Is this one different?

Cameron wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

I hope you’re right. But roughly the same amount of people voted for Obama in 2012 as voted for Clinton in 2016 but certain demographics didn’t show up. Even knowing the Republican was a racist.

Link? I had thought it was the opposite, that Trump received about as many votes in 16 as Romney got in 12, but that Clinton got less than Obama.

Cameron wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

I hope you’re right. But roughly the same amount of people voted for Obama in 2012 as voted for Clinton in 2016 but certain demographics didn’t show up. Even knowing the Republican was a racist.

Link? I had thought it was the opposite, that Trump received about as many votes in 16 as Romney got in 12, but that Clinton got less than Obama.

kingstonlake wrote:

Cameron wrote:

Link? I had thought it was the opposite, that Trump received about as many votes in 16 as Romney got in 12, but that Clinton got less than Obama.

Clinton got 65,853,514  Trump 62,984,828
Obama got 65,915,795  Romney 60,933,504

Black voter turnout was 66% in 2012, 59% in 2016
Latin voter turnout was roughly the same

Cameron wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

Clinton got 65,853,514  Trump 62,984,828
Obama got 65,915,795  Romney 60,933,504

Black voter turnout was 66% in 2012, 59% in 2016
Latin voter turnout was roughly the same

Okay, you would seem to be correct then. Care to link me to where you got those numbers?

kingstonlake wrote:

Cameron wrote:

Okay, you would seem to be correct then. Care to link me to where you got those numbers?

the election results were just wiki. Minority trends were pew research.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/12/black-voter-turnout-fell-in-2016-even-as-a-record-number-of-americans-cast-ballots/

kingstonlake wrote:Full house vote on inquiry Thursday. I got a feeling Pelosi wants certain things public. I bet she also wants to expose Pumpkin Spices utter disdain for the intelligence community.

MiamiSpartan wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:Full house vote on inquiry Thursday. I got a feeling Pelosi wants certain things public. I bet she also wants to expose Pumpkin Spices utter disdain for the intelligence community.

What was said in the private depositions would always come out in an actual impeachment hearing.  I think what she wanted was to gather enough evidence that a) Dems in Trump districts can't just ignore and puss out on a vote, and b) those Dems' constituents can't really complain about their vote (except the hard core Republicans in their districts, but it isn't like they were ever going to vote for those Dems anyway).  

The Nixon and Clinton cases had the house vote on the inquiry early on because there had already been independent investigations and the evidence was presented to the House. In this case, the House had to conduct the investigation themselves.  

kingstonlake wrote:Supposedly Nunes aid has been leaking the name of the whistleblower.

White House official testifies on Ukraine call concerns, as president blasts 'Never Trumper witness'

A White House official testified behind closed doors Tuesday that he had concerns about President Trump's July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the heart of Democrats' impeachment inquiry, according to prepared remarks -- as the president ripped the witness as a "Never Trumper" and challenged his account.

Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who serves as a director on the National Security Council (NSC), arrived Tuesday morning to testify before the House Intelligence, Oversight, and Foreign Affairs committees. His prepared opening statement, obtained by Fox News, expresses concern over Trump's request to have Ukraine investigate political opponents. But in the run-up to the testimony, the president repeatedly swiped at the official via Twitter.

"It seems very clear that he is incredibly concerned about Ukrainian defense,” Duffy, who was recently hired as a CNN contributor, said.

“I don't know that he's concerned about American policy ... We all have an affinity to our homeland, where we came from ... he has an affinity for the Ukraine," he continued.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:National Security Advisor resigns the day before testifying.

(I'm sure the racist, bigoted christian sexual predator has never heard of him, never met him, knows nothing about him.. except that he's a Democratic operative).

MiamiSpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:National Security Advisor resigns the day before testifying.

(I'm sure the racist, bigoted christian sexual predator has never heard of him, never met him, knows nothing about him.. except that he's a Democratic operative).

He's not the National Security Advisor.

He is on the National Security Council, though, but that is a big difference. Better not put that question on the test that you want people to take in order to be allowed to vote.

America is a stupid country.

(Just having a little fun with you, Bob, but you kind of walked into it. )

House speaker has 'weaponized impeachment,' conservative groups claim in ethics complaint.

InTenSity wrote:I swear that Foxnews needs to be reigned in, or something. Calling the impeachment proceedings a blatant and obvious coup, is so over the top and dangerous. I laugh every time they also accuse Democrats of proceeding like this is Russia. I just keep thinking, how can people be upset about working with Russia, or as Russia does, when your top man, Carrot Top, wants to be Putin?

InTenSity wrote:I swear that Foxnews needs to be reigned in, or something. Calling the impeachment proceedings a blatant and obvious coup, is so over the top and dangerous. I laugh every time they also accuse Democrats of proceeding like this is Russia. I just keep thinking, how can people be upset about working with Russia, or as Russia does, when your top man, Carrot Top, wants to be Putin?

Scott Dworkin
@funder
BREAKING: Speaker Pelosi has the votes to pass the resolution today formally establishing the impeachment inquiry. An estimated 230 Members of the House plan to vote in support of it.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

InTenSity wrote:I swear that Foxnews needs to be reigned in, or something. Calling the impeachment proceedings a blatant and obvious coup, is so over the top and dangerous. I laugh every time they also accuse Democrats of proceeding like this is Russia. I just keep thinking, how can people be upset about working with Russia, or as Russia does, when your top man, Carrot Top, wants to be Putin?

I go to Fox News periodically just to marvel at the world those people live in..

CNN, etc is bad enough - they had a "CNN Contributor" on the other day who accused the Lindman guy (I think that's his name) of being a Ukranian spy (never mind that he's a decorated war hero while the racist, bigoted christian sexual predator stayed home to nurse bone spurs)...

America is a stupid, gullible country. Unfortunately, it's not illegal.. and all of those people's vote count just as much as ours do.

MiamiSpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
I go to Fox News periodically just to marvel at the world those people live in..

CNN, etc is bad enough - they had a "CNN Contributor" on the other day who accused the Lindman guy (I think that's his name) of being a Ukranian spy (never mind that he's a decorated war hero while the racist, bigoted christian sexual predator stayed home to nurse bone spurs)...

America is a stupid, gullible country. Unfortunately, it's not illegal.. and all of those people's vote count just as much as ours do.

Periodically? 90% of your "Mainstream media" links are from FoxNews (which really shouldn't be Fox News). They love all of the clicks you give them, as well as promoting it to others.

Regarding CNN, it's kind of weird how you criticize them for having someone on with an opposing view point, especially when it only represents about 5-10% of their contributors/content. Shouldn't we be more frightened if they stop having any pro-Trump viewpoints at all?

Either way, the TV portion of FoxNews, CNN, etc., don't really do news anymore anyway. Sure, they might have some breaking news and a couple of minutes of someone on scene at the White House or elsewhere, but for the most part it's just round the clock "analysis", which doesn't really analyze anything, but is really just people throwing out their political opinions. At least the websites actually have news articles that talk about what happened, even if their happens to be a slant on it.

Republicans for weeks had challenged Pelosi to hold a floor vote, complaining the inquiry hasn’t followed past precedent and violates the president’s due process rights. While she finally gave in to those demands in a bid to mute their complaints about process, GOP lawmakers continued to call the inquiry a "sham".

Floyd Robertson wrote:It's disheartening, but utterly believable, that not one of the 194 republicans finds it alarming enough that what Trump has done is worthy of their on-the-record vote for further public investigation into Trump's actions.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Floyd Robertson wrote:It's disheartening, but utterly believable, that not one of the 194 republicans finds it alarming enough that what Trump has done is worthy of their on-the-record vote for further public investigation into Trump's actions.

while I agree with you that it's disheartening and unbelievable, it's important to remember who these people are:

they're racists.. they're misogynists.. they're bigots. Plain and simple. It's who they are, it's who/what they vote for. Every single one of them.

Floyd Robertson wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote: while I agree with you that it's disheartening and unbelievable, it's important to remember who these people are:

they're racists.. they're misogynists.. they're bigots. Plain and simple. It's who they are, it's who/what they vote for. Every single one of them.

Basically what they've said is that getting a BJ in the oval office is a worse offense than colluding with a foreign government for political gain.

Floyd Robertson wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote: while I agree with you that it's disheartening and unbelievable, it's important to remember who these people are:

they're racists.. they're misogynists.. they're bigots. Plain and simple. It's who they are, it's who/what they vote for. Every single one of them.

Basically what they've said is that getting a BJ in the oval office is a worse offense than colluding with a foreign government for political gain.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Banks2Mason wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

well i doubt she's actually his daughter so that makes it ok i guess

If the Republicans are serious about winning this truly political fight, here are three witnesses they should demand be subpoenaed:

   Hunter Biden
   Joe Biden
   Barack Obama.

CNN - Democrats Wasting Time On Impeachment

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

CNN - Democrats Wasting Time On Impeachment

Caution: Mainstream Media Link