Live Presidential Debate Reactions

[BmorePat87]

(10-21-2016, 11:15 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 1) Imitation is the greatest form of flattery; although it this case it had zero relevance. But thanks for the admiration all the same.

2) Has absolutely nothing to do with Hillary or defending Trump; it has to do with those that you accuse of voting for a certain candidate simply because of the “little letter” by his or her name. Not sure how you missed to correlation.

3) I think it first occurred when you suggested Trump had no shot at the GOP nod. I too, get a kick out of seeing how “right” you always are. I just think we enjoy it for different reasons.

Well, you accused Fred of not providing counter points an hour after you failed to address any of my points, just suggesting it was "silly", so yea... it's reelvant.

That was before then bringing up Hillary, which was irrelevant to my points. Whether or not Democrats do something doesn't negate whether or not Republicans or an individual here are doing the same thing. They're not mutually exclusive

I would legitimately be interested in seeing a response from you that isn't just "this is silly", "this case has zero relevance", and "not sure how you missed the correlation". Like asking for a quote, I won't hold my breath. 

PS: I'll give you a quote to reference on the morning after the election: Hillary wins with over 330 electoral votes. 

[*PhilHos*]

(10-21-2016, 12:52 PM)GMDino Wrote: 1) And?  She didn't believe she did anything wrong.  She took responsibility and didn't lie about it.  Is that bad?

2) The one where they were deleted by the people who did it...not her.

1) What? She did nothing BUT lie about it until the truth came out and even then she tried to lie about it (i.e. Powell told her she could do it, etc.) hence all the "explanations" from not understanding the 'C' to claiming that she was given permission, etc.

2) Yeah, of all the ones where she shifts the blame off herself, that probably is my favorite, too. 

[*bfine32*]

(10-21-2016, 12:57 PM)PhilHos Wrote: You keep mentioning this, why? Do you honestly think that the Christians that are voting for Trump (and, let me tell you, based on my Facebook newsfeed, that is certainly not true of all Christians) are doing so because of his family values?

Based on my own circle of friends and family, the number one reason my Christian friends that are voting for Trump are doing so because of abortion. As far as I can tell, none are holding Trump up as to be some paragon of family values. Heck, most don't hold up the Republican party that way as well, though most believe the Republicans are better for their religious beliefs than Democrats. 

I have mentioned before if the Christian were restricted to voting for the Saint, we may not be very active in our voting.

When it became Trump, a candidate I rallied against during the primaries, folks asked: Are you gonna vote for Trump? and my answer was Unless there is a more conservative option. Welp we now have an option on the ballot in KY and that's who will get my vote (so he'll probably have 1; as I don't think Benton is with me)

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-20-2016, 09:00 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Oh, you are aware. So you didn't mean take us to war, you meant make the current war worse or start more wars. Thanks for clearing up your confusion. 

BTW, could you tell me what Trump meant when he stated he would, "bomb the shit out of them"? What about committing war crimes like, "take out their families"?

Would bombing the shit out of them and committing war crimes make things better or worse, Sherlock?

Let me see, bombing the shit out of ISIS vs supplying ISIS with weapons and money? Which path is better for the US?

Taking out their families? I'd suspect that he'd not target their families any more than Obama did with the Killing of Abdulrahman al-Awlaki (the 16 year old son of Anwar al-Awlaki, both USC's) 2 weeks after they killed his father. Ring any bells?

Former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs: “I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children. I don’t think becoming an al-Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.”

That statement seems to me that the current administration doesn't seem too bothered by taking out family members.

(10-20-2016, 09:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Wait.  What?

I thought the problem with Hillary was that she was too soft on ISIS and failed as Sec of State because she refused to commit more troops on the ground.

Now she is too war hungry?   Hillary has got you guys spinning around so much you can't even get your stories straight.

Then there is this quote by Trump

She has not been attacking ISIS, she's to busy supplying them with arms and money to fight Russia.

The problem with your beloved Hillary is that, she mis-handled Syria, Libya and Benghazi. Her Russian Reset button even is a failure. She usually makes the wrong decision and makes things worse. Just like a No-Fly zone. Do you really think Russia will stop flying over Syria? No, they will do it and test her to find her "line in the sand".

Oh yes, your meme. Again something taken out of context.
He loves war, in a certain way.
Next, you'll tell me that he wants wars "including with nukes".

[*bfine32*]

(10-21-2016, 12:58 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I would legitimately be interested in seeing a response from you that isn't just "this is silly", "this case has zero relevance", and "not sure how you missed the correlation". Like asking for a quote, I won't hold my breath. 

Well hell, since you insist:

Let's start with post #3 as an example of you always being right. http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-GOP-Candidate-Thunderdome?highlight=rubio

I'll gladly provide you with more if you want more "kicks" of seeing how right you were.

Matter of fact it wouldn't matter: you can be forthright and admit that you always doubted Trump's chances of making this far or you can double down on always being right.

But the bottom line to all this is you slammed dude for voting along party lines ,instead of voting for the candidate he prefers. Now don't feign offense when you are shown it was just a feeble attempt to belittle someone.

These things work best when we are honest about our intentions and words

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-21-2016, 12:37 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Gary Johnson doesn't know what the "R" means?

I mean, yea, he's probably high most of the time, but come on.

My bad, I forgot you are a Johnson supporter. Hillary has no idea what those little letters mean.
And I won't say anything bad about Johnson.

[*bfine32*]

(10-21-2016, 01:16 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: My bad, I forgot you are a Johnson supporter.

Tee Hee

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-21-2016, 01:06 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Let me see, bombing the shit out of ISIS vs supplying ISIS with weapons and money? Which path is better for the US?

Taking out their families? I'd suspect that he'd not target their families any more than Obama did with the Killing of Abdulrahman al-Awlaki (the 16 year old son of Anwar al-Awlaki, both USC's) 2 weeks after they killed his father. Ring any bells?

Former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs: “I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children. I don’t think becoming an al-Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.”

That statement seems to me that the current administration doesn't seem too bothered by taking out family members.


She has not been attacking ISIS, she's to busy supplying them with arms and money to fight Russia.

The problem with your beloved Hillary is that, she mis-handled Syria, Libya and Benghazi. Her Russian Reset button even is a failure. She usually makes the wrong decision and makes things worse. Just like a No-Fly zone. Do you really think Russia will stop flying over Syria? No, they will do it and test her to find her "line in the sand".

Oh yes, your meme. Again something taken out of context.
He loves war, in a certain way.
Next, you'll tell me that he wants wars "including with nukes".

Is "bombing the shit out of them" taking "us" to war?  Yes or no. 

[BmorePat87]

(10-21-2016, 01:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well hell, since you insist:

Let's start with post #3 as an example of you always being right. http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-GOP-Candidate-Thunderdome?highlight=rubio

I'll gladly provide you with more if you want more "kicks" of seeing how right you were.

So in a "GOP Thunderdome" to determine "King of the Pachyderms", I picked Jeb to win a bracket challenge. You got me, man, incredible. 

Quote:Matter of fact it wouldn't matter: you can be forthright and admit that you always doubted Trump's chances of making this far or you can double down on always being right. 

I definitely doubted Trump's chances in the primary. It defied all logic and historical precedents. But he managed to win with a minority of support within his party. The difference now is that scientific polling shows him incapable of broadening his base and down in nearly every single swing state. He will absolutely not be President. The question isn't if, it's how bad will he lose?

Quote:But the bottom line to all this is you slammed dude for voting along party lines ,instead of voting for the candidate he prefers. Now don't feign offense when you are shown it was just a feeble attempt to belittle someone.

I slammed a bad defense that tried to twist one of of his major character flaws into a redeeming quality for the most important job in the world and suggested he didn't have to bend over backwards trying to defend this man any more simply because of his party affiliation. Trump's time with the GOP is done.

I'll give you credited for trying to counter my very first post, but the reality is that after I provided a defense, you then ignored it and spent the last few posts chasing windmills. If you can't respond, that's good and all, but instead of trying to bring up Hillary and quote a mock thunder dome fight between candidates as an instance of when I was wrong, just admit it and go away. 

If you can actually respond to it, hats off to you. I'll be shocked. Honestly. If not, then by all means continue to be the official board troll (now that Lucie and the Neo-Nazi aren't here anymore). I'm sure there are a few threads out there you haven't tried to complain about the responses to despite not actually responding to the topic yourself. Just expect any responses from me to be "either address my post or troll elsewhere". 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-21-2016, 01:38 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Is "bombing the shit out of them" taking "us" to war?  Yes or no. 

He's referring to bombing the shit out of ISIS, which as you previously pointed out, we are already at war with.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-21-2016, 02:41 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: He's referring to bombing the shit out of ISIS, which as you previously pointed out, we are already at war with.

Really? Are we bombing the shit out of them now? Yes or no. 

[Rotobeast]

(10-21-2016, 02:05 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: If not, then by all means continue to be the official board troll (now that Lucie and the Neo-Nazi aren't here anymore).

6andCounting is going to be pissed that someone else got the title.




Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[*bfine32*]

(10-21-2016, 02:05 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: but instead of trying to bring up Hillary and quote a mock thunder dome fight between candidates as an instance of when I was wrong, just admit it and go away. 

OK. You're Wrong. Moving along.

[NATI BENGALS]

Criminalizing abortion and putting that decision in the hands of the government and not the individual is really concerning.

Of all the things i disagree with Trump about forcing unwanted pregnancies onto women is probably #1. But its hard to argue with him since he respects women more than anyone.

[*bfine32*]

(10-21-2016, 03:00 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: 6andCounting is going to be pissed that someone else got the title.




Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

Oh, it will be assigned to anyone that provides a counter arguement.

[NATI BENGALS]

It is interesting Trump still hasnt released his tax returns. What is he hiding/lying about? If everything he claimed was true there is no reason for him to not release them.

[*bfine32*]

(10-21-2016, 03:45 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: It is interesting Trump still hasnt released his tax returns. What is he hiding/lying about? If everything he claimed was true there is no reason for him to not release them.

IF he was quick-witted, when questioned about his taxes in the debate by Hills, he would have turned to her and said I emailed those to you about a year ago.

But, yeah; he's most likely hiding something. Most likely how "chartiable" he is.

[JustWinBaby]

(10-21-2016, 03:45 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: It is interesting Trump still hasnt released his tax returns. What is he hiding/lying about? If everything he claimed was true there is no reason for him to not release them.

Given that a guy worth $10B who presumably wants to be POTUS has only "loaned" $50M to his campaign....I'm guessing #1 he's worth a lot less than he likes to brag about and #2 bad optics on many legal tax shelters and #3 probably embarrassingly meager charitable contributions.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-21-2016, 02:52 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Really? Are we bombing the shit out of them now? Yes or no. 

We are bombing them.
But then we turn around and do stupid shit like agreeing to safe passage of 9,000 ISIS soldiers if they will join the fight against Russia.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-21-2016, 04:05 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: We are bombing them.
But then we turn around and do stupid shit like agreeing to safe passage of 9,000 ISIS soldiers if they will join the fight against Russia.

If we are bombing them, then what did Trump mean when he stated he would "bomb the shit out of them"?  Did he mean he would continuing doing the same thing you think Hillary has failed to do, but just admitted "we" are doing?  Explain how Trump "bombing the shit out of them" is different than the bombing you claim "we" are currently doing.