Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[Alan Klein]

Biden has finally beat Trump a second time.  Way to go.  I wonder what his approval rating is among Tesla owners?


Quinnipiac poll shows Biden with 33 percent approval rating
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/589450-quinnipiac-poll-shows-biden-with-33-percent-approval-rating

[LesPalenik]

Biden has finally beat Trump a second time.  Way to go.  I wonder what his approval rating is among Tesla owners?

Quinnipiac poll shows Biden with 33 percent approval rating
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/589450-quinnipiac-poll-shows-biden-with-33-percent-approval-rating

I suspect that with his speech at Detroit Zero plant, Biden lost more voters among the younger folks than the entire UAW contingent could ever provide. Many youtubers and even CNBC commentators are still replaying his "Mary, you are the leader" clip.   

[TechTalk]

Wake me up when this show is over. zzzzzzzzz

[Peter McLennan]

I agree.  I remember reading here for years from the same posters how Trump was a traitor and colluded with the Russians, over and over and over again.  They're still repeating the same old stuff about him even though he's out of office for a year.

That's because he is and did.  Just because he's out of office doesn't mean he's not guilty. As far as I know, there is no statute of limitations on treason.

Not only is he a traitor to Republicans, he's a traitor to America and to Democracy itself.

[Alan Klein]

That's because he is and did.  Just because he's out of office doesn't mean he's not guilty. As far as I know, there is no statute of limitations on treason.

Not only is he a traitor to Republicans, he's a traitor to America and to Democracy itself.

Mueller found no one guilty of that in all of America.  Not one person.  Give it up. 

[Peter McLennan]

Mueller found no one guilty of that in all of America.  Not one person.  Give it up.

That's incorrect.  He said they hadn't gathered sufficient evidence under the current constraints to successfully charge him.  That doesn't mean he's not guilty.
That's the Russian part.

The insurrection part, well, we all saw it live on TV.  Some might deny it, but it was there and it was real. If you think he's innocent, fine.  But you've been wrong before.

[Alan Klein]

That's incorrect.  He said they hadn't gathered sufficient evidence under the current constraints to successfully charge him.  That doesn't mean he's not guilty.
That's the Russian part.

The insurrection part, well, we all saw it live on TV.  Some might deny it, but it was there and it was real. If you think he's innocent, fine.  But you've been wrong before.

The point about not having enough evidence has to do with obstruction of justice, not collusion with the Russians.  You're mixing up the case.

[TechTalk]

It's like a binge-watching marathon of just one single episode of a 30-minute sitcom on repeat for several hours continuously until you fall into a coma.

[digitaldog]

It's like a binge-watching marathon of just one single episode of a 30-minute sitcom on repeat for several hours continuously until you fall into a coma.

In other words:

[TechTalk]

Yep. That summarizes it nicely.

[Robert Roaldi]

Last year sometime, John Camp asked a question on these pages about which of the Trump sons was the dumbest. I forget exactly how he phrased the question but the details don't matter. Vanity Fair attempts to answer the question, https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/01/eric-trump-donald-trump-letitia-james-constitution#intcid=_vanity-fair-verso-hp-trending_80219be0-30b4-4449-b2b8-23ce37b7c8bb_popular4-1. Warning, the writing is a bit blunt.

[Peter McLennan]

It's like a binge-watching marathon of just one single episode of a 30-minute sitcom on repeat for several hours continuously until you fall into a coma.

Groundhog Day

[digitaldog]

Warning, the writing is a bit blunt.

This quote was too funny:

“I have pan-fried smarter things than Eric Trump and used them as a garnish on a side salad.”

Substitute “a quarter pounder and a medium fries and Diet Coke” with one fellow who posts too often here; perfect! 😂

[TechTalk]

I'm still trying to figure out why someone incessantly comparing BLM demonstrations, a small percentage of which became riots, to the insurrection on January 6th which went from demonstration to riot to insurrection very quickly; would claim that the latter would never have become a riot if the police had not been "incapable of keeping control and order" and claims that had the police been "prepared, we wouldn't even be talking about this now"—but, has never once even hinted that police were responsible for failing to prevent any of the riots that occurred during the previous summer.

Why would that be?

Oh please, Peter.  Look at the videos of the looting, arson, rioting and breaking into stores.  They were not white people.

[Peter McLennan]

Why would that be?

Excellent question.  What's the answer, Alan?

[TechTalk]

It seems like we have two sets of standards.

[Alan Klein]

Excellent question.  What's the answer, Alan?

The answer is the police were responsible in many cases of not doing their jobs.  They didn't prevent riots because politicians held them back.  They let looters loot, rioters riot, and thieves steal from businesses and burn them down. The police were told to back off.   In one town, rioters occupied an entire geographic area and practically destroyed the police sub-station.  Nothing was done for days or weeks.  It was like an occupying army. 

It was similar with Jan 6th except, in this case, there weren't enough police because the commander refused additional help offered by the military and other outside police units.  So a demonstration was allowed to devolve into a riot. Why did the commander refuse the help? Were politicians also involved in holding them back like in the BLM riots?

[digitaldog]

Excellent question.  What's the answer, Alan?

"When someone says, That's a good question. You can be sure it's a lot better than the answer you're going to get." -Source Unknown
....from Alan! 🤯

[Robert Roaldi]

The answer is the police were responsible in many cases of not doing their jobs.  They didn't prevent riots because politicians held them back.  They let looters loot, rioters riot, and thieves steal from businesses and burn them down. The police were told to back off.   In one town, rioters occupied an entire geographic area and practically destroyed the police sub-station.  Nothing was done for days or weeks.  It was like an occupying army. 

It was similar with Jan 6th except, in this case, there weren't enough police because the commander refused additional help offered by the military and other outside police units.  So a demonstration was allowed to devolve into a riot. Why did the commander refuse the help? Were politicians also involved in holding them back like in the BLM riots?

You're blaming the crimes on the police's inability to prevent the crime. I don't remember you taking this position at the time of the BLM demonstrations but maybe you've revised your position on this, nothing wrong with that. But you must see the dilemma here. I mean, it's an unorthodox position to take. If my car is stolen, is it my fault because I own a car that people want to steal?

On another subject, you have stated a couple of times now that you don't think the last Presidential election was rigged. Fair enough. So what do you think of Trump et al.'s reaction to Senator Mike Rounds on-air statement that he thought the elections were fair and that Trump lost. He's getting some Republican support but Trump lost his mind over it (not a long trip, admittedly). I find Trump's reaction disingenuous because I don't think that he really believes that the election was unfair, but now that he's started the con, he has to see it through. Is this a responsible position for a public figure to take? Do you think he has the country's best interests in mind?

[TechTalk]

I don't remember you taking this position at the time of the BLM demonstrations...

or even suggesting that until now.