LeonDurham's comments

« First    « Previous    Comments 1284 - 1323 of 1,323    Last »

  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 10, 7:53pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TrumpingTits says

Yes, really. I mean, what else is Murkowski going to say, Leon? "I fucked up! Don't vote for me!"

Riiight.


You're obviously missing the point there Trumpy. Extremist Republicans are doing exactly what socal said they don't do.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 10, 7:57pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Tell me what changes Obama made to NAFTA?


More whataboutism from the King. Obama sucked on trade--no doubt. He was way too eager to work with Republicans and do their dirty work.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 10, 7:59pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Not long ago, a Journo who said to their Editor : "I heard it from a guy who says he heard it from another guy" would have been laughed out of the office. But if it's Anti-Trump, it's good to go!

"Accountability Journalism"


And if the unnamed source says there is no Trump/Russia collusion, then TwoScoops and all the other Trumpcucks eat it up no questions asked!
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 10, 8:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TrumpingTits says
Is this your typical trolling pattern? Constantly changing the subject while flat out injecting as many lies as you can in the process in the hope of getting people to take your bait?

Too bad you got outted, oy?


lol--nope, subject was always the same. Perhaps you should reread the posts and maybe you'll understand better this time.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 10, 8:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HeadSet says
That whole article is talking about the "backlash" of Murkowski not getting votes, And you are comparing not getting votes as equal to DOXing, boycotts, harassing at restaurants and physical threats?


Read the original quoted post again. No Dems are harassing other Dems at restaurants or making physical threats.

Alaska GOP is threatening to censor her and withdraw support for her. Seems pretty close to a boycott to me.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 4:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

PrivilegedtobeWhite says
LeonDurham says
OK, read it.
No you didn't


Yep, sure did. So, how does it relate to me exactly?
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 4:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Again, the President negotiates and THEN the Congress votes. Obama had a Dem Congress anyway in 2009-2010, but he wouldn't have needed one to start renegotiating So the "But Republican Congress" is doubly inapplicable.


What the hell are you talking about? I said Obama sucked on trade. And that he worked way too much with Republicans to advance their free trade agenda. You're agreeing with me but pretending to disagree.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 5:08pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Obama promised to renegotiate NAFTA.

Promises Made, Promises Broken.

Trade is one of my top 3 issues, I can never trust the Democrats again until I see America First trade deals being made and/or voted in by them.


You should have voted for Bernie like I did.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 5:10pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says


Obama promised to renegotiate NAFTA.

Promises Made, Promises Broken.


Trump promised to get tough on Wall St. and Big Banks.

Promises Made. Promises Broken.

Reforming Wall St./Big Banks is one of my top 3 issues. I will never vote for Republicans again. period.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 6:54pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
The big banks already face tough regulation.


lol--please tell me you're joking
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 7:31pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
The Obama administration placed tough regulations on the banks after the government was forced to bail them out during the 2008 housing collapse.
Are you saying Obama did nothing to control banks after bailing them out? If so, that would be sheer incompetence on the part of Obama, won't it?


Actually, I'm saying Trump signed the law that reversed the Obama regulations. You didn't know this?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-dodd-frank/trump-signs-bill-easing-u-s-bank-rules-into-law-idUSKCN1IP2WX
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 7:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says


Needs to ease some more. It's still suffocating housing.


Just curious--which regulation specifically do you think is suffocating housing?
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 7:55pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says

You don't need to know every single law or regulation in detail.


If you're going to say regulations are suffocating the housing market, I would think you could at least name 1 regulation.

Strategist says
and what I see is banks arenot lending for housing like they used to, or even close. There are hardly any portfolio loans available today that gave a range of options to potential borrowers for housing loans that were available 20 to 30 years ago.
If more people are able to borrow for homes, more homes would be built, resulting in softer home prices.


Well, I see more types of loans available now than ever before. There is absolutely more choices now than 20-30 years ago.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 8:08pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Look Bob, I trust Trump to deal with the Islamic threat. I never trusted Obama to do the same. It's as simple as that.


This reminds me of when someone posted a fake news article on here. When several posters pointed out that the article was a lie, the Trump supporters responded, even though the article was proven to be fake, they believe it anyway.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 4:30pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

How about $500 on who gains in the House?

Goran wins if Republicans pick up seats, I win if Dems pick up seats.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 4:31pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
If you mean Dodd-Frank, that was a Pastiche of Reform that simply sheltered Big Banks from competition by imposing immense regulatory compliance costs.


lol--that's why Big Banks wanted it repealed so badly, right? And why they paid Trump to get it done?
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 4:36pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I thought you were predicting a red wave? Doesn't sound like you're too confident.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 4:45pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Goran_K says
"Gaining seats" means nothing. The Dems can gain "1 seat" and you win $500, but the Dems would have no control over the House or the Senate.


Gaining 1 seat means one more Dem vote. It most definitely means something.

Yes, I highly doubt the Dems will win the Senate. It's a longshot.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 4:52pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Goran_K says
Well, I'm glad those are the type of victories the Dems are getting excited for. It means that the perception of the blue wave has become the "blew wave".

That makes me happy.


Actually you'll be sad then when they gain control of the House.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 5:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Goran_K says
Yes, but the "blue wave" was supposed to be an over take of both houses.


"supposed" What the hell does that mean? It's always been almost impossible for Dems to win the Senate--even in a blue tsunami it's a tall order.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 5:04pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Goran_K says
The house is the actual real battle. But the funny thing is, it should not be a battle. Incumbents have only kept it 4 times in US History. But for some reason, it's gotten so close again.


It really hasn't. It's only close in your mind.

And that's why you won't bet on House control.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 5:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
November 5th: "NYT and 538 say the Dems have a 98% of winning the Senate"
November 7th: "Uh, you're such an ignorant. The NYT/538 never said the Dems would win the Senate. Only a 98% chance. You don't understand math!"

Maybe a repeat of 2016?


Uh--wtf are you talking about? That example has no resemblance to anything 538 every said.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 5:16pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Goran_K says

Maybe you should go get an NPR or CNN/NBC/WallStreet Journal poll to REALLY convince me.


Great---then you should be happy to bet on House control, right?
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 5:21pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Mighty strange that Saudi Arabia became bad since Trump became President, and we're taking Erdogan BS seriously. Even though this Journalist is to Osama Bin Laden what Ken Livingstone was to the IRA.


The only strange thing is that you are now somehow a Saudi backer. Saudi has been bad since before 9/11. Did you forget where the terrorists are from?

Did you forgot everyone writing about how ridiculous Trump's Muslim ban was when he excluded Saudi? The #1 backer of terrorism.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 5:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
LeonDurham says
Uh--wtf are you talking about? That example has no resemblance to anything 538 every said.

Official NYT Prediction: "only 93%" chance to win two weeks before the election.


So when I say that 538 never said anything like what you posted, you counter with quotes from:

Huffpost,and NYT?

Typical disingenuous Trump cultist response.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 5:25pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Uh, Saudi Arabia embarked on a pretty aggressive reform plan starting a couple of years ago.


lol--you fell for the typical political theater. It's OK, you'll learn how these things work eventually.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 5:39pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Now, you probably think Saudi Arabia should allow Burka-free living and legalize Gay Marriage all in one fell swoop tomorrow by 10AM, but you've never heard of reaction when you impose something people aren't ready for.


How about we start with no State sponsored murder of pro-reform journalists? Is that too much to ask?
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 7:48pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
And nate silver himself. Go back and read. I even included a link.


70 doesn't equal 99. Hopefully you know that.

Basically he said 1 out of every 3 times, Trump will win. Not exactly a huge upset.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 7:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

lol at whoever marked my last comment personal.

@Patrick--can you share what was personal about it?
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 7:50pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

MBS had a pro-reform journalist murdered.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 13, 7:56am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
When was the last time the US Media gave a shit about RIsen or anybody else Obama pursued with the Whistleblower Act?


Is it possible to talk about Trump's flaws without referencing Obama?

Asking for a friend.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 13, 9:48am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

CBOEtrader says

Ok. According to historical trends, losing 30 seats in house and 4 seats in Senate is typical for 1st midterm election.


That was before all the districts were gerrymandered.
  LeonDurham   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 13, 10:50am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Patrick says

Yes, this does seem to be true.


OK please help me. What was personal? So I can avoid it in the future.



The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions