The GOP has a stable of potential winners, the Dems have one old mare

[Skylar]

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So, let's take your post and run with a debate. Can you give specific reports and links? How often do you watch Fox?

Let's start with

You didn't build that
We have to vote on it to see what's in it
What difference does it make?

And just what quote did the candidate/official not mean what they said?

Pick any one and we can get to what was REALY said

Okay, How about when Hillary said, "What difference does it make?" It made a helluva difference when there were dead people resulting from inappropriate actions of the State Dept. She wanted everyone to think, "We can't bring them back to life, so what's the difference."

But she was ignoring the fact that their actions contributed to the unsafe conditions in Benghazi.

You've got it backwards.

The issues she was addressing with the quote you've offered was the State department's accounting of the attack after it had occurred. Not the state department's actions leading up to the attack or any of the 'unsafe conditions'. Here's the statement in context:

Johnson: No, again, we were misled that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that -- an assault sprang out of that -- and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn’t know that.

Clinton: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.

In Context Hillary Clinton s What difference does it make comment PolitiFact

Now you either know this or you should know it. Either way, its an explicit contradiction of your narrative.

And she's right. If the State department reported it was a product of protest for a few days after the fact or if they reported it was a coordinated assault, what difference would it make to the situation? Or in preventing another attack?

Absolutely none.

 

[Jackson]

And you are not going to grant that an effect of this "complaints of necessary force plummeting" is the fact that the police are just not doing their job for fear of ending up in court?

In San Diego? Nope. The exact opposite is true:

San Diego sees spike in felony arrest rate

Over the past five years, the felony arrest rate has steadily risen in San Diego County, according to a report released by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Tuesday.

The report found that the felony arrest rate in 2013 was eight percent higher than it was in 2009. Five years ago, felonies represented 28 percent of all adult arrests. In 2014 that rose to 35 percent.

In 2013, San Diego had the second highest adult arrest rate in California, at 35.9 arrests per 1,000 population, behind only San Bernardino County. It also had the highest juvenile arrest rate in the state at 25.8. The adult arrest rate still marked a significant drop from five years ago, when it was at 41.9.

San Diego sees spike in felony arrest rate - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego

So that's two of your baseless excuses that are down. How many more are you going to make up before you accept the distinct possibility that the reduction in uses of force are because the police are being watched?

You're copping a squat over any semblance of 'objectivity' the more you bend over backwards with made up excuses that don't match the evidence.

So, what was the arrest rate since Ferguson came into play?

Higher. But its irrelevant.

The numbers comparing San Diego cops before before body cams and after all came before Ferguson. Making Fergeson irrelevant to the numbers I'm citing.

Sigh....I was hoping with your talk of 'objectivity' I could present evidence and it might make an impact. Apparently I was wrong.

Arrests haven't gone down. They've gone up. Uses of force have gone

The claim of objectivity still stands.

Then objectively, what is your explanation for the stark reduction in the use of force by police officers by their own reporting when body cams were implemented. We've already eliminated the 'they aren't doing their job because they are afraid' angle. Arrests are up. And the 'false allegation' angle. As these are self reported numbers.

So what do you have left?

Objectively, my explanation works: that much of the use of force by police officers before body cams wasn't necessary.

Its an explanation blessed with the credibility of simplicity (Occam's Razor anyone?), is supported by other evidence (accompanying reduction in complaints of excessive force) and matches the evidence. Nothing you've presented does.

So.....can you offer a better explanation? If no, then why are you rejecting mine? Especially when your last two excuses didn't work.

I was impressed with the data on arrests and feel that the city is not being affected as other metropolitan areas. I looked more at the data provided and other data to complete the observance. Do you feel that the fact that San Diego has a black population of 6.7% has made a difference?

San Diego - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

San Diego is probably not alone. Other cities with the same demographics would be interesting to study.

The demographics of the area didn't change significantly from the year before the use of body cams to the year that body cams were used. Yet use of force changed dramatically between those two years. Body cams are the only significant difference. The black population percentage remained essentially unchanged.

Skylar, you have made a great representation...better than mine. I am inclined to lean toward you opinion. Now, can this be repeated elsewhere whereas the arrest records increase? Can you make these same assumptions where LE are not proactive in their present environment?

 

[Jackson]

So, let's take your post and run with a debate. Can you give specific reports and links? How often do you watch Fox?

Let's start with

You didn't build that
We have to vote on it to see what's in it
What difference does it make?

And just what quote did the candidate/official not mean what they said?

Pick any one and we can get to what was REALY said

Okay, How about when Hillary said, "What difference does it make?" It made a helluva difference when there were dead people resulting from inappropriate actions of the State Dept. She wanted everyone to think, "We can't bring them back to life, so what's the difference."

But she was ignoring the fact that their actions contributed to the unsafe conditions in Benghazi.

Another, "You didn't build that" defies any logic. Can't give Obama a pass on that or perhaps it was inept speech writers. Of course Americans built our infrastructure. But the Community Organizer didn't realkize that as much as their are not 57 states.

Good ones

Hillary is answering a question about the cause of the attack being reaction to a video or planned terrorism. She replies "what difference does it make" in how we have to respond to the attacks
Republicans twist it to mean.....Hllary doesn't care that people died

Obama is speaking roads and infrastructure and says businesses didn't build that
Republicans twist it to imply Obama claims you didn't build your business

 

[daws101]

How many lies and scandals will the Dems justify between now and November of next year?

Certainly a lot less than the repubs.

Considering there are 20 Republican candidates to one, you may have a point.

Which of Hillary's lies do you believe? Benghazi? She has only one cell phone? She didn't know she need to use government e-mails? What about under fire in Bosnia, that was compelling.

Which ones do you believe?

Bengazi is/ was no lie.
as for the others there is no credible evidence proving them to be lies .
I will make my decision on the evidence, not bigoted rumors.

 

[daws101]

How many lies and scandals will the Dems justify between now and November of next year?

Certainly a lot less than the repubs.

Nit so, Republicans stand away from politicians found in contempt of the laws. Look at Hastert. See any republicans saying, "Oh, it's a liberal overcharging this man? No. He's on his own and right Let him go to jail if found guilty. And I am a leaning coinservative

Shit's getting deep in here.

 

[Jackson]

Let's start with

You didn't build that
We have to vote on it to see what's in it
What difference does it make?

And just what quote did the candidate/official not mean what they said?

Pick any one and we can get to what was REALY said

Okay, How about when Hillary said, "What difference does it make?" It made a helluva difference when there were dead people resulting from inappropriate actions of the State Dept. She wanted everyone to think, "We can't bring them back to life, so what's the difference."

But she was ignoring the fact that their actions contributed to the unsafe conditions in Benghazi.

Another, "You didn't build that" defies any logic. Can't give Obama a pass on that or perhaps it was inept speech writers. Of course Americans built our infrastructure. But the Community Organizer didn't realkize that as much as their are not 57 states.

Good ones

Hillary is answering a question about the cause of the attack being reaction to a video or planned terrorism. She replies "what difference does it make" in how we have to respond to the attacks
Republicans twist it to mean.....Hllary doesn't care that people died

Obama is speaking roads and infrastructure and says businesses didn't build that
Republicans twist it to imply Obama claims you didn't build your business

I never thought of HC's comment as she didn't care. As much as I dislike her, she is smarter that to assume that. It's just that she wasn't going to accept any responsibility of her own inaction or those of her Dept.

You're right about that statement of "You didn't build that. Whether it is infrastrucure or their own businesses they certainly did build that. For someone who claims he was so bright and noted in school, he could have written a statement that made more sense. You have to admit, that was one irreverent statement.

 

[daws101]

That she is not being prosecuted is more evidence of your unsubstantiated conspiracy theories

The post you replied to answered that question. The corruption is rampant and coverup is in full force.

Oh no! Not the cover up ploy!
sure sign of makin' shit up!

After Republicans nominated HW, HW, Viagra Bob, W, W, McCain and Romney, call me a skeptic as to who they will pick until I see it. The Republican party's inability to pick candidates is the only chance Chillary has. Unfortunately, it's a good chance...

And the Dems picked a community activist. I'd stop making judgments if I were you.

And The repubs picked a ptsd ridden vet and an a incredible stupid evangelical
it's not the dems judgment that's questionable.

Oh, you were doing so well until that last statement. Before the angry black man who's an empty suit in the white house, John Kerry? Are you kidding me? He was a gag candidate. Al Gore is a lunatic who says more stupid things than Dan Quayle did. Before that was your two election love of the sexual predator who caught a break by being on the good side of the internet bubble which had zero to do with him. Tsongas? Mondale? Carter? LOL, that's picking well? yeah

You'll get an anurisim yammering like that.

I know Obama is a deity, I was just kidding saying he wasn't

Tragic failed attempt at sarcasm.

 

[daws101]

Of course its debatable .

LOL! Yet, when you had the opportunity to do so, ya chose NOT TO.

Now, I wonder, what SHOULD we make of THAT?

Didn't know there was a time limit on debate Bengazi is a good example

Whitewater is another example...went on for eight years

Whitewater was a criminal syndicate... the investigation of it resulted in numerous felony arrests from the sitting governor of Arkansas, to every partner relevant to the enterprise except the Clintons. Who were as guilty as the others, but who escaped charges, by virtue of the untimely deaths of the witnesses.

Usual idiotic mud slinging...

This tells us nothing about the Clintons but makes the poster look like a complete fucking idiot...

Bravo!

 

[Skylar]

In San Diego? Nope. The exact opposite is true:

So that's two of your baseless excuses that are down. How many more are you going to make up before you accept the distinct possibility that the reduction in uses of force are because the police are being watched?

You're copping a squat over any semblance of 'objectivity' the more you bend over backwards with made up excuses that don't match the evidence.

So, what was the arrest rate since Ferguson came into play?

Higher. But its irrelevant.

The numbers comparing San Diego cops before before body cams and after all came before Ferguson. Making Fergeson irrelevant to the numbers I'm citing.

Sigh....I was hoping with your talk of 'objectivity' I could present evidence and it might make an impact. Apparently I was wrong.

Arrests haven't gone down. They've gone up. Uses of force have gone

The claim of objectivity still stands.

Then objectively, what is your explanation for the stark reduction in the use of force by police officers by their own reporting when body cams were implemented. We've already eliminated the 'they aren't doing their job because they are afraid' angle. Arrests are up. And the 'false allegation' angle. As these are self reported numbers.

So what do you have left?

Objectively, my explanation works: that much of the use of force by police officers before body cams wasn't necessary.

Its an explanation blessed with the credibility of simplicity (Occam's Razor anyone?), is supported by other evidence (accompanying reduction in complaints of excessive force) and matches the evidence. Nothing you've presented does.

So.....can you offer a better explanation? If no, then why are you rejecting mine? Especially when your last two excuses didn't work.

I was impressed with the data on arrests and feel that the city is not being affected as other metropolitan areas. I looked more at the data provided and other data to complete the observance. Do you feel that the fact that San Diego has a black population of 6.7% has made a difference?

San Diego - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

San Diego is probably not alone. Other cities with the same demographics would be interesting to study.

The demographics of the area didn't change significantly from the year before the use of body cams to the year that body cams were used. Yet use of force changed dramatically between those two years. Body cams are the only significant difference. The black population percentage remained essentially unchanged.

Skylar, you have made a great representation...better than mine. I am inclined to lean toward you opinion.

Thank you. And thank you for being open to reviewing the evidence. My point in presenting it is as evidence that the use of unnecessary force by police is likely far greater than is being reported. And that such likelihood of unnecessary force is worthy of federal 'interference'.

Now, can this be repeated elsewhere whereas the arrest records increase? Can you make these same assumptions where LE are not proactive in their present environment?

We'll find out. Body cams uses are expanding. If we see accompanying dramatic reductions in the use of force by police after implementation but no major change to their arrest numbers.....then I think that stands as strong evidence that illegal and unnecessary violence by police was pretty wide spread.

Better though is that the use of body cams would then help keep that level low and help reduce unnecessary uses of force. And help protect police officers from unjust accusations when the uses of force were justified. The benefits are very much a two way street. Which is why most police unions support them....with one caveat:

That officers be able to review (but be unable to alter in any way) the body cam footage of an incident before writing their reports. That seems completely reasonable as it would result in the most accurate accounting.

 

[Redfish]

I know...passing liberal policies isn't really accomplishing anything

More sour grapes from the losing party

our national debt when obozo took over was 10T, it will be 20T when he leaves
there are more in poverty today than in 08
there are more on food stamps than in 08
the gap between rich and poor is larger than in 08
the mideast is a total mess under obozo
the country is more divided than other due to his failed policies
his stooge reid sat on over 300 bills rather than doing his job

those are not sour grapes, they are facts. Deal with it.

Now you are trying...actually trying to talk specifics
I am proud of you

Obama took over an economy that was in freefall. That there continues to be economic instability is a given

Now as to the inequality in the distribution of wealth.....that has been brewing since we embraced supply side economics

the economy was not in "free fall" what a stupid comment.

your hero said he would fix it, he did nothing but make it worse, that is the reality of the obama terms

there will always be rich and poor, the government cannot change that. But, the american system of free interprise is the best method to give everyone who is willing to work a piece of the pie. government mandated income distribution never works, it only helps those doing the distributing.

Not in free fall?

The stock market had dropped 7000 points
We were losing 750,000 jobs a month
Auto companies were collapsing
Banks were defaulting
GDP had been negative for five quarters
Housing market collapsed

If that is not free fall, what is?

Obama made it worse?

Stock Market is up 11,000 points
Adding 230,000 jobs a month
Auto companies were saved
Banks repaid loans
GDP up 2-3 percent a quarter
Housing market recovering

That is worse to you?

OK, lets review

Obama had nothing to do with the stock market. the rise is almost all due to the low interest rates by the fed
most of those jobs are part time or the result of people taking jobs they are over qualified for

The auto companies would have been just fine if they had gone through bankruptcy, The bailout (using taxpayer money) was to save the UAW, not the auto companies

banks always repay loans, thats why they are called loans.

GDP, one good quarter an 7 years of miserable ones.

The housing market is better, but not because of anything obozo did.

So, yes, it is worse than when he took over.

 

[Jackson]

So, what was the arrest rate since Ferguson came into play?

Higher. But its irrelevant.

The numbers comparing San Diego cops before before body cams and after all came before Ferguson. Making Fergeson irrelevant to the numbers I'm citing.

Sigh....I was hoping with your talk of 'objectivity' I could present evidence and it might make an impact. Apparently I was wrong.

Arrests haven't gone down. They've gone up. Uses of force have gone

The claim of objectivity still stands.

Then objectively, what is your explanation for the stark reduction in the use of force by police officers by their own reporting when body cams were implemented. We've already eliminated the 'they aren't doing their job because they are afraid' angle. Arrests are up. And the 'false allegation' angle. As these are self reported numbers.

So what do you have left?

Objectively, my explanation works: that much of the use of force by police officers before body cams wasn't necessary.

Its an explanation blessed with the credibility of simplicity (Occam's Razor anyone?), is supported by other evidence (accompanying reduction in complaints of excessive force) and matches the evidence. Nothing you've presented does.

So.....can you offer a better explanation? If no, then why are you rejecting mine? Especially when your last two excuses didn't work.

I was impressed with the data on arrests and feel that the city is not being affected as other metropolitan areas. I looked more at the data provided and other data to complete the observance. Do you feel that the fact that San Diego has a black population of 6.7% has made a difference?

San Diego - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

San Diego is probably not alone. Other cities with the same demographics would be interesting to study.

The demographics of the area didn't change significantly from the year before the use of body cams to the year that body cams were used. Yet use of force changed dramatically between those two years. Body cams are the only significant difference. The black population percentage remained essentially unchanged.

Skylar, you have made a great representation...better than mine. I am inclined to lean toward you opinion.

Thank you. And thank you for being open to reviewing the evidence. My point in presenting it is as evidence that the use of unnecessary force by police is likely far greater than is being reported. And that such likelihood of unnecessary force is worthy of federal 'interference'.

Now, can this be repeated elsewhere whereas the arrest records increase? Can you make these same assumptions where LE are not proactive in their present environment?

We'll find out. Body cams uses are expanding. If we see accompanying dramatic reductions in the use of force by police after implementation but no major change to their arrest numbers.....then I think that stands as strong evidence that illegal and unnecessary violence by police was pretty wide spread.

Better though is that the use of body cams would then help keep that level low and help reduce unnecessary uses of force. And help protect police officers from unjust accusations when the uses of force were justified. The benefits are very much a two way street. Which is why most police unions support them....with one caveat:

That officers be able to review (but be unable to alter in any way) the body cam footage of an incident before writing their reports. That seems completely reasonable as it would result in the most accurate accounting.

I absolutely agree especially with your last statement. There was one police officer who claimed the video cam went down (shut off) three times while he was engaging suspects. The police investigated and found there was no problem with the video cam. He was likely the culprit.

Being a police officer is risky business and we need well qualified and honest people taking those positions. I would agree with most anything that would encourage proper police action, taking out the biased and egocentric cops as long as we support our good officers. Think we can agree on that.

 

[Redfish]

Hillary will find out just how good her percentage points are after the first debate. Hell she can't answer a reporters questions now...what is she going to do when met with actual questions she HAS to answer during a debate? Deep down Hillary is afraid of questions because her answers will be checked and rechecked.

Nope, think HRC is scared and rightly so.

Under any SENSE of Reality... Hillary Clinton would presently be defending herself from Federal Charges ranging from violations of the RICO statutes, to TREASON.

That she is not, is a definitive sign that something well beyond 'corruption' is operating the highest levels of the United States Government.

That she is not being prosecuted is more evidence of your unsubstantiated conspiracy theories

do you really think an obama appointed AG is going to prosecute a clinton? her time is coming, just wait. The clinton crime family will be brought to justice.

 

[Redfish]

Not in free fall?

The stock market had dropped 7000 points

As it should have...

We were losing 750,000 jobs a month

Should have been much worse...

Auto companies were collapsing

They still are...

Banks were defaulting

That will happen when one replaces sound operating principle with unsound notions of 'fairness'.

GDP had been negative for five quarters

Catastrophic collapse of the economy due to the unsound economic policy will do that... .

Housing market collapsed

Yep... ya can't replace sound, actuarial lending policy with irrational notions of fairness and not expect a run on mortgages, that drives the cost of the underlying real property beyond the means of the market to sustain such and not expect it to collapse the market.

If that is not free fall, what is?

It was just the inevitable consequence of insinuating socialist policy into a free market.

And it's not over yet... all the idiots did was set up delays. The Markets did not correct... they simply propped up the fatally flawed system with pretend cash.

In fairly short order, all of it will crash. And there will be no resources remaining to stop it... and at that point, you'll get an idea of what 'free-fall' looks like. And my guess is that you're not going to like it much.

It was FREEFALL headed to depression

Obama stopped it

Ok fool, what specific things did he do to stop the economy from crashing into depression? Stimulus? failed, cash for clunkers? failed, tell us exactly what he did.

 

[Jackson]

Hillary will find out just how good her percentage points are after the first debate. Hell she can't answer a reporters questions now...what is she going to do when met with actual questions she HAS to answer during a debate? Deep down Hillary is afraid of questions because her answers will be checked and rechecked.

Nope, think HRC is scared and rightly so.

Under any SENSE of Reality... Hillary Clinton would presently be defending herself from Federal Charges ranging from violations of the RICO statutes, to TREASON.

That she is not, is a definitive sign that something well beyond 'corruption' is operating the highest levels of the United States Government.

That she is not being prosecuted is more evidence of your unsubstantiated conspiracy theories

do you really think an obama appointed AG is going to prosecute a clinton? her time is coming, just wait. The clinton crime family will be brought to justice.

That is as likely as Holder joining the KKK. I would like to see them brought to justice, but let her lose the next election first. Let the downfall of the Clintons and their criminal activity be a lesson to other politicians who believe they are above the law. Reid should be next.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

LOL~ Red, these cranks are HELPLESS!

 

[Redfish]

Not in free fall?

The stock market had dropped 7000 points

As it should have...

We were losing 750,000 jobs a month

Should have been much worse...

Auto companies were collapsing

They still are...

Banks were defaulting

That will happen when one replaces sound operating principle with unsound notions of 'fairness'.

GDP had been negative for five quarters

Catastrophic collapse of the economy due to the unsound economic policy will do that... .

Housing market collapsed

Yep... ya can't replace sound, actuarial lending policy with irrational notions of fairness and not expect a run on mortgages, that drives the cost of the underlying real property beyond the means of the market to sustain such and not expect it to collapse the market.

If that is not free fall, what is?

It was just the inevitable consequence of insinuating socialist policy into a free market.

And it's not over yet... all the idiots did was set up delays. The Markets did not correct... they simply propped up the fatally flawed system with pretend cash.

In fairly short order, all of it will crash. And there will be no resources remaining to stop it... and at that point, you'll get an idea of what 'free-fall' looks like. And my guess is that you're not going to like it much.

It was FREEFALL headed to depression

Obama stopped it

In fairness, Obama and GW. Most of the massive budget deficit that Bush handed Obama was related to many of the same efforts to keep the economy afloat that Obama continued when in office. QE for example began in November of 2008. With the US government stopping several bank collapses after Lehman Brothers went down before Obama took office.

Regardless of how you feel about Bush or the US government intersession in the Great Recession, Bush played a role in mitigating the damage. Obama played a larger one.

My biggest gripe against Bush is why he waited so long. He denied we were in recession until the 2008 recession was over and did not listen to Paulson until the fall of 2008

there was no recession, there were a couple of bad quarters on wall street and some crooks like Madoff get sent to jail where they belong. The 08 recession is a myth.

 

[Papageorgio]

How many lies and scandals will the Dems justify between now and November of next year?

Certainly a lot less than the repubs.

Considering there are 20 Republican candidates to one, you may have a point.

Which of Hillary's lies do you believe? Benghazi? She has only one cell phone? She didn't know she need to use government e-mails? What about under fire in Bosnia, that was compelling.

Which ones do you believe?

Bengazi is/ was no lie.
as for the others there is no credible evidence proving them to be lies .
I will make my decision on the evidence, not bigoted rumors.

Okay, then I know how gullible you are thank you.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Bengazi is/ was no lie.
as for the others there is no credible evidence proving them to be lies .
I will make my decision on the evidence, not bigoted rumors.

Fact on Benghazi:

Four US Citizens are dead... as a direct result of obama and clinton delivering weapons to Islamic Terrorists and spent MONTHS lying to the American public that the attack was a consequence of a frickin' YOUTUBE VIDEO.

These facts are indisputable and they are the tip of the subversive, treasonous iceberg.

 

[Redfish]

correction to the OP. the dem candidate is an old lame sway backed mare who suffers from dementia.

do you dems really want to run such a person? old, white, angry, corrupt, failed, did I mention old and white?

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Its very amusing to watch the dims twist and turn trying to justify running the old, tired, lying, corrupt, failed bitch HRC. But she is all they have, they have no one else. Its hilarious.

It is hilarious! I am slapping my knee and laughing so hard I start coughing uncontrollably. Especially given the fact that the failed bitch is beating all of the Republicans in the polls. So, genius, what does that make them? And what does that make you, sock puppet?