Democrat Convention Thread

[BmorePat87]

(08-01-2016, 03:22 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: And what Gary Johnson is saying is that states can still do as they choose, just that not every single one of 50 states should be dictated to by a federal mandate.

See, saying "states created it" is not the same as saying "every state agrees with the agenda 100%".  All Gary Johnson is saying is to leave it to each individual state to adopt what they agree with.

And not necessarily directed at you, but this is what confuses and infuriates big gubmit liberals.  Because if you ain't with them, then you're an idiot - and prepare to be bukkaked with faux science and bullshit logic....shamed into accepting Facebook posts as gospel.

You realize that the states that adopted it chose to adopt it, right? There was no federal mandate to adopt it.

This is why his answer is stupid. He was asked about education policy adopted by individual states, not the federal government, and stated he did not support it because individual states should be in charge of adopting policy, not the federal government.

[GMDino]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/08/01/3804041/conversation-trumps-veterans-co-chair-khizr-khan/

Quote:A Conversation With Trump’s Veterans Co-Chair About Khizr Khan


New Hampshire Representative Al Baldasaro is a co-chair of the Trump campaign for veterans’ issues. He helped write Trump’s veterans’ plan. He appeared as a surrogate for the Trump campaign around the country — including events in South Carolina, Florida, Texas, Delaware and New York. He served as a delegate for Trump at the Republican convention and was a member of the credentialing committee.


Reached by phone in New Hampshire, Baldasaro told ThinkProgress that he believes Khizr Khan, the gold star father who criticized Trump at the Democratic convention, is an agent of the Muslim Brotherhood. Baldasaro explained that he believes Khan has “long ties to the Clinton and Obama campaign.” That is damning because “in the White House there is the Muslim Brotherhood.” Baldasaro suggested “looking it up on the internet” for more information.

There is no evidence that Khan had any connection to Clinton or Obama prior to agreeing to speak at the Democratic convention.

Earlier today Baldasaro tweeted an article from a fringe anti-Islam conspiracy site, making similar claims.

Quote:[/url]

 Follow
Rep Al Baldasaro @Al_Baldasaro
Mr Khan, shame on you & #CrookedHillary for not being truthful to all in attacks at @realDonaldTrump @CNN @FoxNews http://shoebat.com/2016/07/31/what-the-media-is-not-telling-you-about-the-muslim-who-attacked-donald-trump-he-is-a-muslim-brotherhood-agent-who-wants-to-advance-sharia-law-and-bring-muslims-into-the-united-states/ …
10:36 AM - 1 Aug 2016 · Londonderry, NH, United States

What The Media Is Not Telling You About The Muslim Who Attacked Donald Trump: He Is A Muslim...
By Theodore Shoebat and Walid Shoebat The Muslim who attacked Donald Trump, Khizr Muazzam Khan, is a Muslim Brotherhood agent, working to bring Muslims into the United States. After reading what we…
shoebat.com

• 
  
   
• 
   134134 Retweets
   
• 
  [url=https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=760122082323795968] 136136 likes
  

On the phone several hours later, Baldasaro maintained that the article could be accurate because one the authors, Walid Shoebat, “has been on TV.”

Still, after tweeting the article multiple times, Baldasaro began to have second thoughts because he didn’t like what the article “said about the son.” The article suggested Humayun Khan, a recipient of the Bronze Star, was a double agent “working for the US and Al-Qaeda… killed before his Islamist mission was accomplished.” (That language was recently deleted from the article.)

Baldasaro tweeted that he is “not sure about [Shoebat’s] credibility.” Still all of his earlier tweets — and his belief that Khan is an agent of the Muslim Brotherhood — remain.

Indeed, Baldasaro expanded his critique of Khizr Khan. He said he was “sickened” and “disgusted” by Khan, accusing him of using his son as a political pawn.

Khan famously implored Trump to read the Constitution, offering to lend his well-worn pocket edition. “Mr. Khan needs to read the constitution about the duties of the President,” Baldasaro said, adding that his attacks on Trump were “half cocked.”

Baldasaro said he had not been contacted by the Trump campaign concerning his tweets on Khan.

Last month, Baldasaro called on Hillary Clinton to be executed by firing squad and refused to apologize. The Trump campaign issued a mild statement saying that they “do not agree” with Baldasaro but was “incredibly grateful for his support.” Baldasaro told ThinkProgress that his role with the Trump campaign had not changed at all since the incident.

Despite his title and extensive involvement with the Trump campaign, Baldasaro insisted that he was speaking only for himself.

“I don’t speak for Trump,” he said, “Only Trump speaks for Trump.”

[JustWinBaby]

(08-01-2016, 04:45 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You realize that the states that adopted it chose to adopt it, right? There was no federal mandate to adopt it.

This is why his answer is stupid. He was asked about education policy adopted by individual states, not the federal government, and stated he did not support it because individual states should be in charge of adopting policy, not the federal government.

There were federal funding incentives to adopt it, and I don't believe you could pick-and-choose parts to adopt.

So not really a free and independent choice, no?

[Belsnickel]

(08-01-2016, 06:44 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: There were federal funding incentives to adopt it, and I don't believe you could pick-and-choose parts to adopt.

So not really a free and independent choice, no?

I thought the incentives were tied t adopting standards meeting certain requirements, not necessarily CC.

[BmorePat87]

(08-01-2016, 06:44 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: There were federal funding incentives to adopt it, and I don't believe you could pick-and-choose parts to adopt.

So not really a free and independent choice, no?

Having standards that were similar to common core standards were one of many things that could aid you in getting additional federal funding. 

In Maryland, we have our career and college readiness standards. They're similar to Common Core, but it's unique to Maryland. Your standards can be unique to your state. They can essentially just be copied from the CCSS. There was no "you must have exactly this word for word". 

Free and independent choice at the state level.

[*bfine32*]

(08-01-2016, 07:44 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: So the Khan situation is continually in the media here, and it has gotten me thinking. The DNC decision to put them up on stage was complete and total bait. They were hoping that Trump would say something stupid as a result, and he delivered.

https://globalriskinfo.com/2016/07/31/an-open-letter-to-khizr-khan/

Quote:Dear Mr. Khan,

I want to preface this letter by stating that I respect your son’s sacrifice for this great nation.  By all accounts, he is a true hero that sacrificed himself in service to our country. For that I am thankful.


As a veteran, I watched your comments at the Democratic National Convention with a mixture of sadness, and anger.  The United States has a military comprised of volunteers.  Every single member has made the conscious choice to join the military and serve.  There is not a single service member who has been forced into service.  It is important for all service members (and apparently, their families) to understand that service to this great nation does not imbue one with special privileges or rights.  I found your comments troubling when you said: “Have you ever been to Arlington cemetery? Go look at the graves of brave patriots who died defending the United States of America. You will see all faiths, genders and ethnicities. You have sacrificed nothing and no one.”


Does it matter whether Mr. Trump has sacrificed “…nothing and no one?”…has Ms. Clinton “..sacrificed” for this nation?  How about Mr. Obama?   Your comment stating that Mr. Trump “…has sacrifice no one” is alarming.  Are you intimating that YOU sacrificed?  Sir, your son willingly sacrificed himself.   As a father I cannot imagine the pain you must feel but his sacrifice is his own.  He was not forced to serve.

I am troubled that you would allow a party that has little more than contempt for the US Service Member to parade you into the DNC to denounce Donald Trump.  Did you watch when protesters at the DNC booed and heckled Medal of Honor recipient  Capt. Florent Groberg? Did you notice your party interrupting the moment of silence for slain police officers?  Your own hypocrisy in not denouncing these acts and instead using the DNC as a platform to make a political point is disgraceful.  The simple fact is that whether one served or sacrificed does not give greater power to their statements.  One vote is as valuable as another.  That sir, is why our Country is great.  Your condemnation of one person for a statement while standing idly as your party disparages veterans and police officers is the height of hypocrisy.


To conflate the need to prevent potential terrorists from entering our country with the belief that ‘all Muslims’ should be banned is simply wrong and disingenuous. As a reminder, Mr. Trump said: ” “Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life,” The irony of your son’s own death at the hands of these very people in Iraq should not be ignored.  I have little doubt that your son would have recognized the need to protect our country from these very people.  In fact, he held is own troops back so that he could check on a suspicious car.  Your son understood sacrifice and how to protect “his people”…’his soldiers’….’his fellow Americans’…


As you continue to make the media circuit and bask in the glow of affection cast upon you by a party that has little regard for your son’s own sacrifice, and veterans in general, I would ask you to consider your comments and your position more closely.
Respectfully,
Chris Mark
US Marine and Navy Veteran.

[Belsnickel]

(08-01-2016, 09:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: https://globalriskinfo.com/2016/07/31/an-open-letter-to-khizr-khan/

I may not agree entirely with him, but I can at least respect his argument. Trump's people should hire him. Though it is likely Trump would go off script, so it probably wouldn't work out.

[GMDino]

(08-01-2016, 09:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: https://globalriskinfo.com/2016/07/31/an-open-letter-to-khizr-khan/

All Trump had to say:

Quote:I want to preface this letter by stating that I respect your son’s sacrifice for this great nation.  By all accounts, he is a true hero that sacrificed himself in service to our country. For that I am thankful.

And ignore the rest.

But the thin skinned, 3rd grader can't do it.  Any slight (Perceived or real) is an "attack" on him that must be vigorously attacked back.

I had a friend tell me today the "left" doesn't like when Trump does such things because they are too used to being "coddled" and having "safe places".  Meanwhile his candidate can't take even the slightest hint that he might be wrong or have small hands without throwing a tantrum or calling names.

It's a hoot to watch!

[GMDino]

(08-01-2016, 09:54 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I may not agree entirely with him, but I can at least respect his argument. Trump's people should hire him. Though it is likely Trump would go off script, so it probably wouldn't work out.

Eh, the right has done more harm to veterans through cutting their support when they get home than any liberal has done.

But Trump doesn't care about any of this.  Trump cares that Trump not be  insulted and Trump look good at all times.

[Belsnickel]

(08-01-2016, 10:21 PM)GMDino Wrote: I had a friend tell me today the "left" doesn't like when Trump does such things because they are too used to being "coddled" and having "safe places".  Meanwhile his candidate can't take even the slightest hint that he might be wrong or have small hands without throwing a tantrum or calling names.

It's a hoot to watch!

I see this all the time from Trump supporters on reddit. The same ones, it should be noted, that will ban you from r/the_donald if they even think you will post something critical of him and consistently delete comments and questions from those that do make it in. Creating for themselves their own "safe space."

[GMDino]

(08-01-2016, 10:36 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I see this all the time from Trump supporters on reddit. The same ones, it should be noted, that will ban you from r/the_donald if they even think you will post something critical of him and consistently delete comments and questions from those that do make it in. Creating for themselves their own "safe space."

And this morning Trump said if he loses in November it's because the election was "rigged".

The guy acts like he never lost anything.

Like people are still eating Trump Steaks on Trump Airlines. 

[JustWinBaby]

(08-01-2016, 07:05 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: They can essentially just be copied from the CCSS. There was no "you must have exactly this word for word". 

Not word for word, but essentially the same.  That makes sense - do as I say (generally) and get money. No pressure.

[BmorePat87]

(08-03-2016, 06:11 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Not word for word, but essentially the same.  That makes sense - do as I say (generally) and get money.  No pressure.

Make anything broad enough and it will be very similar. Like I said, it was one of many things you could choose to do that would make you a candidate for funding. 

No matter how you cut it, Johnson, a man I voted for in 2012 and have supported for the last year in this election cycle, is wrong on this issue and demonstrating common ignorance on the topic.

[NATI BENGALS]

(08-03-2016, 12:11 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Make anything broad enough and it will be very similar. Like I said, it was one of many things you could choose to do that would make you a candidate for funding. 

No matter how you cut it, Johnson, a man I voted for in 2012 and have supported for the last year in this election cycle, is wrong on this issue and demonstrating common ignorance on the topic.

And here i thought the RNC was a circus. Saw some video of the clowns at the libertarian convention... My goodness. No wonder Gary Johnson was their man. 

I would vote for Mcafee before I would Trump. But bragging about doing more drugs than anybody and marrying the hooker you met in Miami just doesnt scream presidential material. 

[BmorePat87]

(08-03-2016, 12:29 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: And here i thought the RNC was a circus. Saw some video of the clowns at the libertarian convention... My goodness. No wonder Gary Johnson was their man. 

I would vote for Mcafee before I would Trump. But bragging about doing more drugs than anybody and marrying the hooker you met in Miami just doesnt scream presidential material. 

Johnson actually represents the more moderate side of the party. Hard liners, the crazies, supported this dude who runs a blog (Petersen). They think Johnson and Weld are just liberal Republicans. Johnson acknowledges the legitimacy of taxes and likes anti-discrimination legislation.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

(08-03-2016, 01:04 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Johnson actually represents the more moderate side of the party. Hard liners, the crazies, supported this dude who runs a blog (Petersen). They think Johnson and Weld are just liberal Republicans. Johnson acknowledges the legitimacy of taxes and likes anti-discrimination legislation.

What did Gary Johnson answer when Samantha Bee asked him about the rest of the Libertarian Party?

He said, and I quote "They are bat shit crazy".

[BmorePat87]

(08-03-2016, 01:29 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: What did Gary Johnson answer when Samantha Bee asked him about the rest of the Libertarian Party?

He said, and I quote "They are bat shit crazy".

and it's true.  Many wouldn't consider me one. Maybe I am a LINO?

[GMDino]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/194084/americans-positive-democratic-gop-convention.aspx?g_source=Election%202016&g_medium=lead&g_campaign=tiles

Quote:Americans More Positive About Democratic Than GOP Convention


Americans are evenly divided on whether they view the Democratic Party more favorably (44%) or less favorably (42%) after the party's national convention last week. However, their ratings of the Republican Party after the GOP convention two weeks ago were significantly worse, with 35% saying they viewed the party more favorably and 52% less favorably.



The results are based on Gallup polls conducted in the days immediately after each party's convention -- the Republican convention in Cleveland from July 18-21 and the Democratic convention in Philadelphia from July 25-28.


Americans' assessments of the effect of the conventions on their image of each party largely mirror their assessments of how the convention will affect their vote in the 2016 election. By 45% to 41%, Americans say they are more rather than less likely to vote for Hillary Clinton based on what they saw or read about the Democratic convention. In contrast, many more Americans said they were less likely (51%) rather than more likely (36%) to vote for Donald Trump as a result of what they saw or read about the Republican convention.

Gallup has asked this question about Democratic and Republican national conventions since 1984, with the exceptions of the 1984 and 1992 Republican conventions. The 2016 Republican convention is the first after which a greater percentage of Americans have said they are "less likely" rather than "more likely" to vote for the party's presidential nominee.

[*bfine32*]

(08-01-2016, 07:44 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: So the Khan situation is continually in the media here, and it has gotten me thinking. The DNC decision to put them up on stage was complete and total bait. They were hoping that Trump would say something stupid as a result, and he delivered.

I found this to be telling:

http://www.mrctv.org/blog/msnbc-headlines-show-blatant-bias-grieving-parental-addresses-dnc-and-rnc

Quote:Take Pat Smith, the mother of Benghazi victim Sean Smith, who gave a speech against Hillary at the RNC. The headline from MSNBC reads: “RNC Manipulates the Pain of Grieving Mother for Partisan Gain.” The article, by Rachel Maddow producer Steve Benen, describes the scene as “a spectacle so offensive, it was hard to even comprehend,” and insinuates that the “rabid” Republican base needed some “red meat to chew on.”

Quote:He then praises Khan’s speech as “One of the most powerful moments of either party gathering.”

[Mike M (the other one)]

(07-28-2016, 01:30 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: You say this like this is abnormal. Every day of the RNC and every day so far of the DNC has been like this. Hell, Trump's acceptance speech had a list at least this long all on its own and I'm sure Hillary's will as well.

Welcome to 'Murica on display, where the facts don't matter.

And most of Trumps points from his acceptance speech were proven mostly true, after the media initially called almost all of them as lies.