Jump to content
Phantis Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Lazarus

USA 2020 Elections: The Democrats

Recommended Posts

Hey, Pepito is 100% right on this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very striking that the people who think Uncle Joe has dementia are 1) Trump fans and 2) Bernie bros. I still haven't seen an actual diagnosis beyond you just not liking him.

Joe Rogan is entertaining but also a colossal moron. He's truly a font of wisdom, as long as that wisdom is pseudoscience and anarcho-libertarianism. And I say that as someone with a soft spot for libertarians.

  • Like it 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'll say that 110% of politics is pandering to certain demographics. That is not necessarily identity politics, which focuses on identity to the exclusion of general policy.

Trump's strategy is to hit exactly the people who can swing the specific states that he needs to get over the electoral college threshold. There is nothing particularly novel about Biden committing to choosing a woman. That's not identity politics; the only difference between him choosing a woman and Trump choosing Pence is gender. There's a reason Trump chose a religious zealot - it is designed to sway the religious zealots (though I guess you can argue that Republicans have mastered the multi-identity coalition - see note below). Biden's casting a wider net because suburban women broke ranks with democrats last cycle and voted for Trump at a surprisingly high rate.

Hell, I'd also argue that most far-left would think that Biden is too far removed from the world of identity politics. One of many reasons they hate him, but it is probably not a coincidence that Biden overwhelmingly crushed Sanders.

 

Note: It's always struck me as interesting that the Republicans have managed to gather a few VERY INTENSE groups together that will  consistently vote in concert.

  • Evangelicals
  • Gun owners
  • Anti-regulation capitalists

Each of these has their own "bugbear" - evangelicals hate gays, gun owners care only about owning guns, the capitalists care about removing regulations. There's no reason someone who wants to be able to pollute at his factory should care about gay rights or gun ownership, but it's striking how these all move in complete lockstep. The Democrats, meanwhile, are fantastic at eating their own and can't manage this nearly as well.

  • Like it 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biden has dementia ... or not.  What use is pushing it one way or the other on this forum going to change reality.  Time will tell.  Do we really think that someone who isn’t inclined to vote for Trump would do so based on this ?

Key will be when they have their debates.  Hopefully Biden can handle Trumps obnoxious and classless style and come out looking like a proper statesman.  If not, then the Dems didn’t pick the right candidate.

It amazes how divided the USA is and how no matter what some people will vote one way or the other.  Loyalty to a political party is an exceedingly rare thing here in Australia.  But I’m veering off topic now.

@tantra129 a subscription to Grammarly might be in order. 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always thought of him more as a libertarian stoner, myself. Likes guns, drugs, small government and personal choice.

Do any of you listen to the podcast Hardcore History? If not, I highly recommend it. I bring this up because (apart from it being ASTOUNDINGLY GOOD!) the host has another show called "Common Sense," which is basically a current events/politics podcast. There's a back catalog of a few hundred episodes but after the last election he basically clammed up.

I bring this up because the guy (Dan Carlin - who coincidentally is friends with Joe Rogan and has been on his show many times!) was kinda-sorta on the Trump side in the runup to the last election. His rationale is that the system in much of the West is fundamentally broken; too much power's been entrenched in the political class, etc etc. A lot of stuff that I think is pretty much spot-on. He also was mildly pro-Bernie for much the same reason as he liked Trump. His many criticisms of Clinton were, in my opinion, also very well thought out (and he absolutely nothing to do with the conspiracy theories and alt-right insanity that we see on twitter today).

Anyway, this is a very roundabout way of saying that people like Rogan may have liked Trump before the last election simply because he represented an opportunity to do away with that "swamp" that he likes to talk about draining. It would have been an amazing thing, had Trump become an actual leader. Or even just a slightly incompetent one.

 

Oh and Common Sense has only updated maybe two times in the last three years now because the actual reality of Donny has seen the host becoming utterly depressed over the state of politics today. Then again, anyone with eyes could have seen this coming so I can't say I really pity him that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let's talk policies.

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden today celebrated the Supreme Court ruling blocking Trump from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) , calling it a "victory" and again saying that if elected, he will work "immediately" on legislation that would make the program "permanent."

The 5-4 ruling was written by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.

This is the second Supreme Court ruling that goes against the Republicans this week.

Is there anybody in these forums that believes that DACA should end, and if so, explain to us why?

 

  • Like it 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, tantra129 said:

more .....

Other than a couple of losers trying very hard to create uncertainty on Biden's health, anything else you've got? We know the playbook, we've seen it over and over again. You've made your opinion clear, we understand who you are and where you stand. Time to move one from the subject. Again, let's talk policies, not 'housewife' gossip or in Greek, ασε τα κατινίστικα φιλάρα! Unless of course the tank is empty - which is what I'm afraid of. 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

personally on policies i'm more left leaning, so there is not much debate.

 

my issue is the radical left and the outcome they yield

 

Katina wants to know: do you think the radical left & their actions will help add or subtract votes for the dems? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, do you spend time on twitter? I ask because I spend more time than is healthy on there, and the echo chamber is absolutely insane. You'd think every person in the world were a socialist, judging by them.

This is all to say that perception is not necessarily reality. I actually do agree that radical leftists are dangerous. In fact, I have never in my life wanted even a run of the mill Democrat to win the presidency until these past two cycles. So I am sympathetic to what you're saying...however, I also think that much of what we see is just background noise. At least, I hope it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw something go viral a few weeks ago in relation to the George Floyd killing. Some little girl was holding a sign in support on a bike trail, and this older man accosts her (I didn't bother watching the video). Twitter then immediately went internet sleuth and "identified" him, based on the fact that he was white, older, conservative, and lived in that general area (it was in Washington DC). Hundreds of thousands of retweets targeting him, with people happily contacting his employer demanding he get fired.

A few days later I see someone retweet a post made by this same man, who went and turned himself in to police with proof that it wasn't him who yelled at the kid. Was the retweet meant to clear his name? No, it was a person who basically said "F*** this guy, he doesn't even get his privilege, who does he think he is? DOES HE WANT PITY?! HE'S PROBABLY A RACIST"

It's absolutely insane. Sickening. Humans really are a stain on this earth.

 

And yes the anti-Trump accounts I followed around 2016 have skewed all my algorithms. In the last few months I've circled around to following mostly finance-related and libertarian sources but re-targeting the algorithm is like moving a river. VERY HARD!

 

All of this is to say that all politics is poison and our anonymous online lives are letting us be the worst possible versions of ourselves. No matter what happens after this election, this is not getting better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tantra129 said:

my issue is the radical left and the outcome they yield

 

Katina wants to know: do you think the radical left & their actions will help add or subtract votes for the dems? 

Tantra who do you see as the radical left in the US? And what actions and outcome(s) do you refer to? I am just trying to see what you mean, because I hear talk of a radical left, but I never know who the radical lefties are, can you kindly shed some light file?

  • Like it 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2020 at 3:44 PM, tantra129 said:

Katina wants to know: do you think the radical left & their actions will help add or subtract votes for the dems? 

Once again, let's push the Republican misinformation campaign. Let's try to assert that the radical left (whomever that might be - it just sounds scary) have taken or will take over the Democratic Party and that Joe Biden is just a pawn of the radical left.

Over the past several years,  As*hole in Chief Trump has used the term “radical left” to describe almost every single one of his political opponents, ranging from former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rep. Ilhan Omer, and others. Just last month, as*hole in Chief Trump said in a Tweet that “[t]he Radical Left is in total command & control of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Google.” And recently, once again, Trump used the term “radical left” in association with former Vice President and current Presidential candidate, Joe Biden.

Radical left is a term to scare potential voters or turn off possible Democratic voters.

As @Tzatziki has asked:

On 6/23/2020 at 11:36 PM, Tzatziki said:

Tantra who do you see as the radical left in the US? And what actions and outcome(s) do you refer to? I am just trying to see what you mean, because I hear talk of a radical left, but I never know who the radical lefties are, can you kindly shed some light file?

 

  • Like it 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As someone that understands little of US politics, I wonder why Nancy Pelosi didn’t try to go up against Trump.  She’s the only one I’ve seen who seemed to rile him.

As far as policies go, and them making an actual real difference to people, it seems both parties are short on ideas.  At least I haven’t heard anything.  Sure there are ideological differences and whoever gets in will control nominations of judges and that sort of thing.  But in terms of changes “on the ground” does it matter if Trump or Biden wins ?  Whoever wins, Wall St wins and everyone else seems not to.

I find it strange that the Dems don’t go hard for traditional GOP states but say having a policy to invest serious dollars in some of them.  You know, actually trying to improve their lives.  I’m sure voters could be swayed that way.  But I don’t see that, or maybe it’s not reported because it’s boring.  Or maybe they don’t actually plan to to invest much, in which case, why the heck should the voters change their vote, or even bother voting.  Or maybe that’s “socialist” thinking.  Don’t care what anyone says, if you promise to build jobs in red neck towns, they’ll vote for you.

Edited by Bananas
  • Like it 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dems spend a lot of money in places like Texas, which is trending blue as the Hispanic population grows. The bigger issue (from their perspective) is that much of the deep-red states (mostly in the South) have a very well-organized Republican base. I think I mentioned a few pages back that the Republicans have been very good at organizing a few intense interest groups into a coalition that will move in lockstep; these groups are particularly well-represented in the traditionally red states. Even in states like Georgia, where there are broad swaths of the state that are predominantly black, the minority population is still deeply a minority - wiki tells me that blacks make up only 27% of Georgia, while its capital (Atlanta) is 51% black. I think that media tends to forget that all because you see one concentration of one group, doesn't mean that they are actually the largest group.

There is a possible realignment actually happening now anyway, wherein the southwest (Arizona, New Mexico, Texas) may be trending more liberal as the Hispanic populations both grow and exercise the vote. Meanwhile, the midwest and great lakes regions (which used to be full of swing states due to their large "blue collar" populations) seem to be trending more conservative outside of the bigger cities. There is a very real belief that the Democrats have abandoned them as their traditional manufacturing and agricultural industries have been hit by global markets falling grain prices. The Republicans do listen (though I'm sure liberals would tell you the conservatives are just taking advantage of the rubes, which is itself a hilarious way to look at it IMO). This ultimately may be an example of the right-wing identity politics tantra might be alluding to.

Ultimately it is difficult to allocate money to all states because money is a finite resource. Believe it or not, these parties do not have billions of dollars in reserve, so they need to target carefully for maximum effect. It is often easier to cede control of a place like Arkansas, if they think they have a better chance to take control of Pennsylvania with those same funds. Of course that's on a national, party-wide level - there are plenty of locally based candidates who will gladly take and spend all of your money regardless of which locality you look at.

Not sure what you mean by Nancy Pelosi going up against Trump? Like, in which way?

 

Oh and for those of you who are questioning the existence of radical leftist candidates - the tone of your question implies that you don't believe they exist, so I'm not sure what the point of trying to convince you of that would be? Like we get it, most of the western world is more liberal than the United States. What's your point?

  • Like it 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, pash said:

Dems spend a lot of money in places like Texas, which is trending blue as the Hispanic population grows. The bigger issue (from their perspective) is that much of the deep-red states (mostly in the South) have a very well-organized Republican base. I think I mentioned a few pages back that the Republicans have been very good at organizing a few intense interest groups into a coalition that will move in lockstep; these groups are particularly well-represented in the traditionally red states. Even in states like Georgia, where there are broad swaths of the state that are predominantly black, the minority population is still deeply a minority - wiki tells me that blacks make up only 27% of Georgia, while its capital (Atlanta) is 51% black. I think that media tends to forget that all because you see one concentration of one group, doesn't mean that they are actually the largest group.

There is a possible realignment actually happening now anyway, wherein the southwest (Arizona, New Mexico, Texas) may be trending more liberal as the Hispanic populations both grow and exercise the vote. Meanwhile, the midwest and great lakes regions (which used to be full of swing states due to their large "blue collar" populations) seem to be trending more conservative outside of the bigger cities. There is a very real belief that the Democrats have abandoned them as their traditional manufacturing and agricultural industries have been hit by global markets falling grain prices. The Republicans do listen (though I'm sure liberals would tell you the conservatives are just taking advantage of the rubes, which is itself a hilarious way to look at it IMO). This ultimately may be an example of the right-wing identity politics tantra might be alluding to.

Ultimately it is difficult to allocate money to all states because money is a finite resource. Believe it or not, these parties do not have billions of dollars in reserve, so they need to target carefully for maximum effect. It is often easier to cede control of a place like Arkansas, if they think they have a better chance to take control of Pennsylvania with those same funds. Of course that's on a national, party-wide level - there are plenty of locally based candidates who will gladly take and spend all of your money regardless of which locality you look at.

Not sure what you mean by Nancy Pelosi going up against Trump? Like, in which way?

 

Oh and for those of you who are questioning the existence of radical leftist candidates - the tone of your question implies that you don't believe they exist, so I'm not sure what the point of trying to convince you of that would be? Like we get it, most of the western world is more liberal than the United States. What's your point?

that's a pretty impressive post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a lot of caffeine earlier 😕

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, pash said:

Not sure what you mean by Nancy Pelosi going up against Trump? Like, in which way?

As in why didn't she try and run for the Dem nomination ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh she'd never win the nomination. She's a legislator through and through. Doesn't have the stage presence, executive experience, or nationwide following. She basically only represents San Francisco, which you'd think is super liberal, but the momentum of decades in office has led to her being completely and totally safe when reelection time comes. She has a lot of conflict with various groups in the Democratic party but she's also *very* good at controlling them. Why deal with the risk of running for president?

Quora's kind of dumb in general but this first guy's post is great IMO: https://www.quora.com/Is-Nancy-Pelosi-ever-going-to-run-for-president <-- he also brings up the point that she is effectively nearly as powerful as the president, in her own sphere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Pepito said:

Once again tantra129 is doing the bidding for the Republican party by pushing their false narrative.

Everyone is pushing their own truth, you cant claim the moral high ground by being a bully, tone it down and stick to the issues don't need to call people out. RESPECT each other please and each others right to disagree or have an opinion that you do not agree with. Otherwise the flow of conversation will degenerate.

 

3 hours ago, tantra129 said:

Why defund the police?

Have you seen some of the equipment that police departments have in the USA? Have a quick look and you will get the answer to this question file.

As for the radical left, it did exist at one time, maybe in the 60s or 70s where left wing organizations actually comitted acts of terror and such. Today there is no radical left, it is a made up fantasy used to excuse and legitimize the neo nazis (alt right).

 

1 hour ago, Bananas said:

As in why didn't she try and run for the Dem nomination ?

She does not have enough "likeability" to win.

  • Like it 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tzatziki said:

 

 

Have you seen some of the equipment that police departments have in the USA? Have a quick look and you will get the answer to this question file.

As for the radical left, it did exist at one time, maybe in the 60s or 70s where left wing organizations actually comitted acts of terror and such. Today there is no radical left, it is a made up fantasy used to excuse and legitimize the neo nazis (alt right).

 

 

i understand your point.

maybe demilitarizing the police is a better term?

defunding is ridiculous

in business, you sometimes solve issues by "throwing" money @ the problem

that may be a better approach than what is being proposed here

the real issue is the great divide

 

 

  • Like it 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demilitarization is a must. In keeping with the money theme, though - police departments generally get these for free, as the military decommissions equipment. I'm sure there's some budget-related accounting chicanery that takes place to allow both sides to realize additional benefits from this arrangement, as well:

Moundsville is in West Virginia (one of the poorest states in the union), and has a population less than 10,000. "“We could use it for various things,” Mitchell said. He said the department can use it as a “tactical resource vehicle” for various scenarios." https://www.theintelligencer.net/news/top-headlines/2020/06/moundsville-police-department-unveils-tactical-resource-vehicle/

 

 

Also, a good article about what I think is a much bigger problem - the power of police unions have over, well, everything.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/melissasegura/police-unions-history-minneapolis-reform-george-floyd

  • Like it 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2020 at 8:27 PM, Tzatziki said:

Everyone is pushing their own truth, you cant claim the moral high ground by being a bully

🦄 People might be pushing opinions. People might be pushing lies. But please DO NOT say that 'everyone is pushing their own truth' - there is only one truth. Let's work toward uncovering it. While you might be calling it 'bullying', I'm calling it 'confronting intentional lies' and standing up against those that push false narratives and right wing propaganda.

I do get your point and I will tone it down.

 

On 6/24/2020 at 8:27 PM, Tzatziki said:

As for the radical left, it did exist at one time, maybe in the 60s or 70s where left wing organizations actually comitted acts of terror and such. Today there is no radical left, it is a made up fantasy used to excuse and legitimize the neo nazis (alt right).

Could not agree more.

On 6/24/2020 at 5:20 PM, tantra129 said:

I'm sure we share some common goals in life, one of which would be to get the best possible candidate in the WH as President. Nor Trump nor Biden are that candidate.

This is not a common goal we share. First of all you don't vote in the US. I do. Second, this is not a question about 'the best possible candidate'. We don't live in La-La Land. The players are set, the lines are drawn. The battle is between Trump and Biden. Don't give me the 'Biden is not good enough'. As I said in my very first post addressing your postings. Pick a side. There are two competitors, one battleground. If you are not with one, then you support the other. The rules of the game are as clear as daylight.

'Two men enter, one man leaves'

 

  • Like it 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

since you referenced beyond thunderdome

 

:"we don't need another hero!!!"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/26/2020 at 11:07 PM, tantra129 said:

triggered radical left

There are fruits of every kind.  For sure there are radical lefties, but people use the term radical left as if there is a counter to the alt right movement. This is false. And it used by people to legitimize the neo nazis in an attempt to normalize them and make people forget or not see that they are simply neo nazis under a new branding. Exactly how Haliburton changed their name or a business that declares bankruptcy only to reopen under a new name.

There are left wing nuts for sure, but there is no radical left as it is being made to seem, like organized groups. Black lives matter is not radical, it is so fundamental or elementary that the fact that it is needed or even discussed in 2020 makes me disgusted with how little progress we have made as a species.

 

On 6/26/2020 at 6:06 PM, Pepito said:

But please DO NOT say that 'everyone is pushing their own truth' - there is only one truth.

Is some ways yes, 2+2=4 that is true. But in life, things are more nuanced and not always black or white. In many cases there is not only one truth in my opinion. Everyone's own experience and point of view has an effect on what they see to be true. Some things are simply not scientifically measurable or explicitly proven, many things are subjective or relative. You seem to be smart enough I think to come up with a scenario or two where the truth is not always so cut and dry, and there might be more than just one.

Thanks for agreeing to tone it down, it is in the interest of keeping a good discourse going and not having things go pear shaped or turning to bird bath conversation. It will be more fun for everyone here if we can argue our points in good faith and good content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Similar Content

    • By Lazarus
      Former President Barack Obama delivered a rousing eulogy celebrating Lewis' life. "He, as much as anyone in our history, brought this country a little bit closer to our highest ideals," Mr. Obama said.
      Consider it a lesson in leadership and human values. Topic is locked to keep out trolling (we'll deal with all the exotic trolls in these forums in the coming days).
       
       
    • By Lazarus
      This is from BBC:
      Vegan protests: 'Un-Australian' activists arrested, PM Morrison says
      Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has criticised animal rights activists as "shameful and un-Australian" after dozens were arrested in nationwide protests.
      While - I have to admit - I'm note sure where PM Scott Morrison stands on issues, It looks to me like taking out a page from the Orange Orangutan's (Donald Trump) book. Divide the country in an effort to conquer. Pitch one group of people against another and start creating a condition that is hostile to people sharing values. Probably now is a good time to break up labor unions also?
      It seems that everywhere one turns, it's a right wing full frontal attack to the voice of the people.
    • By Reaper
      Inexplicable decision
      Online government portal Diavgeia turned out to be one of the most important reforms carried out in Greece over the last few years. A decision by today?s leftist-led coalition government to dismantle the transparency initiative program was based on absolutely unfounded excuses and represents a major setback. The government portal allowed citizens to have access to decisions regarding state recruitments and procurements, the expenditure of public organizations and other interesting information.
      In the absence of Diavgeia, what is more than certain is that the corrupt and the wasteful will once more be able to hide behind a veil of nontransparency. The removal of the transparency portal was no doubt an incomprehensible decision on the part of the SYRIZA-Independent Greeks administration.
      http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_wsite3_1_06/05/2015_549741
    • By Bashibozuk
      Trump is not the problem; the DNC (i.e. the Democratic National Committee) is.
      When Carter (screwed by OPEC, unpopular thanks to OPEC, and sabotaged by his own party) was defeated in 1978, the Democratic National Committee decided that the plebe that voted Democratic could not be trusted to choose electable candidates. In the future the DNC would choose its own super-delegates who would enable the choice of good candidates.
      In 2016 those who read newspapers read that:
      The super-delegates were 15% of the total. Therefore, if the elected delegates were Sanders 49% and Clinton 36% of the total, Mrs Clinton would have been the Democratic candidate.
      At the New Hampshire’s primary Sanders received 60.4% of the poll vote and Mrs Clinton 38%, of the poll vote. Sanders had 15 voted delegates; Mrs Clinton had 9 elected delegates and 6 superdelegates. Is that possible that the the D in DNC stands for Double-dealing?
      On October 30, 2016, the DNC interim chair Donna Brazile was fired from her position as a political commentator at CNN over e-mail leaks suggesting she had improperly supplied Hillary Clinton’s campaign with advance knowledge of debate-questions.
      Let us move beyond the lady Macbeth aspects of the DNC. How idiotic must one be in order to manage to lose an election against a pathetic bimbo? This demands great talent. Examples:
      α) Trump brags that he will bring the factories back to the USA; the DP claims that the new factories will use robots and the unemployed will remain unemployed.
      β) The DP is all for clean energy. What about the coal-miners in WV? Under the DP plan they will live longer because of cancer avoidance. Moreover, since they will have less money, their life-span will feel even longer.
      γ) In the US the members of every group live, on the average, longer than the previous generation. With one exception; low-class whites. To the best of my limited knowledge, the DP has no plan for them.
      My impression is that Trump is not the problem. The doctor Frankenstein that created him is.
       
    • By Epicurus
      We had another mass shooting in the US, this time in Las Vegas, the deadliest of its kind, until the next one of course. Our right to be safe is trampled by the right for someone to own military-grade weapons.
      We had hoped that after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, Congress would act to pass some federal gun safety laws. Nothing!  The victims' stories and pictures in Vegas are beginning to circulate now. I'll leave you with the images of the children of Sandy Hook as a horrific reminder that how a political party and its leaders are essentially in the pocket of the gun lobby.
    • By athinaios
      Friends,
      It's been a week since the US general election, and a new page in American politics has started. Let's put the other thread to rest, because it escalated into personal attacks, so let's respectfully discuss the new president's tenure and related matters here. 
      Let's remind ourselves that the point of this forum is to welcome a diversity of people and ideas, and to have a good time, even when we disagree with others; and, it'll be fun, because we'll be having a civilized discussion, right?...
      So, president-elect Trump....  We'll be watching but who can say what he'll actually do? How do you judge his first moves and statements?
       
    • By Tzatziki
      Pentagon Officials Allowed Workers to Use Government Credit Cards at Strip Clubs
       

       
      The initial 2015 audit discovered that workers spent nearly $100,000 at various strip clubs and related adult-oriented establishments, which kinda sounds like nothing when compared with the estimated $1 million spent at casinos. As for how exactly such charges are allowed to exist, the report's findings suggest that Defense Travel Management Office officials and DoD management did not properly explain how the travel cards should be used. Furthermore, DoD officials were not adequately trained on how to discipline those found to have misused the cards. For the complete rundown, read the full report right here.
  • Popular Topics Now

×
×
  • Create New...