us safe.  How many times have we been down that road not to learn from it?

Hillary Clinton supported China's policy of one child per family.
Hillary Clinton supported her husband's trade deal.
Hillary Clinton supported the present administration's stance on homeschooling - that 'parents have no intrinsic right to educate     their children if an alternative (ie. government school) is available.
Hillary Clinton is in favor of strict gun control.  (NY already has that and it doesn't stop gun violence.)
Hillary Clinton states every sexually abused woman should be believed (except if they are abused by her husband)
Hillary Clinton and her primary advisor, Blumenthal, created the problems in Libya.  Why?  Because he had business interests.
Hillary Clinton wants to put coal mines in West Virginis out of business.  Her solution for all those she would have unemployed?  Government hand=outs; which, incidentally, is her solution to most things.

Hillary Clinton is not a friend to our Constitution or our freedoms.  No Hillary!!

I don't know anyone who votes straight party lines, actually.  But then NY is very blue.

[mogamom]

Loretta Lynch, landing in Phoenix, who is in charge of the investigation into Hillary's e-mails, has a private conversation with Bill Clinton in an empty private jet just prior to the Benghazi Report's release (which Hillary dismisses by suggesting we should 'move on'; remember this: 'What difference does it make now anyway!?') and 'only talked about their grandchildren'.

[bellamarie]

Hillary Clinton also supports continuing to fund Planned Parenthood with taxpayer's money. 

Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch had a meeting yesterday.  Can't imagine what that was all about. They call it a chance meeting....I just have to laugh at that.  This is so Clintonish, and so inappropriate. 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/29/politics/bill-clinton-loretta-lynch/index.html

Mogomom, we were posting at the same time.  Also kinda like, all those emails she deleted were personal like discussing wedding plans, yoga classes etc.  It amazes the level of crime and lies she gets caught in, and gets away with. 

[mogamom]

Maybe that's why some people like her?  Sad.  And now it seems that Kerry is telling us that he's working with others to over-turn the vote in Britain to leave the EU?

[marjifay]

If Trump's sister is anything like her brother, putting her on the Supreme Court would be a big tragedy.  I am not a big Clinton fan, I had preferred Bernie Sanders, but either one of them would be better for the country than Trump.  One of the reasons we need a Democratic president is so we don't get more Republican Sup. Court justices.

Marj

[bellamarie]

Marjifay, 

One of the reasons we need a Democratic president is so we don't get more Republican Sup. Court justices.

Why do I feel the Republicans feel the same way about needing Trump, only so they don't get more democratic Supreme Court Justices?     

Kerry has no weight in overturning the vote in Britain.  He helped make that horrible Iran deal that gives Iran billions of dollars to help them with their nuclear program.  Kerry has been such a huge disappointment at SOS.

[BarbStAubrey]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/08/meet-donald-trumps-sister-the-tough-federal-judge-ted-cruz-called-a-radical-pro-abortion-extremist/

[bellamarie]

Well, I guess we find out why Clinton and Lynch had their private 30 minute secret meeting on her plane.

http://freedomoutpost.com/after-lynchs-mystery-meeting-with-bill-justice-dept-shields-clinton-foundation-emails/

Yesterday’s mystery meeting on the tarmac between former President Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch has now been clarified.

Obviously, it wasn’t a social visit as Lynch publicly claimed, but an arrangement clarifying how the powerful Clinton dynasty would be kept above the law in the face of heated publicly scrutiny as Hillary Clinton seeks the presidency.

Instead, the Justice Department filed a motion that would keep from release thousands of emails potentially exposing conflicts of interest on the part of the Clinton Foundation and overlapping state department officials, such as Hillary’s chief of staff Huma Abedin.

If those were personal emails about wedding plans and yoga classes why would they need time to release them.  This wreaks of corruptness.

[mogamom]

Remember those 45 (at my last count - all reported receiving 100k - 200k annual salary) 'czars' appointed by Obama to virtually every major federal agency who have been busily re-writing federal policy?


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/25/obama-invites-18-7-million-immigrants-avoid-oath-allegiance-pledge-defend-america/


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/20/exclusive-video-veteran-forcibly-dragged-air-force-ceremony-saying-god/

Just more attacks on the freedoms Americans enjoy - an attack Hillary has vowed to continue.

This comes after hearing Gruber make thousands telling groups how to bamboozle gullible Americans with legislation, and finding out how the White House controls the 'talking points' of the media with the 'expert' foreign policy knowledge of a man with his expertise in writing fiction:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/magazine/the-aspiring-novelist-who-became-obamas-foreign-policy-guru.html

[BarbStAubrey]

Alice Waters questions if Hillary is right for this election cycle? I think that may be the issue... a good article explaining her point of view. Has nothing to do with Hillary being a woman nor does it refer to any of the negative reports that have covered the media news.

http://alicewalkersgarden.com/2016/06/the-chaos-of-a-hillary-clinton-presidency/

[bellamarie]

This is a sad day when the FBI Director Comey stands and gives a complete laundry list of the things Clinton is guilty of, and then says,

“Although there is evidence of potential violations, our judgement is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,”

It was NOT his call to decide if a prosecutor would take the case, it was his job to report the findings.

“This is not to suggest that in similar circumstances a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences,” Comey added. “To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.”

It is no wonder that Americans have lost faith and trust in the justice system, congress, politicians and in our administration.  Bill Clinton sealed the deal when he met with DOJ Loretta Lynch, the fix was in, now we are hearing Hillary say she could appoint Lynch as the Attorney General.  I just hope the American people rise up against this gross misjustice at the polls in November.  Comey said it is likely that hostile actors have her classified emails.  This could make her weak and vulnerable if elected president, opening her up to blackmail. From his findings she has shown gross negligence and incompetence.  As he put it, "extreme carelessness". 

http://time.com/4393271/james-comey-fbi-hillary-clinton-email/

[Frybabe]

Something very fishy about the whole sequence of events the last day or two. Comey surprised everyone (almost) with his conclusion. IMO, he was practically begging someone else to pick up the gauntlet. My first thoughts were that he was either bribed, blackmailed, or threatened into recommending she not be prosecuted.

In other news, after seven years, the Chilcot report is out. Here is a synopsis: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36721645

[BarbStAubrey]

What is so sad is the vast number of folks who think this is all because she is a women - there are several liberal groups on Facebook that have been noting the problems with each candidate and my oh my the issues that Hillary has manipulated is un-believable - none of which includes the things the media has skewed like Bhangazi - also, there were so many Trump issues they quit noting them - what people forget is she still does not have the nomination - neither she nor Sanders have enough votes - she has been using her chutzpah to persuade folks that she is the nominee hoping to overwhelm the support for Sanders and hold on to her super delegates that have not yet voted.   

All I can say is Jill Stein is looking better and better - only problem is she is only on the Ballot in 40 states. Both conventions should be interesting. My take there is no longer a Republican or a Democratic party - there is an angry protectiveness party - a liberal progressive party - and a party for the upper income folks that is a combo of the traditional Republicans and Bill Clinton centrist Democrats. 

The Democratic party is no longer the party that elevated unions, the party of either Roosevelt much less Kennedy, Johnson or Carter - Clinton moved it to the right and even Obama kept it to the right. As much as I like Obama, especially that he kept us out of war his record of disseminating the party is pretty grim.  Under his leadership the party lost 12 Senate seats, 69 House seats and 13 governorships and the party has so few young new voters that if they do not switch from Bernie Sanders a whole generation will be lost.

And goodness only knows what will become of the Republican party after Trump - at least he has uncovered the anger kept under wraps and like Pandora's box there is no putting it back.

What is so sad to me is to see out in the open the amount of corruption - just the counting of votes that was forced on California to see county after county flip - the corruption is so blatant now it is right out in the open for us to see - and then we have the nerve to bring UN observers to other countries when they vote or to call out another country for its corruption - we are no better.

I keep saying I am going to shut it all down - I have eliminated several daily email notices and changed my home page from the BBC news to a lovely page of nature photography - no longer listen to any news except on Friday night and the Charlie Rose show on PBS - but there is no escaping completely - I need to pull out some needlework or make a quilt - something that will so engage me that I can shut off all this sad sad state of affairs and pretend I live in the land of integrity. 

[Frybabe]

Yes, I want to see if Jill Stein is on the PA ballot. We can always write in her name come November.

Sad to say my sister is a Hillary fan. She makes every excuse under the sun for her. She blasts Trump (not undeservedly, IMO), blasts Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, and refuses to watch or listen to anything that doesn't fit her view. I try not to get involved with her on politics because I can't have a reasonable debate with her. While I will concede some of the problems I see with my "side", she refuses to acknowledge any with the Dems and Hillary. Oh, and of course, she saw absolutely no impropriety with Bill visiting with Loretta on her plane.

In general, I don't voice my opinion. I am not a good debater.  I do like to post an article or two for anyone interested so that people form their own opinions. I believe you really need to check out both sides of the argument in order to form an informed opinion. And who was it that said you had to study your opponents and what they stand for in order to form a rational opinion and effective debate (or something like that)?

Oh, quilting! My Mom used to quilt. I still have one she made for my bed way back in the sixties. That makes it 50 years old at the least and in such excellent condition. I let her have it for her bed when she was in assisted living. When I did the math and recalled how old it is, I put it away in the cedar closet. Don't want the cats to damage it.
I never picked up on quilting, but I do knitting, crochet and needlework.

[bellamarie]

Barb and Frybabe, I completely agree with your posts. 

I have always been an Independent, and respect everyone's right to their party choice, but what I see is the party these people have been loyal to for years, no longer exist.  When I feel comfortable trying to discuss party politics with either Dems or Republicans, they don't really seem to see the changes that have taken place.  If I ask them what does their candidate stand for, their views, policies and ideology, they can not give me anything.  They truly are for a candidate because they are against the other person/party. 

I had the neatest conversation with my 8 yr. old grandson who is on the Autism spectrum and is highly intelligent, when we had a sleepover a week ago.  He truly wanted me to tell him what I thought about Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and asked who I liked better, and who I was voting for and why.  Wow, I was so impressed he cared that I started with telling him I can't honestly say I like either one of them as a candidate.  I told him Hillary does not stand for what I as a Christian feel is good for our country, and how I feel she has broken laws, and did not send help to our Americans when they were being killed, and that I can not ignore.  He said, "So she is a bad person, and should go to jail."  Imagine an 8 yr. old being able to deduce it down to that one statement.  Then I told him how Trump says things without thinking and really makes people upset, but I do think he wants to make our country safe.  He has built a very big successful business, but has never been a politician (someone who has worked in government and been elected before), but because the politicians are doing such a horrible job and not working together to keep our country safe and great we might need someone new.  He said, "Well I think you should vote for Trump, because he has built big buildings, given lots of people jobs, and knows how to get people to work together so he could be successful and rich, so he will do the same for our country."  I laughed and told him I will vote for the person who most aligns with my faith because first and foremost I am a Christian and want someone who will protect my Christian rights, and the rights of the unborn baby.  He just made his First Communion this past Spring so he has a good understanding of what I meant, since we talk about religion as well from time to time.  His response was, "That would make God happy." 

If only life were that simple, seeing it through the eyes of an 8 yr. old.

I am watching far less news anymore.  A couple shows at night to catch up, but the tv is off the entire day in my house.  If there is breaking news I won't learn about it until I turn it on after dinnertime.  In truth I don't care for either candidate, or either party.  After the FBI Director Comey said yesterday Hillary was "extremely careless" with the handling of classified emails, but he couldn't see a "reasonable prosecutor take the case" I just shook my head and thought, the justice system is as corrupt as the politicians.  I heard many prosecutors who have practiced criminal law who said they would have taken it in a second, so what Comey really was saying, go home folks....nothing to see here, the fix is in and once again the teflon Clintons are going to get away with criminal corrupt acts.  So, if I ever had any doubts which I didn't, after Comey ran down a laundry list of her wrongdoings, and saying anyone else would have been punished, I threw my hands up and said, we are in deep trouble.  Bernie will now be pressured to drop out, give her his votes and support her on the trail.  Obamas and Clintons hate each other, but he is now flying around on Air Force One with her, using taxpayer money to help her campaign to get elected.  Voter fraud will elect her even if the American people resoundly don't.  I'm not a cynic, I am a realist.  I will still cast my vote against her.  My conscious will never allow me to vote for a someone who refused to send help to our Americans in Benghazi, who lied to the American people about it being about a video, who stood in front of four caskets, family and friends and the Nation and blatantly lied, knowing she had emailed her daughter, leader of Libya and the prime minister saying it was a terrorist attack, and NOW the FBI found her guilty of multiple criminal acts, but refused to recommend indictment.

I just may write in my 8 yr. old grandson Zakary Michael Reinhart's name in November, he says one day he might like to be president, so he can help our country.   

Quilting is sounding good to me........       

[bellamarie]

Barb, 

And goodness only knows what will become of the Republican party after Trump - at least he has uncovered the anger kept under wraps and like Pandora's box there is no putting it back.

It's not JUST the Republicans who are angry with the corruption and the establishment, Independents and Democrats are as well, that is why Bernie Sanders has lasted this long.

[marjifay]

I find it hard to believe the dumb contradictory statements Trump has made and gotten away with, and that there are still people who plan to vote for him in November.  The Sunday 60 Minute Show was an example.  He and his VP running mate, Gov. Mike Pence, were interviewed by Leslie Stahl.  The subject of the Iraq War came up.    Trump said "That was a war that we should not have been entered." 

Stahl reminded him that Pence had voted for it.  Trump replied "I don't care."

Stahl couldn't believe what she'd heard him say, and she said "You don't care that your running mate voted for the war, a war you've been ranting against?

Trump just said "Well that was a long time ago.  He's entitled to make a mistake every once in a while."

Stahl said "But you've used Clinton's vote for the was -- which was the same as Pence's -- as an example of her bad justment.  Isn't she also entitled to a mistake?

Trump:  No, she's not.

I really think there is something mentally wrong with Trump and the idea of his becoming our president is really scary to me.

Marj







Stahl couldn't believe what she's heard him say and said "You don't care that your running mate voted for the Iraq War when you've been ranting against it?  What do you mean by that? 

Trump just said "Well it was a long time ago.  He is entitled to a mistake every once in a while."

Stahl said, "But you've used Clinton's vote for the war as an example of her bad judgment.  Isn't she entitled to a mistake?  Trump said, "No, she she's not."

I really think there is something mentally wrong with Trump.  The idea of him being our president is very scary.

Marj



 







Stahl was shocked at this, and said, "You don't care that Pence voted for the war.  What do you mean by that?

Trump just said "Well that was a long time ago.  Pence is entitled to make a mistake every once in a while."  Stahl could not believe her ears.  and said But you use Clinton's vote--which was the same as Pence's--as an example of her bad judgment.  Pence is entitled to a mistake, but she's not?  Trump said "No, she's not."

I really think there is something mentally wrong with Trump.  The idea os his becoming president is really scary.

Marj

t
t

[marjifay]

 I must apologize for messing up my last message.  Did not mean to repeat parts of it.

Marj

[BarbStAubrey]

Marj just cool it - Trump will say anything outrageous and the more outrageous the better because it guarantees him free press - the idea of marketing is not showing how good you are but, to get your name repeated and then the listener makes their judgment - we do not use our logic to make a judgment call we make an emotional discussion and then back it up with selective logic. - Having been a Real Estate Broker for 36 years I can vouch for that process - it took me about 9 years to learn it and another 9 to verify what seemed off the wall but it is true.

Surrounded as I am with more Pubs than Dems the various folks in this city who are behind Trump think he is the best thing since applesauce and were enchanted with his acceptance speech - while some of us were ready to hunker down as if Nazism was around the corner or at least move to Canada and for some, really, no joke, they are planning to move to Denmark.

All to say your outrage is someone else's cup of tea.

[BarbStAubrey]

I found this to be very helpful - the results are extensive showing where on the map of the US there are more folks who think as you think and by what percentage - on and on - I found it one of the best I ever came across

http://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz

[marjifay]

Yes, Barb, I suppose Trump says such outrageious things just for the free publicity.  But I think he really believes some of the junk he says.  And I still think he should see a psychologist to get some work done on his brain.  And it's hard for me to understand why anyone would vote for him.  (and I'm not for Clinton -- I plan to write in Bernie Sanders' name on the November ballot.)


Marj

[BarbStAubrey]

We cannot do write ins - plus even if a write in got the necessary paper work in the state does not allow anyone to be a registered write in if they had been campaigning and lost - so that eliminates Bernie - I took the quiz and was shocked to learn I had equal marks to Bernie and Jill - since the quiz was on issues and not all the faldarah in the press and facebook I felt better about having some direction because they have decided they are not going to allow Bernie to be a candidate.

Actually it will not matter - this state is Red and has been deep Red - there are a few isolated places in the state that are blue - I happen to live in one of them but there is 1 blue to 10 reds in this state plus the blues this year are split so Trump gets this state.

[marjifay]

Well if what you say if true, Barb, about write-ins not being allowed, then that is a real shame.
 
And the more I think about what you said about Trump using outrageous statements as a cheap means of advertising, the more I think if true, it makes the people who vote for him bigger boobs than he is.  I can't imagine Obama or Clinton or Sanders or any other intelligent candidate doing that.  That would be insinuating that the candidate thinks that the majority of voters are dummies and/or the candidate is trying to appeal to the dumbest voters in the country. 

[BarbStAubrey]

that has been the reason he has run his campaign at 1/10 the cost as compared to the others - he knew what to do to get media attention - the pundits agree he studied the media and knows how to use it better than most who are pros in marketing - at first they thought he was following the formula used by the wrestling fans but soon realized he knew how to manipulate all the media - and so if any watch certain programs on TV he knows what will attract their interest and for most they are shocked by enjoy and like that they are acknowledged for the kind of locker room crude talk that they partake in their life - even the most educated guys will let their hair down so to speak among each other out of the workplace.

It is the biggest wall that men have to keeping out women where as a few will join in as one of the boys - remember he is only after the white male vote. That is why many think he has been a set up from the beginning to assure Hillary gets the vote. He attracts the only demography Hillary cannot get to back her. However, I am thinking they over estimated the numbers who will vote for her. What a mess.

there was a map - can no longer find it that showed the states where write ins are allowed and those that do not allow any and those that you need to register etc. etc - there are less than 20 states where you can do a write in - some do not allow it at all - either 7 or 9 forgot - this state only allows it if they person registered with the State as a possible candidate and again in this state they will not accept a registration from anyone who had run during the primary and lost.

[mogamom]

WikiLeaks has set up a way to find specific topics in the emails they released.  Trump knows how to manipulate the media for coverage.  Reading through the emails, it appears that Clinton manipulates the content, which is ever so much more dangerous to a democratic nation.   

[Frybabe]

My little eye opener this morning while watching the news was the youngish fellow who thought that Republican equated with Republic and Democrat equated with Democracy.  eye roll, please.

[mogamom]

Hahaahaaa!  That was a good one!  Do you think he ever went further and put it together to mean we have a Democratic Republic?  That might actually be a teachable moment?


Anyway, Trump said there has been an increase in violent crimes, President Obama says it is the lowest it has been in thirty years:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/25/politics/violent-crime-report-us-cities-homicides-rapes/index.html

How come the Palestinian flag was present and the Russian flag was present last night, but no American flag was displayed?

[Frybabe]

How come the Palestinian flag was present and the Russian flag was present last night, but no American flag was displayed?

I missed that. I TV back on to watch at least the roll call vote, but by the time I did, it was over. Turned it back off and continued reading.

[jane]

Before this flag thing gets totally out of hand, please read the snopes item below and see the photos of the American flag at the DNC.  The Palestine flag was from the audience.

Both the RNC and the DNC used digital backgrounds, and the RNC shot of all the American flags behind some of their speakers was also digital and so not always seen.


As Snopes says below, the websites spreading this false information are cherry picking their camera shots.


Please read
http://www.snopes.com/flags-banned-at-dnc/

[Frybabe]

Interesting Jane, though I had assumed, since I didn't watch it, that she was talking about the protesters.

[jane]

Having heard that same comment from a TV person and rebuked as shown in the Snopes link, I assumed she meant on stage. 

 Nobody has control over the protesters who wave flags or boo people, be they at the RNC or DNC, as I see it.