Jump to content

  • NJ Woods & Water Zazzle Storefront
  • NJ Woods & Water Cafepress Storefront


Welcome to NJ Woods & Water


Sign In  Log in with Facebook

Create Account
Welcome to NJ Woods & Water, like most online communities you must register to post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup.
Come be a part of NJ Woods & Water by signing in or creating an account today!
  • Enter contests and win prizes
  • Start new topics, ask, and answer questions
  • Subscribe to topics and forums you're interested in
  • Get your own profile page, blog, and photo/video galleries
  • Participate in live chat
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Share content with your social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and Google+
If you are experiencing trouble creating an account, please click here to submit a support ticket and we will help resolve any issues you may be having!
 

Photo

If It's True !!!


93 replies to this topic

#81 Male OFFLINE   Batsto

Batsto

    6 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 05/20/17 - 11:56 AM

[quote name="tick trawler" post="144037" timestamp="1495232923"]Quoted from this Fox News article under fair use concerning the case of Seth Rich:
http://www.foxnews.c...gator-says.html
 
"An FBI forensic report of Rich's computer -- generated within 96 hours after Rich's murder -- showed he made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter, documentary filmmaker, and director of WikiLeaks who was living in London at the time, the federal source told Fox News.
“I have seen and read the emails between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,” the federal investigator told Fox News, confirming the MacFadyen connection. He said the emails are in possession of the FBI, while the stalled case is in the hands of the Washington
Robert Gore connecting the dots earlier this week:
https://www.theburni...ts/#more-150513[/quo

Great article! Once again Obama and this independent investigation will bust the democrats for what they are....Modern day Bolsheviks.
  • Agree x 2
  • Optimistic x 1
  • List

#82 Male OFFLINE   deadonshot2

deadonshot2

    Button Buck

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 05/20/17 - 02:17 PM

How do you figure?   There's not doubt the Obama Administration was more professional & competent than the Trump Administration has been so far, and that's an understatement, but in terms of not moving the country forward, I dont get that.  The Obama Administration moved the country BACKWARD at any chance it got, to the point I sometimes wondered, "whose side are they on anyway". 

You are correct obama moved the country backwards but trump has done nothing to move it forward. He sees a shiny object the dems wave in front of him and that is where his attention goes to. The republicans have total control of washington and struggled to get a half ass healthcare bill through the house. The bill will not look the same when the senate gets done with it. So I would not call that an accomplishment by the house. The republicans set the agenda- so when do we start winning? He had flynn who had to resign, he has others withdraw from nominations and  a general say no thank you to a nomination. His immigration EO was shot down not once but twice. I truly think he his trying to prove he is now a republican (after being a dem for most of his life) by trying to undo everything obama did. Even when speaking at the college, his speach was as much about himself as it was about the graduates. You do not inspire people by crying to them that you are being treated unfairly. If he didn't want to be treated unfairly, then hand over documents, tapes, video and encourage the senate and now mueller to interview all witnesses immediately and put it all behind everybody. His credibility would be restored if nothing is found and his agenda would be unstoppable. The other ineptness I speak of is the constant flip flopping on answers. They can not even get their stories straight. The first four months have been a weekly train crash, self inflicted. I understand the dems want to slow trumps agenda but his inabilities rest solely on his shoulders. He is the one that constantly reloads the gun for them.


  • Agree x 1
  • List

#83 Male OFFLINE   BenedictGomez

BenedictGomez

    5 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 535 posts

Posted 05/20/17 - 06:21 PM

You are correct obama moved the country backwards but trump has done nothing to move it forward........... The republicans have total control of washington and struggled to get a half ass healthcare bill through the house..........The republicans set the agenda- so when do we start winning?.........If he didn't want to be treated unfairly, then hand over documents, tapes, video and encourage the senate and now mueller to interview all witnesses immediately and put it all behind everybody. His credibility would be restored if nothing is found and his agenda would be unstoppable. The other ineptness I speak of is the constant flip flopping on answers. They can not even get their stories straight. The first four months have been a weekly train crash, self inflicted. I understand the dems want to slow trumps agenda but his inabilities rest solely on his shoulders.He is the one that constantly reloads the gun for them.

 

Agree for the most part, the only thing I'd say is I'd like to give Trump more time as it's only been 4 months.  That said, it's true that most of the damage done to the Trump presidency so far has been Donald Trump's fault. 

 

Yes, the media is biased against him 100%, but they always are biased against Republicans.  That's nothing new.  The difference is I've never in my life seen a candidate give the media more ammunition to smack him with.  We cant go more than 2 days without him saying something completely moronic, and Republicans who want to see liberal laws and regulations repealed are genuinely getting worried.  I assumed Trump was "acting" a lot when he was a candidate to appeal to the idiot masses and would be more intelligent and mature once he assumed office, but it doesn't seem like the case.  Honestly, I'd be happy if they just took his Twitter away, it's getting him in a ton of trouble.  The "tapes" thing was so naive and stupid, it makes one question his fitness for office.



#84 Male OFFLINE   smoking gun

smoking gun

    12 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,251 posts

Posted 05/20/17 - 09:24 PM

I stopped following any of it for quite some time.peoole have to let the president do his job instead of tuning into the crazy news outlets.since he got elected the left has been so butt hurt and they have done nothing but attempt to have the man impeached.lets not lose focus on what's happened for the past 8yrs prior to his election.ao much dirty laundry anything Trump has done so far isn't even remotely close to the cluster**** the Obama administration had done
  • Winner x 2
  • Agree x 2
  • Like x 1
  • List

#85 Male OFFLINE   Batsto

Batsto

    6 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted Yesterday, 07:32 AM

Word on the street.....special investigation team going to subpoena Clinton foundation/DNC regarding an abuse of power with Justice Dept under Loretra Lynch. It's going to be Mr. Toad's Wild Ride boys and girls. You will see the dems yelling and crying fowl all week to appeal to the leftist revolutionary base.
  • Optimistic x 1
  • List

#86 OFFLINE   Rdfhunter

Rdfhunter

    Spike

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 226 posts

Posted Yesterday, 10:00 AM

This discussion alone is proof that the democrats are winning in their battle to bury republicans ... It's long been a fact that the action is only a crime if a republican committed it ..
  • Agree x 1
  • Like x 1
  • List

#87 Male OFFLINE   DV1

DV1

    5 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 12:26 PM

This discussion alone is proof that the democrats are winning in their battle to bury republicans ... 

And they are being helped by, Republicans. If the nominee had been anyone but Trump, Republicans likely would have lost the Senate too, or at best, been a 50-50 tie. Without Trump, Clinton wins Pa, Wis and Michigan, if not more. In Pa and Wis, those Senate races were close, and had not Trump been at the to the bring people to the R column, the Democrats likely would have on both of those seats, maybe Missouri too, as that one was a nail biter. 

 

If the agenda is stalled, or Republicans come after Trump, without cause (meaning actual evidence instead of Media hype and cries from Democrats ), the Republican will lose the Senate in 2018, and maybe even the House. I have come to the conclusion that most Democrats are power hungry, elitists rule, borderline evil people, and Republican are just dumb, easily scared or happy to let the Socialists rule, and blame the problems on them. Trump is the closest thing to a 3rd Party candidate we will ever have win the Presidency, and they are revolting against him, both sides. 


  • Winner x 1
  • Disagree x 1
  • List
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation UNDER GOD, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

#88 Male OFFLINE   Axiom

Axiom

    13 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,887 posts

Posted Yesterday, 01:32 PM

Trump is the closest thing to a 3rd Party candidate we will ever have win the Presidency, and they are revolting against him, both sides. 

 

 

I agree, for now anyway.... but I think maybe u yourself are falling for some of this "media hype" you speak of.. Relax.. its cool.. we got this.. Trump da man.. And conservatives are gonna get even MORE seats in the white house in 2018... :cupcoffee:


:D


#89 Male OFFLINE   BenedictGomez

BenedictGomez

    5 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 535 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:56 PM

If the nominee had been anyone but Trump, Republicans likely would have lost the Senate too, or at best, been a 50-50 tie. Without Trump, Clinton wins Pa, Wis and Michigan, if not more.

 

Possibly, though we'll never know, but I really doubt the outcome of the election would have been any different knowing what we know now.   Trump definitely reshaped the map, but it wasn't all good reshaping like MI, PA, WI, as Trump helped Democrats in some states.  For instance, say it was Rubio for instance instead, he likely wins Nevada, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Virginia (all states Trump lost), and wins the presidency as well, but just with a different Electoral College tally.



#90 Male OFFLINE   DV1

DV1

    5 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 563 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:41 PM

Possibly, though we'll never know, but I really doubt the outcome of the election would have been any different knowing what we know now.   Trump definitely reshaped the map, but it wasn't all good reshaping like MI, PA, WI, as Trump helped Democrats in some states.  For instance, say it was Rubio for instance instead, he likely wins Nevada, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Virginia (all states Trump lost), and wins the presidency as well, but just with a different Electoral College tally.

No way Rubio wins those. Trump made NH closer than it would have been otherwise. Rubio would have made Va closer but he's from the Romney mold and Romney lost Va, so no reason to think Rubio would have done any better. Co is no longer Republican territory and Nevada has been gone for some time. Too many Libs in Colorado now and Nevada, for whatever reason, continued to elect Harry Reed. No Republican is going to win there. I still contend that Trump is the only Republican that could have won that election. Any one of those other candidates and we have Hillary as President. He brought out people that don't normaly come out, and switched some Dems to vote for him. Get another typical Republican (like Rubio, Bush, Kasich, even Cruz, etc, and those people either don;t vote, or vote Democrat. Trump only won because he appealed to the people that the Dems have left behind. Had they run Joe Biden, that middle America, everyday man/woman vote would have gone to him and he wins easily.


I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation UNDER GOD, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

#91 Male OFFLINE   BenedictGomez

BenedictGomez

    5 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 535 posts

Posted Yesterday, 06:55 PM

Trump only won because he appealed to the people that the Dems have left behind. Had they run Joe Biden, that middle America, everyday man/woman vote would have gone to him and he wins easily.

 

I agree with you that Biden would have beaten Trump, but I disagree that Trump was so popular he gained all sorts of votes other Republicans wouldn't have.   The math suggests Trump won mostly because lots of Democrats loathed Hillary and stayed home!

 

You're right that Trump brought in voters, but you're completely discounting that Trump also turned off quite a few Republican voters as well.  You need to net that out, as the math just doesn't show this massive Trump voter boost.

 

Trump received 3.3% more votes than Romney (who had a BAD voter turnout), but America's population grew roughly 3% from 2012 and 2016.  

 

So it's true, Trump got more votes than Romney, but not by THAT much when adjusted for growth.   The real story is that Hillary Clinton received FEWER votes than Barack Obama even though the population grew by 3%, which is about 3 million "missing" Democrat votes nationwide.   That, as President Trump would say, is "Uuge".



#92 Male OFFLINE   DV1

DV1

    5 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 563 posts

Posted Today, 06:06 AM

I agree with you that Biden would have beaten Trump, but I disagree that Trump was so popular he gained all sorts of votes other Republicans wouldn't have.   The math suggests Trump won mostly because lots of Democrats loathed Hillary and stayed home!

 

You're right that Trump brought in voters, but you're completely discounting that Trump also turned off quite a few Republican voters as well.  You need to net that out, as the math just doesn't show this massive Trump voter boost.

 

 

As a math guy, I can't believe you are taking that position, it's looks like desperation on your part to defend your political analysis, and completely ignore the "numbers", or "math"  you always rely on. Fact is, the 2016 election set a record for turnout, and Trumps turnout numbers were greater than any Republican has ever gotten. 

 

In 2016, Clinton got 65,853,516 votes. Obama got 65,915,795 in 2012. That's only about 62 thousand votes, so it clearly wasn't that Clinton didn't get the votes Obama did. 

Trump got nearly 63 million votes in 2016, as compared to almost 61 million for Romney, just under 60 million for McCain, 62 million for Bush in '04 and 50 million in 2000. Not only did Trump turn out more voters, he turned them out in places that no other Republican would have, Pa, Mich, & Wis. That is how he won, and I still don't think any other Republican would have had that success. 

 

As for him turning off traditional Republican voters...maybe a few but those voters had voted for Obama in the past 2 elections anyhow. They are the NJ type Republicans, and those in what they call the 'collar counties' around Philly we hear s much about down here. Many of them go for Clinton for the same reason they went for Obama; social guilt. Trump being the candidate turned many more new voters and Regan Democrats to him, than turned Rino Republicans away from him. 


Edited by DV1, Today, 06:07 AM.

I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation UNDER GOD, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

#93 Male OFFLINE   Batsto

Batsto

    6 Pointer

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted Today, 06:18 AM

As a math guy, I can't believe you are taking that position, it's looks like desperation on your part to defend your political analysis, and completely ignore the "numbers", or "math"  you always rely on. Fact is, the 2016 election set a record for turnout, and Trumps turnout numbers were greater than any Republican has ever gotten. 
 
In 2016, Clinton got 65,853,516 votes. Obama got 65,915,795 in 2012. That's only about 62 thousand votes, so it clearly wasn't that Clinton didn't get the votes Obama did. 
Trump got nearly 63 million votes in 2016, as compared to almost 61 million for Romney, just under 60 million for McCain, 62 million for Bush in '04 and 50 million in 2000. Not only did Trump turn out more voters, he turned them out in places that no other Republican would have, Pa, Mich, & Wis. That is how he won, and I still don't think any other Republican would have had that success. 
 
As for him turning off traditional Republican voters...maybe a few but those voters had voted for Obama in the past 2 elections anyhow. They are the NJ type Republicans, and those in what they call the 'collar counties' around Philly we hear s much about down here. Many of them go for Clinton for the same reason they went for Obama; social guilt. Trump being the candidate turned many more new voters and Regan Democrats to him, than turned Rino Republicans away from him.


Don't forget about voter fraud. I can't wait to see some results of the voter fraud commission. Detroit had more democrat votes in some precincts than actual register voters and imagine in LA, Phila and other liberal strong holds.
  • Agree x 1
  • List

#94 Male ONLINE   newjerseyhunter

newjerseyhunter

    Button Buck

  • NJW&W Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 118 posts

Posted Today, 09:08 AM

Trump received 3.3% more votes than Romney (who had a BAD voter turnout), but America's population grew roughly 3% from 2012 and 2016.  

 

So it's true, Trump got more votes than Romney, but not by THAT much when adjusted for growth.   The real story is that Hillary Clinton received FEWER votes than Barack Obama even though the population grew by 3%, which is about 3 million "missing" Democrat votes nationwide.   That, as President Trump would say, is "Uuge".

 

The population or the population of eligible voters? 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users