Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Really Why, because some idiot like yourself wrote some falsehoods, such as the claim that MG Logeman was born way back in 1918, which is a complete lie. 

Is that why you claim it was BS? 

Well no it isn't any BS, it comes from this website:  

https://flagofficers4america.com/

And here is the information on MG Logeman, which is incorrect in the Comment section.  The guy who wrote the BS claiming MG Logeman was dead, is full of shit.  

https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/106377/major-general-john-d-logeman/

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/1989/01/09/general-to-get-2nd-star/62627698007/

He graduated from Univ. of Wisc. back in 1961, which means he wasn't born in the year 1918

Sorry to confuse you and Jim Brown with the facts.  I know they are inconvenient.  

You are missing the point of course.  No one denies that the military in general support Republicans.   Republicans have historically been the party of strong defense.  So it is completely unsurprising that many former generals presented with the opportunity to sign an on-line list supporting Trump would choose to do so.  I am sure a significant number would sign an on-line list supporting Harris too, but I doubt that Harris would get as many endorsements as Trump from the entire population of former military officers.

The point you miss is that the 7 generals on Russ's original post worked closely with Trump and know Trump personally and professionally.  That gives the 7 generals on Russ's list special insight into Trump's fitness to be President, in my opinion.  You are right that some of these guys were fired, and that could bias their opinions.  We each have to weigh the credibility of each of the 7 ourselves, right?

Comparing 7 generals who worked closely with Trump in his first term with a self-selected list of Trump supporters who happen to be former military officers is pretty stupid though.  It is as simple as comparing people with inside knowledge v. people who happen skew R, as if that mattered.  I bet that the population of Harley Davidson owners skews toward Trump too.  Does that counterbalance the opinions of 7 men who worked closely with Trump in his first term?  Even you have to see this, although I know that you will not acknowledge this simple truth.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Why?  Because they are wrong, and Logeman, Air Force Major General was not born in 1918 as the comments claim?  

Maybe you should get a clue..... sorry forgot that you're a lib so you don't have any clues.  

The comments that entertained me were not the ones about Logeman.  I enjoyed the allegations by two parties that each was a Russian bot.  Made me wonder.  I liked the comment that regular folks have no right to "endorsement."  Regular folks can have a political opinion of course, but endorsement is reserved for former or current politicians, or other folks with expert knowledge.  I appreciate this sort of level-headed point of view.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Pakman summarized the final results of the relevant polls: Silver, real clear, five 38 etc:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCqLl3Shbok

Silver and 538 both have it as a tie.   Harris won 40,012 of the 80,000 simulations Silver ran last night.   I am not going to watch Pakman, but if he said "Silver predicts Harris win" as Silver regretfully noted many would, then Pakman is a fool.  40,012 out of 80,000 is closer to 50/50 than a coin toss, where heads wins 50.05% of the time.  (Because of imbalance in the disk I suppose).   538 had it 51/49 Harris.  The guru in Nevada, Jon Ralston predicts only Nevada, but his final number is Harris, 48.5 percent; Trump 48.2 percent; others and "None of These Candidates, 3.3 percent".  But Ralston is not confident.  (He has never been wrong for president (Nevada only of course)).

https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/editor-jon-ralstons-2024-nevada-election-predictions

All of this 50/50 stuff means either that the beneficiary of the most polling error, or the beneficiary of the strongest election day ground game is our next president.  Same as we knew weeks ago....  Which I find vaguely dissatisfying, but it is what it is.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Pakman summarized the final results of the relevant polls: Silver, real clear, five 38 etc:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCqLl3Shbok

On the lighter side, in Dixville Notch where all 6 registered voters gather to vote at midnight, it was a 3-3 tie.  

https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/05/politics/dixville-notch-new-hampshire-2024-results/index.html

This could be ominous for Harris, since Dixville Notch unanimously cast five votes for Biden and had Hillary Clinton in 2016 winning four of seven votes — two went to Trump and one to Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Pakman gave a summary of the results, like I said. Pakman is no fool, either...

I know you like him, just not my cup of tea.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

No, you're missing the point.  A guy like Kelly is so arrogant it isn't even funny.  And Personally I don't blame him.  The fact is that he was fired IN FRONT OF THE WORLD.  

Because you state your assertions as simple truth doesn't make them simple truths in the least.  Lefties like you are completely unhinged and because they are Generals doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

Trump is no fascist and he's no dictator and the fact that Like always, You are utterly impotent of thought or of evidence to point it out otherwise is a telling sign that your anger is personal, petty, and unhinged.

Now I haven't checked back but I can only assume that you failed miserably to point out any policies that Kamala Harris supports that you think is great for the country. 

I'm guessing that since you are here trying to support the idea that a bunch of pathetic, angry TDS suffering Lib Generals should be listened to speaks to the fact that these guys are just that TDS filled angry people.

BTW, General Keith Kellogg worked with Trump and he's supporting him.  So is General Jack Keane is as well.

So your laughable assertion that they know him and so we need to heed their advice is laughable as well.

I agree that Trump is not a fascist or dictator.  I do think he would gladly be a dictator if the robust US system of checks and balances permitted or empowered dictators.   

You sort of get the point I see.  This is progress.  Kellogg and Keane, assuming they worked closely with Trump, do have more insight into his fitness for office than those who have not.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Theme song from "The Good, The Bad And The Ugly" performed by the National Danish Orchestra:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enuOArEfqGo&list=RDenuOArEfqGo&start_radio=1

That is spectacular!

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

So your laughable assertion that they know him and so we need to heed their advice is laughable as well.

Sigh.  James describes your critical thinking skills and reading comprehension skills quite well.  What I said was, "We each have to weigh the credibility of each of the 7 ourselves, right?"

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

As if I didn't read that???  

If you had read "We each have to weigh the credibility of each of the 7 ourselves, right?", and understood my plain English you could never have honestly posted, "So your laughable assertion that they know him and so we need to heed their advice is laughable as well."

Since you apparently did read and comprehend my post, the only conclusion I can reach is that you lied about the content of my post when you replied, "So your laughable assertion that they know him and so we need to heed their advice is laughable as well."  You did this in a failed attempt to score a cheap rhetorical point.  This dishonest habit of yours has been pointed out literally dozens of times here, but once more does no harm.

You have every right to reply of course.  You do not have the right to lie about the content of my post (or anyone else's).  Lies are your stock in trade though.   This and your other odious habits like name calling, shock language, misogyny and homophobia (multiple examples of that just today) are why I and almost everyone else here generally ignores you.  Today is Election Day and we are all dialed into politics, so it seemed reasonable to give you a pass.

Originally Posted by Russ Carroll

UNSHUN Richard, we dont have to wait to know. The country is split 50/50 before the election and it will be after. The real question is will the Republican Party learn ANYTHING at all from this if Trump loses. Any rational Republican would have been able to beat Biden or Harris. Will the GOP abandon Trump if he loses again, realizing that they had a far easier path for a President Haley, or are there too many that simply want to "own the libs" to even care about the GOP nominees viability. RESHUN

The question is what will shake the country out of the immense polarization we suffer from now.  And by the way, I do not blame just Trump.  I could cite dozens of examples of the left causing or enhancing divisiveness.   

If history is our teacher, the process of shedding polarization is not going to be pleasant.  9-11, World War, a great depression, that sort of thing does the trick.  Have we ever shed toxic divisiveness without a cataclysmic event to rally around?  Dark Jim