2018 mid-term

[HuskerNation1]

Just now, Nebfanatic said:

I think there are other circumstances where interference by Russia in kahoots with Trump would be wrong but I'm glad you can acknowledge this. Of course this is all hypothetical at this point as Trump has not been directly linked to Russia at this point. I will say if there is no connections made within Muellers report I would say any collusion talk is dead in the water. But I ask you, what if Mueller finds indisputable evidence of an unsavory relationship between Russian leadership and Trump? Would you still consider Trump our legitimate President? To be totally fair as I said earlier if there was no evidence found by Mueller I for one would no longer question his legitimacy and even though I still wouldn't like him I would respect his authority more.

 

There is a lot of speculation in your post.  First off, you are admitting you have questioned the legitimacy of his Presidency WITHOUT any evidence or proof.  This is what is wrong with the anti-Trump crowd.  They did the same to Kavanaugh and chose a presumption of guilt instead of a presumption of innocence.  The fact that so many Dems and the media have continued to push this narrative without any evidence is part of the reason Trump has been able to successfully expose the bias in the media.  Now as for Trump having relationships with Russia, he has likely had many relationships with members of many countries since he has been a successful businessman around the world for decades.  If his campaign was trying to get opposition research on Hillary just as Hillary's team and any campaign seeks opposition research on their opponent, that is not a big deal to me as it's been done for a long time.  If there were violations of campaign finance laws or the funneling of money from foreign entities, that would be a greater concern in my mind.  There is actually more support for Clinton-Russian collusion but that does not get much news coverage.  What specifically would Trump had to have done in relation to Russia to be too much for you?

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/clinton-russia-collusion-evidence/

[Nebfanatic]

16 minutes ago, HuskerNation1 said:

 

There is a lot of speculation in your post.  First off, you are admitting you have questioned the legitimacy of his Presidency WITHOUT any evidence or proof.  This is what is wrong with the anti-Trump crowd.  They did the same to Kavanaugh and chose a presumption of guilt instead of a presumption of innocence.  The fact that so many Dems and the media have continued to push this narrative without any evidence is part of the reason Trump has been able to successfully expose the bias in the media.  Now as for Trump having relationships with Russia, he has likely had many relationships with members of many countries since he has been a successful businessman around the world for decades.  If his campaign was trying to get opposition research on Hillary just as Hillary's team and any campaign seeks opposition research on their opponent, that is not a big deal to me as it's been done for a long time.  If there were violations of campaign finance laws or the funneling of money from foreign entities, that would be a greater concern in my mind.  There is actually more support for Clinton-Russian collusion but that does not get much news coverage.  What specifically would Trump had to have done in relation to Russia to be too much for you?

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/clinton-russia-collusion-evidence/

We will see what Muellers report says. My question was simply hypotheticals. I'm asking you if there is evidence of collusion, would you condemn him for it? Too much is working with the Kremlin to gain any advantage in the election for me. Working with Russia is nothing to scoff at no matter to what extent. There is far from no evidence as members of Trumps admin have been indicted by Muellers team but that is besides the point. My point is there are two outcomes to the Mueller investigation. Either there will be connections between Trump and Russia or there won't be. I have already told you how I would respond to Trumps name being cleared by Mueller, my question to you is how would you react if he isn't cleared by Mueller? Will you fall in line and continue to support him or will you do whats right and condemn the actions?

[Nebfanatic]

28 minutes ago, HuskerNation1 said:

 

There is a lot of speculation in your post.  First off, you are admitting you have questioned the legitimacy of his Presidency WITHOUT any evidence or proof.  This is what is wrong with the anti-Trump crowd.  They did the same to Kavanaugh and chose a presumption of guilt instead of a presumption of innocence.  The fact that so many Dems and the media have continued to push this narrative without any evidence is part of the reason Trump has been able to successfully expose the bias in the media.  Now as for Trump having relationships with Russia, he has likely had many relationships with members of many countries since he has been a successful businessman around the world for decades.  If his campaign was trying to get opposition research on Hillary just as Hillary's team and any campaign seeks opposition research on their opponent, that is not a big deal to me as it's been done for a long time.  If there were violations of campaign finance laws or the funneling of money from foreign entities, that would be a greater concern in my mind.  There is actually more support for Clinton-Russian collusion but that does not get much news coverage.  What specifically would Trump had to have done in relation to Russia to be too much for you?

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/clinton-russia-collusion-evidence/

Another question, if the Clinton had won yhe presidency and special council was investigating her admin for election interference with Russia, would you presume she was innocent until proven guilty?

[HuskermanMike]

On 11/9/2018 at 8:52 AM, Frott Scost said:

 

I will never in my life understand why a poor or middle class person would vote for a rich person to represent them, like the rich person knows what they are going through or even gives a s#!t what they are going through. We need more politicians like this if you really want to drain the swamp. Regular, working people that actually understand the struggle and want to make a difference. 

Because they, elites, run for office more often than working class people. And from a book I read, it said people tend to allow the elites that get politics to figure it out. Basically, people vote for elites that they like because they most likely know more about politics/what is best for the country than they do. Elites will always vote and run for office, so they can get funding and stuff done for them well ahead of time too. I am just trying to explain this not agreeing/disagreeing with what you said although I like your line of thinking. 

[GBRHouston]

The Broward County election official Brenda Snipes has a long history of corruption. Let's not pretend like there's not something fishy going on there.

[GBRHouston]

9 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

Another question, if the Clinton had won yhe presidency and special council was investigating her admin for election interference with Russia, would you presume she was innocent until proven guilty?

I'm not who you were quoting, but I'm a Republican. Yes I would. Presumption of innocence is just common sense. Everybody gets that right systematically. I just wish it would apply to society too.

[Danny Bateman]

3 minutes ago, GBRHouston said:

The Broward County election official Brenda Snipes has a long history of corruption. Let's not pretend like there's not something fishy going on there.

 

Proof backing up this statement would be good context.

[GBRHouston]

5 minutes ago, Clifford Franklin said:

 

Proof backing up this statement would be good context.

I should have said corruption/incompetency. For all I know this may just be incompetency. But her history of trouble includes "forgetting" to count ballot in 2012, leaving a medical marijuana amendment off some of the ballots in 2016, not mailing 58,000 people their absentee ballots in 2004, and destroying the 2016 ballots too soon after the election. The last one isn't corrupt, just illegal.

 

Edit: And here we are now. Broward County, which isn't even the largest in the state, is the only one to not report all of its votes by the deadline. And here we are on November 11.

[Nebfanatic]

9 minutes ago, GBRHouston said:

The Broward County election official Brenda Snipes has a long history of corruption. Let's not pretend like there's not something fishy going on there.

Shouldn't we wait for judgement? Innocent until proven guilty I thought

[GBRHouston]

2 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Shouldn't we wait for judgement? Innocent until proven guilty I thought

If there's proof of guilt right in front of you then I think that presumption of innocence is off the table. I'm pre-law, don't try and pull that argument with me. We've had that nailed into our heads so many times.

[NM11046]

On 11/4/2018 at 8:17 PM, Clifford Franklin said:

Finally got sick of their crap. Put 2 hours into text banking for both Abrams & Gillum tonight. Sent out over 2000 messages. 

 

If they're going to play dirty we'll just have to outwork them. 

Thanks for the work!  Wasn't text banking kinda fun?  I worked for Beto and sent probably 7k and then did GOTV for PA for 3-4 days.  Different system and I only got out about 4k.  Felt good to do something from afar, and the fact that I could do it while watching fb games made it an easy decision.

[Nebfanatic]

4 minutes ago, GBRHouston said:

If there's proof of guilt right in front of you then I think that presumption of innocence is off the table. I'm pre-law, don't try and pull that argument with me. We've had that nailed into our heads so many times.

I wouldn't say anything you presented was proof of guilt. If so, Trump has definitely colluded with Russia

 

[commando]

21 minutes ago, GBRHouston said:

The Broward County election official Brenda Snipes has a long history of corruption. Let's not pretend like there's not something fishy going on there.

so are the republicans officials who are counting the votes (there are always reps from both parties in the office doing the counting) must somehow be working with the dems to pull off this fraud?

[GBRHouston]

Just now, commando said:

so are the republicans officials who are counting the votes (there are always reps from both parties in the office doing the counting) must somehow be working with the dems to pull off this fraud?

What...? No. Why do you even bring that up? If you look into it Snipes is heavily incompetent and unfit for her role. Everyone on here needs to stop trying to justify it. 

[Nebfanatic]

1 minute ago, GBRHouston said:

What...? No. Why do you even bring that up? If you look into it Snipes is heavily incompetent and unfit for her role. Everyone on here needs to stop trying to justify it. 

The hypocrisy is just hilarious really. I mean you judged someone prior to proof of guilt right before you quoted me to tell me you wouldn't do that if given the opportunity.