2020 Presidential Candidates

And old Joe Biden jumps into the race. My Facebook and Twitter feeds are already packed with his ads. He should have run in 2016. As should have Elizabeth Warren. Much less competition last time and they were younger.

homeagain wrote:
bolded....ah BUT TRUMP didn't think HE would have a ''win'' and what a shocking surprise that was...(of course the caveat to the whole enchilada is foreign interference in 2020)….

Do you have a credible source that has evidence that Russian influence swayed the election? Sorry, I've never heard that one even though most liberals seem to wish that was true. What is true is that Clinton was the worst candidate the Dems have picked in my lifetime. I look forward to seeing this evidence.

Rick wrote:

homeagain wrote:
bolded....ah BUT TRUMP didn't think HE would have a ''win'' and what a shocking surprise that was...(of course the caveat to the whole enchilada is foreign interference in 2020)….

Do you have a credible source that has evidence that Russian influence swayed the election? Sorry, I've never heard that one even though most liberals seem to wish that was true. What is true is that Clinton was the worst candidate the Dems have picked in my lifetime. I look forward to seeing this evidence.

www.factcheck.org/2019/03/trumps-russia-investigation-repeats/ WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF CREDIBLE?

Very interesting read Homeagain. I think no Trump supporter wants to think that there was actual influence on the campaign - because well, that may mean they were influenced, and no one wants to think that. the truth is, at this point, it is a proven fact, stated by multiple agencies that the Russians infiltrated the system, ran propagandized ads and continue to do so. the reality is, there really isn't any way for anyone to know if their program in the 2016 election was successful. We can think that maybe, but the only way to prove that would be for it to be found that they tampered with the votes themselves and I think if that were the case we would likely have heard about that by now. as for the propaganda - in order to know if anyone's mind was swayed toward Trump, that person would have to know what all they saw and read in the months leading up to it. Possibly knowing they subscribed to one of the false Russian companies blogs or something, but even then, did they read that every day? did they believe all of it? personally I likely wouldn't really even remember what I saw or read during that period.
Beating that horse now just does not do anyone any good. The real key is in making sure it doesn't happen in the next election. I personally have little faith that all outside influence can be eliminated - but I can hope.

and yes, Rick, I will agree with you on Hilary Clinton. As I have said, I did vote for her - but grudgingly. To me, and I am sure you won't agree, she seemed to be the lesser of two evils. that is my opinion and I am entitled to it, just as you are yours. I also will hazard some speculation that the current state of affairs may not be all that different had she been elected rather than Trump. That being said, I trusted her judgment slightly more concerning foreign affairs, because I am old enough to remember being terrified of the Russians and nuclear war. Out of the two, I felt she was much less likely to shoot off her mouth to the wrong person and get us blown up. what a choice. someone said earlier, Biden should have run last time - yes he should have. I'm sure with the passing of his son it did not seem appropriate and I can certainly understand his thinking. Warren... well that's a discussion maybe for the 2020 candidates thread - there you will find a never ending list of choices .... and I'm seriously hoping it doesn't end up with another lesser of the evils choice

homeagain wrote:

Rick wrote:

homeagain wrote:
bolded....ah BUT TRUMP didn't think HE would have a ''win'' and what a shocking surprise that was...(of course the caveat to the whole enchilada is foreign interference in 2020)….

Do you have a credible source that has evidence that Russian influence swayed the election? Sorry, I've never heard that one even though most liberals seem to wish that was true. What is true is that Clinton was the worst candidate the Dems have picked in my lifetime. I look forward to seeing this evidence.

www.factcheck.org/2019/03/trumps-russia-investigation-repeats/ WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF CREDIBLE?

Please HA, it's a very simple question and all you do is give me a link. Nowhere in that did I see any evidence that the election was swayed by the Russians. If you think the answer to my question is embedded somewhere in that link, please give me the quote. I feel like I'm beating a dead horse every time im looking for a simple answer and never seem to get one. Can anyone else answer my question directly?

Rick wrote:

homeagain wrote:

Rick wrote:

homeagain wrote:
bolded....ah BUT TRUMP didn't think HE would have a ''win'' and what a shocking surprise that was...(of course the caveat to the whole enchilada is foreign interference in 2020)….

Do you have a credible source that has evidence that Russian influence swayed the election? Sorry, I've never heard that one even though most liberals seem to wish that was true. What is true is that Clinton was the worst candidate the Dems have picked in my lifetime. I look forward to seeing this evidence.

www.factcheck.org/2019/03/trumps-russia-investigation-repeats/ WHAT IS YOUR DEFINITION OF CREDIBLE?

Please HA, it's a very simple question and all you do is give me a link. Nowhere in that did I see any evidence that the election was swayed by the Russians. If you think the answer to my question is embedded somewhere in that link, please give me the quote. I feel like I'm beating a dead horse every time im looking for a simple answer and never seem to get one. Can anyone else answer my question directly?

here's my succinct statement to you...…….IF you believe that foreign foes are NOT fucking
with our way of life....a successful way of governing for centuries (until the present) THEN
you are not only naïve to the obvious, I would say you are in DENIAL (COLLECTIVELY)….
THERE IS A STEEP PRICE TO BE PAYED FOR THAT DENIAL. JMO

•To make democracy work, we must be a nation of participants, not simply observers. ...
•Voting is the only way to make change in a democracy. ...
•Democracy is not just an election, it is our daily life. ...
•Let us never forget that government is ourselves and not an alien power over us.

and on the lighter side:

Winston Churchill once said "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”

parkcobound wrote: Very interesting read Homeagain. I think no Trump supporter wants to think that there was actual influence on the campaign - because well, that may mean they were influenced, and no one wants to think that. the truth is, at this point, it is a proven fact, stated by multiple agencies that the Russians infiltrated the system, ran propagandized ads and continue to do so. the reality is, there really isn't any way for anyone to know if their program in the 2016 election was successful. We can think that maybe, but the only way to prove that would be for it to be found that they tampered with the votes themselves and I think if that were the case we would likely have heard about that by now. as for the propaganda - in order to know if anyone's mind was swayed toward Trump, that person would have to know what all they saw and read in the months leading up to it. Possibly knowing they subscribed to one of the false Russian companies blogs or something, but even then, did they read that every day? did they believe all of it? personally I likely wouldn't really even remember what I saw or read during that period.
Beating that horse now just does not do anyone any good. The real key is in making sure it doesn't happen in the next election. I personally have little faith that all outside influence can be eliminated - but I can hope.

Thank you for that reasonable response in your own words... that is very refreshing and fairly rare around here. I know you were addressing Home but thought you may be a better person to debate with at this point.

We know from Obama's own mouth that our elections can't be tampered with, especially on a macro level because there is no connection between the internet and voting machines. So I guess the premise is that its some kind of false propaganda that some voters may be naive enough to believe from the Russians that would then sway them to vote for Trump. Seems like a very long stretch considering every day the masses are pummelled with propaganda from the news media (see 2+ years of a false narrative about Russian collusion).. then add the influence Hollywood has which is massive and mostly favoring the Democrats since as long as I can remember. Then add the influence of educators have on our kids and young adults from K to college... most teachers and professors naturally lean left and their influence on young minds is probably as much or more than what kids get from their parents.

So if the Russian interference was just political ads, how in the world could that come close to the influence the news media, educators, Hollywood, Google, FB, and every other left leaning organization has on the minds of voters? I agree we should prevent any country, ally or enemy, from influencing our voting process but to say that Hillary would be president if only the Russians didn't put up 100k worth of FB ads seems ridiculous to me. But I'll still consider any real evidence that someone wants to provide.