`The Biden administration is priming the press ...

[Watchmen]

No. It's completely irrational and unreasonable to vote for him at this point. He has no redeeming qualities. It's not even a case of a bad man who might have some good policy ideas. He has no policy ideas, other than lower taxes on the wealthy and "secure the border". He's a lying, narcissitic felon and con man who truly only cares about himself and already tried to plunge us into chaos by fomenting an insurrection. His plans for his second term could be catastrophic.

There is not a single rational reason to vote for him. The idea that the decision to vote for him can be rational is a blindspot for people who like to pretend to be neutral.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[Magic Man]

Thank you for proving my point.

Your point was that it's completely irrational to vote for Trump? Glad I could help.

 

[Laniakea]

Since I have a dear friend who is fully and completely a Trump supporter, but has become a bit obsessed with reading labels in search of GMO, let me take this opportunity to share one little aspect of the "plan" for Agriculture that begins on page 289 of the manifesto.

From page 307 -- so you must be diligent in your reading.....
Remove Obstacles for Agricultural Biotechnology. Innovation is critical to agricultural production and the ability to meet future food needs. The next Administration should embrace innovation and technology, not hinder its use—especially because of scare tactics that ignore sound science. One of the key innovations in agriculture is genetic engineering. According to the USDA, “[C]urrently, over 90 percent of U.S. corn, upland cotton, and soybeans are produced using GE [genetically engineered] varieties.”112 Despite the importance of agricultural biotechnology, in 2016, Congress passed a federal mandate to label genetically engineered food.113 This legislation was arguably just a means to try to provide a negative connotation to GE food. There are other challenges as well for agricultural biotechnology. For example, Mexico plans to ban the importation of U.S. genetically modified yellow corn.114 The next Administration should: l Counter scare tactics and remove obstacles. The USDA should strongly counter scare tactics regarding agricultural biotechnology and adopt policies to remove unnecessary barriers to approvals and the adoption of biotechnology. l Repeal the federal labeling mandate. The USDA should work with Congress to repeal the federal labeling law, while maintaining federal preemption, and stress that voluntary labeling is allowed. l Use all tools available to remove improper trade barriers against agricultural biotechnology. The USDA should work closely with the Office of the United States Trade Representative to remove improper barriers imposed by other countries to block U.S. agricultural goods.

In other words, if it makes money, pump them animals full of stuff and spray the daylights out those fields!

A bit reminiscent of the "advice" that resulted in the dust bowl, isn't it?

I think your interpretation of the text is a bit exaggerated. They just want to remove barriers to what works. Government red tape is often what stands in the way of things being done efficiently, or at all in many cases.

 

[Watchmen]

Your point was that it's completely irrational to vote for Trump? Glad I could help.

The point that Dems are blind to why some rationale people vote for Trump.

 

[Spice]

I think your interpretation of the text is a bit exaggerated. They just want to remove barriers to what works. Government red tape is often what stands in the way of things being done efficiently, or at all in many cases.

I interpreted nothing. This was a copy and paste directly from the manifesto. I bold-texted enough for a quick scan to catch the gist. If you don't see this as alarming, you must know nothing about the history or safe practices of commercial farming.
Are you one who still believes a healthy, food grade chicken is plump with golden skin?

 

[Laniakea]

You've heard of it but didn't know anything about it when I brought it up before...sure, makes sense...

What's so horrible? How about all of it? As I already laid out, it calls for replacing thousands of government officials with Trump yes men.

Can you show where it says government officials would be replaced with "Trump yes men"?

That's the big one, because it's the most dangerous. It also wants to ban all abortion and the abortion pill,

If it violated the law, the SCOTUS would overrule it.

outlaw pornography

How's that a bad thing? Or maybe we should have a federal department that oversees pornography? There's one for everything else.

and get rid of the Department of Education, among many other things. Just look at the main idea on their site:

"It is not enough for conservatives to win elections. If we are going to rescue the country from the grip of the radical Left, we need both a governing agenda and the right people in place, ready to carry this agenda out on Day One of the next conservative Administration."

Ok, nothing there other than to say they plan on implementing what they promised to implement. They're right, it's not good enough just to win elections. Those who win have to do what they promised to do. At least the Republicans are saying what their plan is. I'm tired of hearing from Dems that Republicans have no plan.

They need to "put the right people in place" aside from elections.

No, that's just your interpretation/misrepresentation of what they actually said.

 

[Laniakea]

I asked for a reliable source and you could not find one. Why am I not surprised? And worse yet for you, even your right wing source did not support your claim. Did you forget that you wrote that quickly?

Now you're just mimicking yourself again.

 

[Laniakea]

I interpreted nothing. This was a copy and paste directly from the manifesto. I bold-texted enough for a quick scan to catch the gist. If you don't see this as alarming, you must know nothing about the history or safe practices of commercial farming.
Are you one who still believes a healthy, food grade chicken is plump with golden skin?

Your quote at the end was the interpretation I referred to.

 

[Spice]

Your quote at the end was the interpretation I referred to.

You can't face the truth, which I knew before I replied to your challenge made to another poster to "show" the concerns.

But I'm in hopes others browsing this thread will see there is a real need to read this document and take note how certain aspects are hidden with expected GOP agenda.

Prior to this piece on bioengineering, the Agriculture section was dealing with food stamps, school meal programs, WIC, etc., that is always expected to be in a state of needed revision per the GOP.

Then came areas concerning farmers directly, subsidies, insurance, barren land, etc., so of course the average reader would not be interested and move on -- never seeing the bioengineering bit.

Be diligent readers Americans!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Now you're just mimicking yourself again.

LOL! You forgot what you said that needed support. You are so entertaining at times.

 

[Laniakea]

You can't face the truth, which I knew before I replied to your challenge made to another poster to "show" the concerns.

But I'm in hopes others browsing this thread will see there is a real need to read this document and take note how certain aspects are hidden with expected GOP agenda.

Prior to this piece on bioengineering, the Agriculture section was dealing with food stamps, school meal programs, WIC, etc., that is always expected to be in a state of needed revision per the GOP.

Then came areas concerning farmers directly, subsidies, insurance, barren land, etc., so of course the average reader would not be interested and move on -- never seeing the bioengineering bit.

Be diligent readers Americans!

Was that bit about bioengineering the biggest issue you had about what was on that website?

 

[Laniakea]

LOL! You forgot what you said that needed support. You are so entertaining at times.

If something needs to be supported, it's up to you to point out what it is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If something needs to be supported, it's up to you to point out what it is.

It was quite clear. You could always have asked what you missed.

EDIT: I went back and it was the very first claim that you made. If there is ever any doubt you look at your first claim. It was this:

"Sending F-16s to Ukraine after saying that would be crossing a red line,"

Your article did not support that.

 

[Laniakea]

It was quite clear. You could always have asked what you missed.

Nope! If you believe there's something you didn't understand, it's up to you to ask for clarification. But you have to do it properly.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope! If you believe there's something you didn't understand, it's up to you to ask for clarification. But you have to do it properly.

Once again, it was your first claim. That should have been obvious. By the way, I do not use biased sources. Or at least I try not to. I go for sources very close to the center politically. You tend to go to sources that are not well respected. All you have is projection far too often.

 

[Laniakea]

Once again, it was your first claim. That should have been obvious. By the way, I do not use biased sources. Or at least I try not to. I go for sources very close to the center politically. You tend to go to sources that are not well respected. All you have is projection far too often.

Once again, you failed to identify what you don't understand.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Once again, you failed to identify what you don't understand.

Wrong, look again.

 

[Laniakea]

Wrong, look again.

I would if you would learn how to ask properly.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I would if you would learn how to ask properly.

Too late, you already lost.

 

[Laniakea]

Too late, you already lost.

It's never too late for you to learn how to properly ask someone for what you don't understand. But go ahead and try again.