@hotmuscletwi Show them this photo and tell them that not only was Trump was the first president elected supporting gay marriage, he was the first president to name an openly gay person to a Cabinet-level position.
If you're really worried about them being Trump supporters who won't accept you (as you seem to be since you mentioned it), tell them that if he has no problem with it, neither should they.
@hotmuscletwi Show them this photo and tell them that not only was Trump was the first president elected supporting gay marriage, he was the first president to name an openly gay person to a Cabinet-level position.
If you're really worried about them being Trump supporters who won't accept you (as you seem to be since you mentioned it), tell them that if he has no problem with it, neither should they.
@bi4smooth Hey there, thanks for that info. I clicked on 'completed torrents' but that list only seems to included torrents from 2021 even though I have been seeding ones going back to around 2016. I guess I'll have to go through the torrents in my old client one at time and look up each one on the site, download it, and add it to the new client.
Would you happen to know if running two clients at the same time will screw anything up?
I have to switch torrent clients since I'm having problems. I'm using a very old crappy program called FDM. The problem is I have like 1,500 torrents seeding in it so I have to download all of the .torrent files again to add them to the new client. The FDM program doesn't keep a backup of each torrent like most torrent clients.
I've read online that some torrent sites allow you to download all of the little torrent files from your history on the site at once in a zip file. Is this available here or do I need to search and locate each video and click download manually?
@gsrtorr Yup, I've been getting those 404 errors a few times these last few days as well.
I switched back to the old design last week after seeing all of the problems with the new design. I posted my complaints and changed back today to see the progress. Some of the problems have been addressed, which is good. :clap2:
But it seems like the new design has become far less efficient.
I can only fit 4 or 5 torrents on the screen at once now, whereas with the old design I could fit 11. That means double the amount of scrolling, so I don't see how this larger design is an improvement. Toggling the descriptions is a nice addition, but the torrents don't get smaller when the descriptions are off. It just cleans up some of the clutter.
Can you make the fonts and the spacing smaller so it's actually using all of the space available?
I switched back to the old design. The new design seems darker and less colorful than the old design. I liked the blue banner and buttons, but that's a personal choice. These were the issues I had:
The "Added" and "Size/Infos" columns are too close together.
The page skip "1 - 50Â | 51 - 100" is missing some ranges.
The "Search" button at the top is now a two click (Click Torrents then click Search) process, but that's the button I click on most often.
No message counter displayed on header, requires two clicks also.
I'm sure the new design will come along eventually. :clap2:
If things keep going the way they are, we'll certainly get to enjoy his leadership for two terms.
The Democratic party is in such disarray they've got no one on the national scene that can challenge Trump in 2020. Bernie and Biden will both be 78 years old in 2020 and even the left is done with Hillary after her campaign last year. Who does that leave? Warren? Schumer? Ellison??
Maybe they'll have someone to challenge Pence in 2024.
In order to be charged with Purgery one has to willingly be misleading and intend to do so. If Jeff Sessions understood the question as being asked about discussions with Russian officials in the context of the campaign he did nothing wrong. He has recused himself from any investigation that may involve the presidential campaign, and he is submitting a letter of clarification to the Senate to clarify his meetings with the Russian Ambassador. There is no legal standing to remove him as Attorney General.
Intent is important. If there is no proof Sessions intended to lie, then he cannot be charged.
Exactly. All of the nonsense about his "involvement" with the Russians is just a conveniently timed attack by the media to halt the good press Trump was receiving from the Tuesday night speech.
Sessions had already testified that he would recuse himself from any investigations that involved the campaigns. So far there hasn't been any need to recuse himself because no there's nothing to investigate. A couple of Washington Post articles claiming that supposedly leaked information obtained illegally and attributed to "anonymous" sources is not probable cause to convene an investigation.
Sessions simply reiterated his recusal policy yesterday, which is exactly what he should do if that situation should arise.
You're right, normal voters go to CPAC. I'm wrong. No idea what I'm talking about. This isn't a clear case of sample bias.
No bias involved since they clearly were surveying a specific subset of the population. It's not hard to understand…they polled conservatives at CPAC to get a feel for the level of support Trump has among conservatives.
The poll results indicate there is a high level of support for Trump among conservatives. That's all, nothing more, nothing less.
No, it doesn't. It certainly indicates how attendees of CPAC feel towards Trump. Get over it. Facts are facts.
And as you just stated above, we know what kind of person attends CPAC, so we know what kind of support Trump has among that subset of the population. See, that wasn't so hard to follow.
Voter turnout was low, this is a fact… How do you come to that conclusion? Democrats voted for Trump? Doubt it. Maybe if you consider not showing up, a vote for Trump. Moderates who are not on a side, voted for Trump. You truly believe Obama voters, went for Trump this time? Come on dude... Your analysis of what occurred is overwhelmingly narrow minded. What stops citizens who don't normally vote from deciding to vote? What stops the youth who have low participation rates from realizing that voting is important? You're not making any sense man... You're describing a world where there are two groups of voters and there are only voters and non voters... That isn't reality.
Voter turnout was about 58-59% in 2016, which was a little higher than in 2012 and a little lower than in 2008. Trump won in counties that Romney and McCain had both lost in. An analysis of the election results demonstrate where those counties are, and just how large the swings were from 2012 to 2016:
_President-elect Donald Trump’s surprising victory on Nov. 8 stemmed from massive surge in Republican voters throughout the Rust Belt.
A TIME analysis of county-level results show stunning shifts in Trump’s favor through the upper Midwest and Northeast, demonstrating the success of his trade and economic message in the nation’s heartland. Meanwhile former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took advantage of Trump’s weakness with traditional Republicans to make gains largely in urban coastal centers.
The one exception: the mountain states, where growing Hispanic populations and Mormon distaste for Trump provided some of the sharpest swings for the Democrats.
Of the 3,112 counties for which there is county-level data, 2,728 shifted toward the GOP, 383 shifted Democratic, and 1—Barrow County, Georgia—stayed exactly the same.
The counties where Clinton gained on Obama occurred in much larger counties, where a median of 75,554 people showed up to vote in 2016. The median for the 2,728 Republican-gaining counties is 9,905._
http://time.com/4587866/donald-trump-election-map/
LMAO… The ACA repeal isn't going to happen... He just vomited out Ryan's plan during his speech last night which is unpopular among Republicans, not to mention Trump's supporters. Under that law, the health insurance plan for many Americans will effectively be "You Pay For It" with no actual insurance.
Ryan's plan? Trump gave his outline for replacing Obamacare, and that included:
-Ensuring people with pre-existing health conditions are guaranteed "access" to health insurance, "and that we have a stable transition for Americans currently enrolled in the health-care exchanges.
-Giving people who buy their own health coverage tax credits and expanded health savings accounts to help pay for their coverage, as well as flexibility about the design of their plans.
-Give states "the resources and flexibility" in their Medicaid programs "to make sure no one is left out." Medicaid covers primarily poor people.
-Legal reforms to protect doctors and patients "from unnecessary costs" that drive up insurance costs, and to bring down the price of high-cost drugs.
-Creating a national insurance marketplace that allows insurers to sell health plans across state lines.
You have to remember, there may be 20 million vocal people who were given insurance due to the ACA, but there are over 100 million insured people who didn't want or need this huge government program that are the silent majority. Congress isn't catering to the 20 million, it knows where its bread is buttered.
Oh my god dude /eyeroll … "Fictional Trash with No Merit." Be honest: you didn't actually do any research what so ever and you just hear him say "Fake News" and assume it is. What fictional trash with no merit are you referring to? Also, propaganda is a pretty strong word, what are you talking about? What propaganda are you referring to? I think you mean the word "Agenda" and you're going to have to have specific details here or I'm just going to roll my eyes at you.
Propaganda is the word I intended to use, it's not too strong at all. When a left-leaning news outlet publishes allegations that the Trump campaign was in collusion with Russian intelligence officials, gives nothing but the comments of an "anonymous source" claiming to have obtained leaked intelligence data as evidence, that's propaganda. When they try and use that propaganda as the basis for a CRIMINAL investigation into the president, that's the beginnings of a treasonous coup attempt.
We're fortunate the Congress isn't falling for any of these unfounded and salacious allegations, but can you imagine what kind of subversion could be taking place if the media's bedfellows, the Democrats, were in control of Congress?
The media has been waging a war against Trump since he won the nomination. They are shameless in their behavior. We all saw their reaction to Trump's win on election night, so we know they're upset about their girl losing. But they should at least try and APPEAR to be objective, even if they have no plans of actually being objective. They risk making themselves irrelevant as people seek alternative sources of information.
So my advice to you of "Don't believe the hype" in regards to their reporting on Trump, still stands.
