It was discussed a while back by the mods that the word TROLL will not be used on forums in relation to specific posters as an insult.

If you do not wish to see what another is posting and feel that perhaps they are just winding you up then;

Put them on ignore.

Lets stop the name calling now.

I know its Saturday and you all have nothing better to do but the recent standard of posting across all these thread is appalling.

All I am seeing here in politics across multiple threads is personal attacks by many people.

I think it is time to look at what you are all posting, it is just the same rehashed posts over and over.

Nothing really new for days and days now.

As someone for outside the USA I would quite like to try and understand what is happening in the political situation currently..

And how it might affect Europe and the world.

I am not getting any information from these threads.

Those few posts with information get buried quickly by the troll(s) who despise truth and information.

---

I take it that 239521 is back derailing threads again with his usual rants.

Just add 239521 to your ignore list and you'll be surprised how things greatly improve around here. ;-)

Cheers.

<redacted>

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

It was discussed a while back by the mods that the word TROLL will not be used on forums in relation to specific posters as an insult.

Bernie, is trollbot OK as a description?

---

It was discussed a while back by the mods that the word TROLL will not be used on forums in relation to specific posters as an insult.

Bernie, is trollbot OK as a description?

Not if using it as an insult.

I have a mind to remove all posts where one users is insulting another but that would take to long and leave politics with very little useful content.

Please attack a persons belief or stance NOT the person.

I thought America was the one country in the world where people can say what they believe without fear, and without being "labelled"

Seems not.

As someone from outside the USA I would quite like to try and understand what is happening in the political situation currently..

The liberal/left/socialist/marxist/communists--also known as the democratic party here in the US--almost illegally gained power over the citizens of the U.S. for the next several generations. They supported a known felon because she would have supported all the other felon political appointees appointed by obama. But the American people saw what was about to happen and picked the only candidate capable of defeating this evil, one that wasn't created by our dishonest press. If a candidated is not created by our dishonest press, they cannot be destroyed by our dishonest press.

President Trump is now in the process of "draining the swamp." This is a precedence for two reasons. 1) It's a campaign promise that he is following through on and 2) it's showing the truth about the democrats.

We are now witnessing a battle between a party which was about to "fundamentally change America" -- the democrats (and the deeply rooted obama appointees) who are literally struggling for their livelyhood and someone who is getting this nation back to "a rule of law" in which we were created.

That's what's currently happening.

And in another universe, after a closely contested election, in which the person who got the most votes of citizens lost, it seems to many, the winner of that election is incapable of fulfilling the obligations of the post to which he was elected. The winner's supporters seem unable to understand why the more numerous group is unhappy with this outcome; still, in fairness to them, none are old enough to have been on the side of a person who garnered the more votes, yet still lost an election. It's a rare event that, rather unfortunately, has occurred twice in recent history, and on both occasions, resulted in the same party's candidate losing.

The winner and his allies seem to be suggesting that their opponents are now in some sort of disarray, though at the same time, complain that there is some sort of widespread coordinated approach to undermine the winner. Yes, you read that right, the opposition is both in disarray and capable of conducting a well-planned conspiracy. Not only this, it is claimed that the opposition has access to vast sums of money with which to hire professional agitators. That the winner is unable to provide a shred of evidence to support these claims does not appear to matter much to the supporters, indeed, his supporters seem not to care about evidence at all (some going so far as to suggest that "alternative facts" are based in reality).

Oh and in other, more recent developments, the winner, who thought that law enforcement was not doing a sufficiently good job of investigating his opponent prior to the election, has now confirmed that he was also subject of a pre-election investigation, though, in typical incoherent form, says that his being investigated is evidence of a Watergate-like conspiracy against him.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

in which the person who got the most votes of citizens lost,

You keep saying this, but he won the election in *accordance with the law*. We do not have a pure democracy here. And, as another poster has stated multiple times, neither candidate received a majority of votes.

It's still true. Nobody is arguing that is was not in accordance with the law or in favor of a pure democracy, why are your straw man arguments always so obvious?

suggesting that their opponents are now in some sort of disarray,

The liberal/democrat/socialist/marxist/communists now only control *5* of our *50* states.

So? There's insufficient data to conclude that this is anything more than an aberration.

some sort of widespread coordinated approach to undermine the winner.

obama is now back to Ayers/Alinsky community organizing. Although the dishonest press is ignoring it, look at what his "OFA" organization is doing. Also look at all the last minutes executive orders he signed to try to sabotage Trump. Also, look at the current state of the clinton family foundation (AKA clinton crime family foundation, AKA clinton money laundering organization, AKA "pay for play" foundation). Since that felon was successfully kept out of the white house, that foundation is now dead.

I don't need to look, I have you (and presumably infowars or some similarly trustworthy news source) telling me, it's so much easier this way.

has now confirmed that he was also subject of a pre-election investigation,

Still, no law cited which was broken. Still no witnesses. Still no proof of any wrong doing. It's the only thing left the dishonest press has to try to bring down Trump even though any logical person can see there's no way for the Russians to successfully "hack a national election" since all voting machines are controlled by different organizations and there's an "air gap" between voting machines and the internet.

Right, the voting machines are safe, thus the election was safe, another pointless trip into straw man territory. Why did "45" argue so many times that the election would be rigged if he knew all the time that the voting machines were safe from tampering. Oh that's right, there's more than one way to hack an election.

The liberal/democrat/socialist/marxist/communists are just throwing temper-tantrums because they just can't believe they LOST.

AKA mobilizing opposition, just as tea did eight years ago. The tea supporters just can't believe anybody would want to.

My current assessment stands.

Splendid. Wouldn't have it any other way.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Right, the voting machines are safe, thus the election was safe, another pointless trip into straw man territory. Why did "45" argue so many times that the election would be rigged if he knew all the time that the voting machines were safe from tampering. Oh that's right, there's more than one way to hack an election..

exactly. +1

---

#resist

Right, the voting machines are safe, thus the election was safe, another pointless trip into straw man territory. Why did "45" argue so many times that the election would be rigged if he knew all the time that the voting machines were safe from tampering. Oh that's right, there's more than one way to hack an election..

exactly. +1

Where is the proof of Election Vote Rigging?

The New York Times admits there are none.

Where did the NYT say there was rigging in the first place?
Isn't it the case that the NYT has always said there was no wide spread rigging.
Vote rigging is all a fantasy in Donald's head, placed there by his fiends.

---

Right, the voting machines are safe, thus the election was safe, another pointless trip into straw man territory. Why did "45" argue so many times that the election would be rigged if he knew all the time that the voting machines were safe from tampering. Oh that's right, there's more than one way to hack an election..

exactly. +1

Where is the proof of Election Vote Rigging?

The New York Times admits there are none.

Who said anything about election vote rigging?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Right, the voting machines are safe, thus the election was safe, another pointless trip into straw man territory. Why did "45" argue so many times that the election would be rigged if he knew all the time that the voting machines were safe from tampering. Oh that's right, there's more than one way to hack an election..

exactly. +1

And don't forget about Putin giving Trump and his horde of crooks all the help and info needed to get there. ;-)

Cheers.

And attempting to 'Influence' an Election, as the Obama Administration attempted

Care to substantiate that comment.
Educate me further, as I seem to be ignorant in that matter, it seems.

---

If there was no rigging of The Vote.

And attempting to 'Influence' an Election, as the Obama Administration attempted, is not a criminal offense.

And The Russians attempted to 'hack' both the Democrats and the Republicans. Only succeeding against the Democrats.

And all 'information' released was TRUE.

How does The Truth, which may influence an election. Be considered....

My that's a lot of "ifs". Who said there was no rigging of the vote? As far as I can tell, the comments in this thread were"

Guy wrote:

any logical person can see there's no way for the Russians to successfully "hack a national election" since all voting machines are controlled by different organizations and there's an "air gap" between voting machines and the internet.

bobby wrote:

Why did "45" argue so many times that the election would be rigged if he knew all the time that the voting machines were safe from tampering. Oh that's right, there's more than one way to hack an election.

Neither Guy nor I said that election votes were or were not rigged, hence my earlier question "Who said anything about election vote rigging?" after you decided to join the conversation. Guy said that machines were safe from tampering, which I took on face value, even though Guy provided no evidence to support the claim, and a computer scientist has suggested otherwise. No doubt that computer scientist has an inferior understanding than that of Guy's as to the chemical basis of electronic computation, thus the findings can be summarily dismissed.

As 666 has noted, you appear to be in possession of facts that the rest of us have yet to see (that the Obama administration attempted to influence the election).

Why would anybody believe that Russians were not successful in their attempts at hacking the Republicans?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

And attempting to 'Influence' an Election, as the Obama Administration attempted

Care to substantiate that comment.
Educate me further, as I seem to be ignorant in that matter, it seems.

Hi Nick...

Israeli Elections. Remember? "Bibi" Netanyahu. Remember? If not, just look it up.

As they say: Ignorance of history is no excuse.

Didn't realize Bibi was on the payroll of the Obama administration to influence last year's election. The things you learn on these boards!

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Why would anybody believe that Russians were not successful in their attempts at hacking the Republicans?

Comey said there was no sign "that the Trump campaign or the current RNC was successfully hacked."

FBI director James Comey told a Senate panel that there was "penetration on the Republican side of the aisle and old Republican National Committee domains" no longer in use.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/comey-republicans-hacked-russia/

Why would anyone believe the Russians were successful in hacking the Present Day RNC?

I accept your apology.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

said that machines were safe from tampering,

No, I did not. You can hack one easily if you have physical access to it when no one is looking (and have done your homework and have completed some preparatory work prior to your watergate break-in type scandal). Swapping a ROM DIP in a socket takes seconds, once you open the cabinet. How many voting machines would it take to swing a national election? Is it possible to coordinate such a thing on such a massive scale that it would change the outcome of a national election?

Apologies, I was paraphrasing your comment:

Guy wrote:

any logical person can see there's no way for the Russians to successfully "hack a national election" since all voting machines are controlled by different organizations and there's an "air gap" between voting machines and the internet.

The comment about "air gap" certainly implied that there were to safe to some degree, again my apologies for not being sufficiently cautious in my language.

chemical basis of electronic computation,

Falling back onto an Ayers/Alinsky tactic again, are we? You *know* the point I was making when I was suggesting this. Now you're going to use the dishonest media tactic of continuing to quote me out of context to mislead people. *You're* part of the problem our nation has been struggling with and *you're* a main reason President Trump was elected--to drain the swamp of this nasty, polluted, bio-hazardous water which has been stinking up this nation for the last several decades.

There is no context in which your comment about chemistry and CPU function could be correct, that you chose to defend it at the time, and since then is your own business. That, while a moderator, you chose to delete the content of the post in which you made the remark is also your own business, if you hadn't then it would be linked with each reference. If you're not happy with the "chemist of computer science" label, perhaps you might reconsider your own use of labels when describing your fellow posters.

Oh, and if this poster is part of the problem, you only have your fellow citizens to blame, they invited me here, paid for me to relocate, sponsored my visa and green card application, investigated my background on several occasions during the naturalization process. As for being the main reason for "45" being elected, you have far too high an opinion of me.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...