So yeah, Trump campaign was actually coordinating with the Russians the entire time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, why are you concerned about Ukraine? It's not our battle to fight. Maybe volunteer for your local school instead of regurgitating CNN.

I think HRC going full-blown McCarthian was ridiculous.

We have our problems, people. Stop trying to police the world. We're not that rich and powerful anymore. Better pray Russia and China don't start trading oil in yuan. This is what your headaches should be about.

NP here.

What on earth gives you the idea that it will stop with Ukraine? Exactly how much of the world are you willing to cede to a bloodthirsty dictator?

We are plenty rich and powerful enough to ensure stability in the world, which is both moral and in our best interest as a nation.

Your "America is weak" nonsense is simply wrong, and unpatriotic to boot.

And this is where your total lack of external awareness begins. Russia is not the admirable adversary it is portrayed by the media. It is a bleeding economy that cannot possibly master the means to conquer the whole world. It is a dog that barks but doesn't bite.

America is not weak. America is not smart. But its people are waking up to the fact that we can't afford to support the rest of the world anymore.

You obviously missed the memo. Stay afraid of Putin if you choose. I can't help but laughing.

Tell that to Ukraine and now Syria. Yes, we're in Syria, too, but I am not the one saying the US is all bark no bite. Russia still has plenty of bite. NATO is sending troops along the eastern side of Europe as a deterrent to Russia. NATO and Europe seem plenty worried about Russia.

That's cool. Just tell people you won't be providing them with healthcare, because you need to protect the European way of life. Fair is fair.

I have no idea what this post is supposed to mean. The PP stated that Russia is all bark no bite. I was stating that it still has bite. What does healthcare have to do with it? Can you stay on topic? Or is that too hard for you like it's too hard for Trump?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, why are you concerned about Ukraine? It's not our battle to fight. Maybe volunteer for your local school instead of regurgitating CNN.

I think HRC going full-blown McCarthian was ridiculous.

We have our problems, people. Stop trying to police the world. We're not that rich and powerful anymore. Better pray Russia and China don't start trading oil in yuan. This is what your headaches should be about.

NP here.

What on earth gives you the idea that it will stop with Ukraine? Exactly how much of the world are you willing to cede to a bloodthirsty dictator?

We are plenty rich and powerful enough to ensure stability in the world, which is both moral and in our best interest as a nation.

Your "America is weak" nonsense is simply wrong, and unpatriotic to boot.

And this is where your total lack of external awareness begins. Russia is not the admirable adversary it is portrayed by the media. It is a bleeding economy that cannot possibly master the means to conquer the whole world. It is a dog that barks but doesn't bite.

America is not weak. America is not smart. But its people are waking up to the fact that we can't afford to support the rest of the world anymore.

You obviously missed the memo. Stay afraid of Putin if you choose. I can't help but laughing.

Tell that to Ukraine and now Syria. Yes, we're in Syria, too, but I am not the one saying the US is all bark no bite. Russia still has plenty of bite. NATO is sending troops along the eastern side of Europe as a deterrent to Russia. NATO and Europe seem plenty worried about Russia.

That's cool. Just tell people you won't be providing them with healthcare, because you need to protect the European way of life. Fair is fair.

I have no idea what this post is supposed to mean. The PP stated that Russia is all bark no bite. I was stating that it still has bite. What does healthcare have to do with it? Can you stay on topic? Or is that too hard for you like it's too hard for Trump?

I think the point is that we shouldn't devote resources to protecting Europe from Putin, bc that money could be devoted to improving healthcare of Americans. (Though I don't think the president-elect has promised to spend more government money on healthcare.)

I don't agree that we should break solidarity with NATO Allies, but I'm intuiting that's the link between Russia/NATO and healthcare..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, why are you concerned about Ukraine? It's not our battle to fight. Maybe volunteer for your local school instead of regurgitating CNN.

I think HRC going full-blown McCarthian was ridiculous.

We have our problems, people. Stop trying to police the world. We're not that rich and powerful anymore. Better pray Russia and China don't start trading oil in yuan. This is what your headaches should be about.

NP here.

What on earth gives you the idea that it will stop with Ukraine? Exactly how much of the world are you willing to cede to a bloodthirsty dictator?

We are plenty rich and powerful enough to ensure stability in the world, which is both moral and in our best interest as a nation.

Your "America is weak" nonsense is simply wrong, and unpatriotic to boot.

And this is where your total lack of external awareness begins. Russia is not the admirable adversary it is portrayed by the media. It is a bleeding economy that cannot possibly master the means to conquer the whole world. It is a dog that barks but doesn't bite.

America is not weak. America is not smart. But its people are waking up to the fact that we can't afford to support the rest of the world anymore.

You obviously missed the memo. Stay afraid of Putin if you choose. I can't help but laughing.

Tell that to Ukraine and now Syria. Yes, we're in Syria, too, but I am not the one saying the US is all bark no bite. Russia still has plenty of bite. NATO is sending troops along the eastern side of Europe as a deterrent to Russia. NATO and Europe seem plenty worried about Russia.

That's cool. Just tell people you won't be providing them with healthcare, because you need to protect the European way of life. Fair is fair.

I have no idea what this post is supposed to mean. The PP stated that Russia is all bark no bite. I was stating that it still has bite. What does healthcare have to do with it? Can you stay on topic? Or is that too hard for you like it's too hard for Trump?

I think the point is that we shouldn't devote resources to protecting Europe from Putin, bc that money could be devoted to improving healthcare of Americans. (Though I don't think the president-elect has promised to spend more government money on healthcare.)

I don't agree that we should break solidarity with NATO Allies, but I'm intuiting that's the link between Russia/NATO and healthcare..

Perhaps, but the point wasn't about whether we should be involved in E. Europe, but rather, whether Russia still has bite. And it does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The PP stated that Russia is all bark no bite. I was stating that it still has bite.

Elaborate, please.

Healthcare is just a good example. Other countries devote money to healthcare while we subsidize their military defense. People of this country think it's unfair. More of our money should go to domestic, not overseas, projects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP stated that Russia is all bark no bite. I was stating that it still has bite.

Elaborate, please.

Healthcare is just a good example. Other countries devote money to healthcare while we subsidize their military defense. People of this country think it's unfair. More of our money should go to domestic, not overseas, projects.

? I did.. Ukraine and Syria. WTF? Again, the post wasn't about whether we should be involved, but that Russia still has bite. Goodness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who voted for Trump don't care about Russia. They would've voted for him anyway. I doubt they really even understand who Putin is, and they didn't care to learn.

Disagree--they are "Make America Great" again-style patriots. Many grew up in Cold War.

A campaign tying Trump to Russia would have resonated much more than the emphasis on Trump's comments on Muslims, etc.

HRC should have broken out the "Evil Empire" talk and tied Trump directly to Putin.

+1 Very true.

[Anonymous]

None of this will matter. Justice will be run by Guilani, who won't prosecute Trump for anything, including treason. Our country is f%*#ed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who voted for Trump don't care about Russia. They would've voted for him anyway. I doubt they really even understand who Putin is, and they didn't care to learn.

Disagree--they are "Make America Great" again-style patriots. Many grew up in Cold War.

A campaign tying Trump to Russia would have resonated much more than the emphasis on Trump's comments on Muslims, etc.

HRC should have broken out the "Evil Empire" talk and tied Trump directly to Putin.

+1 Very true.

Seriously? Trump criticized Reagan in one of the debates. I'm not sure there was much that could be done to get through to them. They can't even keep their arguments straight. But they sure showed us for electing a Black man twice and putting an ambitious woman on the ticket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, why are you concerned about Ukraine? It's not our battle to fight. Maybe volunteer for your local school instead of regurgitating CNN.

I think HRC going full-blown McCarthian was ridiculous.

We have our problems, people. Stop trying to police the world. We're not that rich and powerful anymore. Better pray Russia and China don't start trading oil in yuan. This is what your headaches should be about.

NP here.

What on earth gives you the idea that it will stop with Ukraine? Exactly how much of the world are you willing to cede to a bloodthirsty dictator?

We are plenty rich and powerful enough to ensure stability in the world, which is both moral and in our best interest as a nation.

Your "America is weak" nonsense is simply wrong, and unpatriotic to boot.

And this is where your total lack of external awareness begins. Russia is not the admirable adversary it is portrayed by the media. It is a bleeding economy that cannot possibly master the means to conquer the whole world. It is a dog that barks but doesn't bite.

America is not weak. America is not smart. But its people are waking up to the fact that we can't afford to support the rest of the world anymore.

You obviously missed the memo. Stay afraid of Putin if you choose. I can't help but laughing.

The above is, in a word, ludicrous.

Russia has more force projection capability than all of Western Europe combined could possibly deal with (absent US assistance), notwithstanding its economic woes.

"Supporting the rest of the world" is not the issue--again, it's in our self interest to create a stable global order. This has been the overwhelming consensus by both conservative and liberal statesmen, wonks, intellectuals, military leaders since the end of WWII.

You'd overturn this and endanger our national security for what compelling reason exactly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP stated that Russia is all bark no bite. I was stating that it still has bite.

Elaborate, please.

Healthcare is just a good example. Other countries devote money to healthcare while we subsidize their military defense. People of this country think it's unfair. More of our money should go to domestic, not overseas, projects.

? I did.. Ukraine and Syria. WTF? Again, the post wasn't about whether we should be involved, but that Russia still has bite. Goodness.

It doesn't. Goodness. (See how well this works? Oh well, if you don't want to talk, just stop responding.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP stated that Russia is all bark no bite. I was stating that it still has bite.

Elaborate, please.

Healthcare is just a good example. Other countries devote money to healthcare while we subsidize their military defense. People of this country think it's unfair. More of our money should go to domestic, not overseas, projects.

? I did.. Ukraine and Syria. WTF? Again, the post wasn't about whether we should be involved, but that Russia still has bite. Goodness.

It doesn't. Goodness. (See how well this works? Oh well, if you don't want to talk, just stop responding.)

No, I don't see how that works. Russia still has bite. Just ask Ukraine, and now Syria. Seriously. You must be living in Trump reality when he stated that Russia is not in Ukraine.

[Anonymous]

Russian govt is blackmailing Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP stated that Russia is all bark no bite. I was stating that it still has bite.

Elaborate, please.

Healthcare is just a good example. Other countries devote money to healthcare while we subsidize their military defense. People of this country think it's unfair. More of our money should go to domestic, not overseas, projects.

? I did.. Ukraine and Syria. WTF? Again, the post wasn't about whether we should be involved, but that Russia still has bite. Goodness.

It doesn't. Goodness. (See how well this works? Oh well, if you don't want to talk, just stop responding.)

No, I don't see how that works. Russia still has bite. Just ask Ukraine, and now Syria. Seriously. You must be living in Trump reality when he stated that Russia is not in Ukraine.

PP, enough. Saying it is so doesn't actually make it so. At least in my reality. Either provide a viable explanation, or stop reiterating "Russia has a bite." Because it doesn't. It wants you to think it does, and you don't know any better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There it starts. Scandals and court cases are gonna chase this man to be one term president. He won the electoral college by about 1% in 4 states and lost the popular vote. Dems will show up in force for a non clinton candidate in 2020 and by then his base will be disillusioned because they can't see anything coming their way. So 2020 a dem president will win.

By 2018 Americans will be so sick of scandal and corruption that the mid-term elections will be a bloodbath of historical proportions, which will allow the dems to neutralize the threat. The 2020 democratic candidate will have the longest coattails since FDR. God will smite down Thomas and Kennedy. Four years from now Democrats will control all three branches of government.

If we're going to dream there's no sense in half measures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The PP stated that Russia is all bark no bite. I was stating that it still has bite.

Elaborate, please.

Healthcare is just a good example. Other countries devote money to healthcare while we subsidize their military defense. People of this country think it's unfair. More of our money should go to domestic, not overseas, projects.

? I did.. Ukraine and Syria. WTF? Again, the post wasn't about whether we should be involved, but that Russia still has bite. Goodness.

It doesn't. Goodness. (See how well this works? Oh well, if you don't want to talk, just stop responding.)

No, I don't see how that works. Russia still has bite. Just ask Ukraine, and now Syria. Seriously. You must be living in Trump reality when he stated that Russia is not in Ukraine.

PP, enough. Saying it is so doesn't actually make it so. At least in my reality. Either provide a viable explanation, or stop reiterating "Russia has a bite." Because it doesn't. It wants you to think it does, and you don't know any better.

What are we talking about? Does Russia have a military, navy, and air force to rival ours? No (neither do France and England). Does Russia have enough military power to invade her neighbors and temporarily stabilize Assad? Yes.