The Big Fat Compendium Of Russiagate Debunkery

[coracle]

"The Democrats screwed up big time by blocking Sanders. Polls showed he could beat Trump and Hillary could not. The party should have gotten behind him, but they would rather lose than upset the corporate donors."

I don't remember the Polls showing that Clinton could not beat Trump, Pam. I seem to remember they all predicted a "comfortable" win for her. And the only reason they showed Sanders could beat him was because it was never going to happen.

Polls today only reflect the aims of the polling organization to sway the result their way and/or to produce the opportunity to spread fake news.

Thinking that Sanders would have beaten Trump when everybody else failed is clutching at straws. He was/is a SOCIALIST not even a democrat.

[Pam]

"The Democrats screwed up big time by blocking Sanders. Polls showed he could beat Trump and Hillary could not. The party should have gotten behind him, but they would rather lose than upset the corporate donors."

I don't remember the Polls showing that Clinton could not beat Trump, Pam. I seem to remember they all predicted a "comfortable" win for her. And the only reason they showed Sanders could beat him was because it was never going to happen.

Polls today only reflect the aims of the polling organization to sway the result their way and/or to produce the opportunity to spread fake news.

Thinking that Sanders would have beaten Trump when everybody else failed is clutching at straws. He was/is a SOCIALIST not even a democrat.

Here's one that showed Trump beating Hillary.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...y-head-to-head

I actually agree with you though, that not all polls are reliable.

As I said above, the word "socialist" doesn't scare everybody, especially the younger voters. Bernie was doing well with the 18-35 group.
The other thing about Bernie is he did well with independents and people that might not normally vote. A lot of those that stayed home or left part of the ballot blank in November would have gone for him. People want progress and are sick of the corporate tools in both parties.

[Richard]

Here's one that showed Trump beating Hillary.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...y-head-to-head

I actually agree with you though, that not all polls are reliable.

As I said above, the word "socialist" doesn't scare everybody, especially the younger voters. Bernie was doing well with the 18-35 group.
The other thing about Bernie is he did well with independents and people that might not normally vote. A lot of those that stayed home or left part of the ballot blank in November would have gone for him. People want progress and are sick of the corporate tools in both parties.

I agree with the age group of Bernie supporters,their was a commentary awhile back about minlinials and that they supported the socialist aspect until they got into the 40k to 50k pay range then it kinda changed.

Based on my observations,I want to be clear that they are my observations on social media and more so Facebook,which I have no clue as to why I even keep that,but I used to play one of the games on there so I have 600 "friends"

Based on that number the Bernie supporters in the 18 to 25 range are radically left and point blank socialist,the ones in the 35-40 range and some I actually know are ones that at that age are still acting like everybody owes them a living and a free place to live.

That is not to say all Sanders supporters are like that or all dems are bad or all Repub are bad.

Most just want to provide for thier families and make a better life for thier children.

I believe Bernie believes in what he is proposeing and we really need to do some systematic changes when it comes to the education,immigration,and healthcare,I am glad he has a voice and keeps those points in the forefront.

But all of those things need to be paid for.

Totaly off subject but the recent apartment fire in the U.K.,that was council housing or section 8,the building was located in a very expensive part of town.

The replacement apartments that the displaced residents are now moving into costs the others residents 1.6 million pounds that is over 1 million in US per unit.

How would someone like to bust thier butt to be able to afford to live in the heart of London when all they need to do is quit work and have the exact same thing.

That is when it becomes a slippery slope.

Detroit has already seen what it is like when there are more taking then paying into. It just does not work.

[Pam]

I agree with the age group of Bernie supporters,their was a commentary awhile back about minlinials and that they supported the socialist aspect until they got into the 40k to 50k pay range then it kinda changed.

Based on my observations,I want to be clear that they are my observations on social media and more so Facebook,which I have no clue as to why I even keep that,but I used to play one of the games on there so I have 600 "friends"

Based on that number the Bernie supporters in the 18 to 25 range are radically left and point blank socialist,the ones in the 35-40 range and some I actually know are ones that at that age are still acting like everybody owes them a living and a free place to live.

That is not to say all Sanders supporters are like that or all dems are bad or all Repub are bad.

Most just want to provide for thier families and make a better life for thier children.

I believe Bernie believes in what he is proposeing and we really need to do some systematic changes when it comes to the education,immigration,and healthcare,I am glad he has a voice and keeps those points in the forefront.

But all of those things need to be paid for.

Totaly off subject but the recent apartment fire in the U.K.,that was council housing or section 8,the building was located in a very expensive part of town.

The replacement apartments that the displaced residents are now moving into costs the others residents 1.6 million pounds that is over 1 million in US per unit.

How would someone like to bust thier butt to be able to afford to live in the heart of London when all they need to do is quit work and have the exact same thing.

That is when it becomes a slippery slope.

Detroit has already seen what it is like when there are more taking then paying into. It just does not work.

What we have now is a system that makes it harder and harder to get ahead. Jobs have been lost and wages haven't kept up with inflation. People are going bankrupt from health bills etc. What's wrong with trying to make things better for regular Americans? Even if we end up somewhere with people wanting a "free ride", I don't really care. I'm more offended that my tax dollars currently go for expensive military hardware and killing people in foreign lands.

Those people in England were made homeless by govt. negligence, so actually the govt. does own them a place to stay at least short term. Those apartments had no sprinklers, no alarms, only one stairway and were covered in flammable material. Whole families were burned alive. That's the outrage, not that they get to temporarily stay someplace expensive. My understanding is that the poor people were in that neighborhood first and then it became gentrified.

[Richard]

What we have now is a system that makes it harder and harder to get ahead. Jobs have been lost and wages haven't kept up with inflation. People are going bankrupt from health bills etc. What's wrong with trying to make things better for regular Americans? Even if we end up somewhere with people wanting a "free ride", I don't really care. I'm more offended that my tax dollars currently go for expensive military hardware and killing people in foreign lands.

Those people in England were made homeless by govt. negligence, so actually the govt. does own them a place to stay at least short term. Those apartments had no sprinklers, no alarms, only one stairway and were covered in flammable material. Whole families were burned alive. That's the outrage, not that they get to temporarily stay someplace expensive. My understanding is that the poor people were in that neighborhood first and then it became gentrified.

The problem there was the housing council was broke or stretched to the limits because of the recent mass immigration.

Thier health care system is also in major turmoil now also.

They had alarms,you can hear them in the vids,the biggest problem was that tenants were told that in case of fire to stay in your unit,personally if my house is on fire I do not care what anybody says,I am out of there.

Sprinklers of lack of were grandfathered in like it is here in the states according to the year the property was built.

But anyways,it boils down to everything needs to be paid for,and every country that leans towards heavy socialist values is basically in collapse or shambles.

The hand up aspect works if implemented with a training program etc.

But the way it works now is the city's see the poor as a paycheck from the federal government,the more you have the bigger the check and sooner or later you reach that tipping point where the poor outnumber the contributors.

There will always be poor and disadvantaged,nothing one can do to change that,at best one can do is provide the opportunity to not be poor and that is not through equal distribution of everybody's paycheck because that removes the incentive to actually do better.

There are no easy answers.

You actually make money off of the poor and not the rich,when that changes then maybe we will be in a better place.

[GMan]

The problem there was the housing council was broke or stretched to the limits because of the recent mass immigration.

Thier health care system is also in major turmoil now also.

They had alarms,you can hear them in the vids,the biggest problem was that tenants were told that in case of fire to stay in your unit,personally if my house is on fire I do not care what anybody says,I am out of there.

Sprinklers of lack of were grandfathered in like it is here in the states according to the year the property was built.

But anyways,it boils down to everything needs to be paid for,and every country that leans towards heavy socialist values is basically in collapse or shambles.

The hand up aspect works if implemented with a training program etc.

But the way it works now is the city's see the poor as a paycheck from the federal government,the more you have the bigger the check and sooner or later you reach that tipping point where the poor outnumber the contributors.

There will always be poor and disadvantaged,nothing one can do to change that,at best one can do is provide the opportunity to not be poor and that is not through equal distribution of everybody's paycheck because that removes the incentive to actually do better.

There are no easy answers.

You actually make money off of the poor and not the rich,when that changes then maybe we will be in a better place.

I agree with your assessment Richard. The last part is sooo true. The poor are looked at as a paycheck by some. The bigger the need, the more federal dollars in the bank for the taking. As dollars are consolidated for a purpose, that dedicated money pot begins to become tempting for picking.

With no check and balance other than the gov agency doling out the dough and sending a low paid inspector out on yearly rounds, whats going to change? the inspector reports deficiencies and the same contractor more than likely gets the job to correct the issues that they themselves installed / overlooked while doing the job the first time. Add the urgency of an overcrowded system and an influx of refugees and you have the recipe for what happened in the London tower.
I also would of high tailed it out of there when I heard an alarm. Must be my paranoid distrusting nature.

[Pam]

The problem there was the housing council was broke or stretched to the limits because of the recent mass immigration.

Thier health care system is also in major turmoil now also.

They had alarms,you can hear them in the vids,the biggest problem was that tenants were told that in case of fire to stay in your unit,personally if my house is on fire I do not care what anybody says,I am out of there.

Sprinklers of lack of were grandfathered in like it is here in the states according to the year the property was built.

.

The building was rehabbed in the past couple of years and they still chose not to put sprinklers in. It should be a requirement. The highly flammable material was put on the exterior during the remodel, so they ended up making the building more dangerous instead of safer. Even if you only care about dollars and cents this was foolish because now replacing the whole building is going to cost them more than doing a proper rehab.

I saw interviews with many of the residents. They weren't all recent immigrants so I don't know where you got that from. Not that it matters, nobody deserves to be burned alive.

[oladub]

The problem there was the housing council was broke or stretched to the limits because of the recent mass immigration.

The numbers I read were 720 people living in a 120 unit apartment building. In Minneapolis, this similar size apartment building originally built to house local poor people is now almost entirely occupied by Somali immigrants although Minneapolis probably is better about zoning enforcement... well maybe except for the bridge. The taxpayers of Minneapolis probably never expected the nice high rise they built to house local poor people to be used to accommodate the third world either. London probably had scarce funds to do the job right.