View Full Version : American Politics during the Trump Presidency
WorldTravel69
11-06-16, 03:26
How come there is not a Thread for this Election?
Here is a good movie based on a True story about Southern Boys fighting in Mississippi. Fighting for the Rich or not?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1124037/?ref_=nv_sr_3
It is about land owners that did not have enough Slaves to fight for the South in Their place.
I forgot to add I voted in our early elections.
The choices are Shady, Insane, Clueless, Who? and a few more Whos?
I voted for the Big "M" on the ballot. Maybe it will pass this time.
How come there is not a Thread for this Election?I do not think that anyone wants to comment about two chronic liars and two criminals. That is a bad pair to draw to. Sane people just want to vomit. My dos centavos worth.
Tres3.
Daddy Rulz
11-07-16, 02:08
Wondering about: I wonder if we will see an immediate correction in the peso/dollar with the FBI now reporting that the new batch of emails showed no criminality? If stock futures are an indication I'm thinking that yes, my dollars will be worth more pesos on Monday.
Bad news; One of them is going to get elected on Tuesday.
Unless of course this happens:
What happens if no presidential candidate gets 270 Electoral votes?
If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote. The Senate would elect the Vice President from the 2 Vice Presidential candidates with the most Electoral votes. Each Senator would cast one vote for Vice President. If the House of Representatives fails to elect a President by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President Elect serves as acting President until the deadlock is resolved in the House.
Rock Harders
11-07-16, 22:41
Wondering about: I wonder if we will see an immediate correction in the peso/dollar with the FBI now reporting that the new batch of emails showed no criminality? If stock futures are an indication I'm thinking that yes, my dollars will be worth more pesos on Monday.
Bad news; One of them is going to get elected on Tuesday.
Unless of course this happens:
What happens if no presidential candidate gets 270 Electoral votes?
If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote. The Senate would elect the Vice President from the 2 Vice Presidential candidates with the most Electoral votes. Each Senator would cast one vote for Vice President. If the House of Representatives fails to elect a President by Inauguration Day, the Vice-President Elect serves as acting President until the deadlock is resolved in the House.As mind boggling as it may seem, do not expect the ARS to collapse anytime soon against the USD; there are many billions of USD entering the market via the "blanqueo" (more than $6 billion USD cash deposited so far) and the government is actually doing all they can to prevent the ARS from appreciating against USD. Just as significant in the ARS "strength" are the 27% short term yields on ARS denominated securities vs. 0% yields on similar USD denominated securities.
Agustina BA
11-07-16, 23:04
I like hilary very muchh , kises babysss ❤️❤️❤️.
Daddy Rulz
11-08-16, 20:12
How awesome would seeing this tomorrow be?
Daddy Rulz
11-09-16, 06:16
This is going to be fun to watch.
Member #4112
11-09-16, 11:40
The Republic is saved!
The Major News Media outlets have been exposed by Wikileaks as the DNC's lackeys!
ObamaCare, Obama's signature legislative achievement, has collapsed under it's own onerous weight as predicted and will be repealed!
Obama's "legacy" which is based upon Executive Orders will be erased with the stroke of a pen as it was created!
A victory or Reaganisque proportions!
Rejoice my Brothers the King is Dead - Long live the President!!
Daddy Rulz
11-09-16, 12:32
The Republic is saved!
The Major News Media outlets have been exposed by Wikileaks as the DNC's lackeys!
ObamaCare, Obama's signature legislative achievement, has collapsed under it's own onerous weight as predicted and will be repealed!
Obama's "legacy" which is based upon Executive Orders will be erased with the stroke of a pen as it was created!
A victory or Reaganisque proportions!
Rejoice my Brothers the King is Dead - Long live the President!!I think he's saying that it's time to end the hate.
Hillary has worked very long and very hard over a long period of time, and we owe her a major debt of gratitude for her service to our country.
I mean that very sincerely. Now it is time for America to bind the wounds of division, have to get together. To all Republicans and Democrats and independents across this nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people.
-President Elect, Donald T Trump
WorldTravel69
11-09-16, 13:17
From the cover of Time Magazine.
Canada has a matching service if anyone wants to leave the country. It is called MapleMatch.
http://www.maplematch.com/
Member #4112
11-09-16, 15:12
My liberal brothers on this board are a bit like the CNN talking heads this morning, they just can not rap their heads around the fact Clinton lost and Trump won.
Today these same liberal brothers are now calling some of Trump’s central themes of this campaign “hate”, the repeal of the catastrophe of ObamaCare and rescinding Obama’s executive orders which circumvented the legislative process.
Trump was both humble and conciliatory in his speech last night after winning the election. He called for unity and even complimented Clinton, but at no time did he retreat from his central campaign promises. We have yet to hear from Clinton. Tell me is it true she was in a state of shock, unable to address her followers, mumbling “but I’m entitled” over and over?
Trump’s defeat of Clinton is on the order of magnitude of Reagan / Carter. Gentlemen look at the county map, the country is nearly all RED with only the liberal bastions on the east the left coast being blue with a couple of other states. Gentlemen look at the Electoral College, this was no “close” race, this was a repudiation of the last 8 years and the promise of 4 more of the same under Clinton.
I am certain from now until January 20, 2017, Obama is going to have writer’s cramp signing all the blanket pardons he will have to issue before leaving office.
To paraphrase the immortal and conciliatory words of the liberal messiah, Barak Hussain Obama, after his election “We won, you lost, get use to it”.
This liberal brother is going to be a gracious loser, and hope that Trump can indeed achieve some positive things for the US. I was sort of surprised, but not all that surprised. Hey, if the Cubs can win the World Series, anyone can win anything. I'm in Europe so I did not watch the election due to the time change, but I had a funny feeling when I woke up, and I dicked around for quite a while before checking the results. I heard the stock futures market took a huge dump overnight, as did the dollar, and the MX peso. But the stock market is way up as of this minute, and the dollar is up against the euro, and I don't care about the MX peso.
So to my conservative brethren, I say, congratulations on your victory. I guess the Dems picked up 1 Senate seat and maybe 2 but one was still too close to call. So not enough to repeal the ACA, I wouldn't think. As Daddy Rulz said, it will be fun to watch what happens. I won't be there and only care about what happens in the financial markets. After a nasty campaign with two rather unpopular candidates, at least the election did not end up in the House of Representatives. Obama has reached out to Trump. Trump was gracious to Clinton. That's not all that bad of a start, if you think about it. So best of luck going forward to both my liberal and conservative friends who will have to live under the results.
I just wish my conservative friend Punter 127 had hung around long enough to see it. For those who don't know, he passed away last month. He was a reasonable conservative, one you could talk to.
Member #4112
11-09-16, 16:56
Really sorry to hear he passed away.
Wish all our bothers the best in the coming year.
Trumps defeat of Clinton is on the order of magnitude of Reagan / Carter. Gentlemen look at the county map, the country is nearly all RED with only the liberal bastions on the east the left coast being blue with a couple of other states. Gentlemen look at the Electoral College, this was no close race, this was a repudiation of the last 8 years and the promise of 4 more of the same under Clinton.
I do not intend to participate in any discussion on the essence of the political issues at stake. I’d just like to point out, from a purely mathematical perspective, that yesterday’s results are very different from those of the Carter/Reagan 1980 election.
HRC won the popular vote with 47.7% vs 47.5%. Reagan got 50,7% vs Carter’s 41% (independent Anderson got 6,6%).
The following article models what the outcome would have been if only 1% of the vote would have been casted for HRC instead of for Trump. Such a shift would not have affected the outcome in 1980.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-a-difference-2-percentage-points-makes/
WorldTravel69
11-10-16, 03:41
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/09/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-popular-vote/
There are riots going now around the country in all states.
Today I told high school kids marching down Shattuck Avenue in Berkeley shouting Fuck Trump. I yelled at them that this is a Blue Stats, that it was not the Bay Area and California that voted for Trump, but the Red States and go to the Red States and protest.
Jackson why are you so quite? How do the Independents feel?
I told you your political Threads would lose you members. You did not listen. I am sure you lost a lot of friends over it.
Trump talked about Rigged elections. Bull Shit, but check his taxes. Hundreds of people are suing for wages he said he would pay.
He says he is for bringing back the jobs. Meanwhile he has a workers strike at his Casino in Las Vegas.
It should be a popular vote always. As Andrew Jackson and Ben Franklin said. Watch what you are voting for. The Republic may be taken over for your not watching it, sort of.
I do not intend to participate in any discussion on the essence of the political issues at stake. Id just like to point out, from a purely mathematical perspective, that yesterdays results are very different from those of the Carter/Reagan 1980 election.
HRC won the popular vote with 47.7% vs 47.5%. Reagan got 50,7% vs Carters 41% (independent Anderson got 6,6%).
The following article models what the outcome would have been if only 1% of the vote would have been casted for HRC instead of for Trump. Such a shift would not have affected the outcome in 1980.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-a-difference-2-percentage-points-makes/
"It should be a popular vote always.".
Yep. And I would say that no matter who won or lost in the electoral college.
Member #4112
11-10-16, 10:54
I looked this morning and they are still counting votes. We will see who ends up with what.
We get this whining from the loser about this issue every time it happens. If it was such a problem then why has it not been corrected before this election?.
Are you trying to tell me neither Trump nor Clinton had any idea the Electoral College was the determining factor and not the popular vote when this started? The main stream media sure as hell did as all I heard for months was how the Democrats had the advantage when it came to the Electoral College.
The unrest is in 25 cities, mostly Blue states and a lot of it is about no free college tuition, screw these spoiled rotten fragile little snow flakes - I paid for mine when I went and they can pay for theirs.
You did not see this type of conduct in 2012 or 2016 from the Republicans - so what's with all these cry baby Democrats?
Democrats had the advantage in the Electoral College and the main stream news media on their side and working with the DNC from the jump and they still lost.
Stop quibbling and making excuses - YOU LOST! GET OVER IT!
Well, call me whatever you want but the electoral college system will not change because that would require a constitutional amendment, and why would the less populous states vote to give up their disproportionate influence? But if you know the history behind it, you know it's not necessary any more. Personally, I would also like to see run-offs so that whoever eventually gets elected has a majority and not just a plurality. Any system that you can't explain to educated Europeans has got to be a little strange. I said the same thing when Benjamin Harrison was elected.
Well, call me whatever you want but the electoral college system will not change because that would require a constitutional amendmen.Just as changing the electoral college would require a constitutional amendment, so too would a change in the Senate that took away the two senators per state. There are pundits who think this system is elitist, but I do not think that they have read the Constitution or Federalist Papers. Democracy and majority rule is wonderful, but the founders also wanted to provide some protection for the minority. They deliberately included the requirement that a super-majority is required to amend the Constitution. The losers (I did not like Clinton or Trump) seem to always claim that the electoral college is archaic, but many historical events have proven the founders very wise. All one has to do is look at the many basket case countries that do not have a super-majority protection and/or an independent Federal Judiciary in their constitution. I think that the founders were very wise.
Tres3.
Spirit Rider
11-10-16, 15:29
I guess the Dems picked up 1 Senate seat and maybe 2 but one was still too close to call. So not enough to repeal the ACA, I wouldn't thinkYou are technically correct that Obamacare cannot be outright repealed without being subject to a filibuster requiring 60 votes. However, any part of the law requiring taxpayer funds and imposing taxes can be repealed through a budgetary process known as reconciliation. This is the process that was used when Obamacare was originally passed. The senate version was passed with Senator Ted Kennedy's support. He died and Scott Brown was elected to replace him. When the house version passed, the Democrats no longer had a filibuster proof majority. In their infinite wisdom they rammed it through with reconciliation (which is not subject to filibuster rules).
The Republicans have already "repealed" Obamacare before and had President Obama veto it. Their repeal also used the reconciliation process. It removed the Medicaid expansion, federal subsidies, removed funding for the federal and state exchanges, eliminated the tax penalties for failure to obtain insurance, repealed the taxes to support it, etc... So essentially Obamacare would be in a comma, brain dead and incapable of any function. The laws enabling it would still be in existence, but no implementation to operate.
I was never a supporter of Obamacare and was proved correct. My premiums will go up 35% next year and I am one of the fortunate ones. With that said, there were some provisions that made sense. The covering of those under 26 on their parents plan was a good idea and wasn't responsible for any of the cost problems. The coverage of preexisting conditions was good in the abstract, but horrible in implementation.
Mandating all kinds of minimum coverage was a primary cost driver. When you remove choice and actuarial basis, it is no long insurance. Is it any surprise to have a death spiral. Health insurance needs to go back to actually being insurance instead of some socialist utopian dream of social justice.
Actually I was just typing too fast and meant not enough to PREVENT repealing Obamacare. I am comfortable and fine with requiring a super-majority of states to ratify amendments. And I'm not real fond of two senators per state, but I can live with it. Even giving each state one senator provides some measure of protection for the less populous states, right? Just not as much. But I do believe in one person, one vote, so that's the issue I have with the Electoral College, since it's a national election. It was largely based on the time it took mail to be delivered.
While I do favor some form of national health insurance, which every civilized country seems to have, I was not fond of the individual mandate, and was well aware of the adverse selection that would occur. I will be blunt and say that it enabled me to retire early, but why did I deserve to retire early? I did not. I just got lucky because they did not put in any means testing, and because I am or was an accountant and understood how to game the law, and because I had made the decision to have Roth IRAs instead of regular IRAs. Of course, when I retired early (right at 55), that opened up a job for someone who most likely needed it worse than I did, so I don't feel inherently evil. I did put in my 40 years because I started working full time when I was 15.
My second-favorite judge (after the legendary Oliver Wendell Holmes) was Learned Hand, and he said: "Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands."
Now whether a given tax law is good or bad, that's another story for another day and another discussion board, probably.
Quote by: Judge Learned Hand
(1872-1961), Judge, U. S. Court of Appeals
Source: in the case of Gregory v. Helvering 69 F.2d 809, 810 (2d Cir. 1934), aff'd, 293 U.S. 465, 55 S.Ct. 266, 79 L.Ed. 596 (1935)
WorldTravel69
11-10-16, 19:56
The premiums are going up mainly in the states that have Republican Controlled government.
California has Democratic controlled government. So they set a limit on how much in the Insurance companies can raise the rates. 5% is all they can raise it.
Maybe you might think about moving.
You are technically correct that Obamacare cannot be outright repealed without being subject to a filibuster requiring 60 votes. However, any part of the law requiring taxpayer funds and imposing taxes can be repealed through a budgetary process known as reconciliation. This is the process that was used when Obamacare was originally passed. The senate version was passed with Senator Ted Kennedy's support. He died and Scott Brown was elected to replace him. When the house version passed, the Democrats no longer had a filibuster proof majority. In their infinite wisdom they rammed it through with reconciliation (which is not subject to filibuster rules).
The Republicans have already "repealed" Obamacare before and had President Obama veto it. Their repeal also used the reconciliation process. It removed the Medicaid expansion, federal subsidies, removed funding for the federal and state exchanges, eliminated the tax penalties for failure to obtain insurance, repealed the taxes to support it, etc... So essentially Obamacare would be in a comma, brain dead and incapable of any function. The laws enabling it would still be in existence, but no implementation to operate.
I was never a supporter of Obamacare and was proved correct. My premiums will go up 35% next year and I am one of the fortunate ones. With that said, there were some provisions that made sense. The covering of those under 26 on their parents plan was a good idea and wasn't responsible for any of the cost problems. The coverage of preexisting conditions was good in the abstract, but horrible in implementation.
Mandating all kinds of minimum coverage was a primary cost driver. When you remove choice and actuarial basis, it is no long insurance. Is it any surprise to have a death spiral. Health insurance needs to go back to actually being insurance instead of some socialist utopian dream of social justice.
Big Boss Man
11-10-16, 23:05
The coverage of preexisting conditions was good in the abstract, but horrible in implementation.
Before Obamacare, people I know went to the County hospital and had surgery done. After the bill for the surgery came, they would just file bankruptcy. So in the end, taxpayers were paying for it anyway.
People were also using the emergency rooms as their primary healthcare providers.
Trump campaigned on repealing and replacing Obamacare. Anybody have a link to what they are thinking about to replace it?
Big Boss Man
11-10-16, 23:16
Fairwarning. The writer of this article is very liberal. I have seen him speak publically on Dodd-Frank.
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-repealing-obamacare-20161110-story.html I hope you can get past the paywall.
Before Obamacare, people I know went to the County hospital and had surgery done. After the bill for the surgery came, they would just file bankruptcy. So in the end, taxpayers were paying for it anyway.
People were also using the emergency rooms as their primary healthcare providers.
Trump campaigned on repealing and replacing Obamacare. Anybody have a link to what they are thinking about to replace it?He will replace it with Trump Care. That's when you promise to pay the doctor but you don't pay him, tie him up in litigation, then declare bankruptcy. That's how has run everything else he has gotten his hands on.
Member #4112
11-11-16, 11:09
The primary failing of ObamaCare was the one size fits all approach. Everyone's policy had to include drug rehab, psyc benefits, and for women maternity benefits (for 70 year old women - right) rather the folks wanted them or not. So instead of letting folks purchase the insurance they wanted the liberal elite once again decided they knew better and forced this albatross on the nation. Those are your cost drivers gentlemen.
The second failing of ObamaCare is the liberal elite's failure to ever consider normal human behavior.
National healthcare? Right - the welfare and medicaid systems work so well, not.
Which brings me to one of favorite rants - the elite's are always talking about Medicare and Social Security are going bankrupt (you know the programs the folks who worked and their employers paid for via payroll taxes), never do you hear about welfare and Medicaid running out of money.
My answer is to totally shut down the Federal Medicaid and Welfare Programs and turn them over to the states. If the taxpayers in the individual states want to fund the welfare state they are free to do so (The Peoples Republic of Southern California comes to mind) and if not then to not do so.
Protesters - wow anyone remember the protests by Republicans in 2008 and 2012? Probably not because they did not happen. Now we have the spoiled rotten kids out in the streets raising hell. So we live in a democracy so long as it goes the way the want? Gentlemen that is not democracy that's anarchy.
I'm with Reagan on this one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggUeDa48V4g
Big Boss Man
11-11-16, 14:49
Trump received 23% of the vote in LA County. Orange County voted in favor of a Democratic presidential candidate for the first time since 1936.
Every tax proposal increase passed by a wide majority.
What people fail to understand is that California is very competitive. The population is highly transitory. When you can no longer compete than you move out. Toyota just moved to Texas given 20 years of tax breaks but the building they were in was immediately filled. It makes no sense to have the back office for the car dealerships located in Southern California. Especially since Toyota now manufactures most it cars sold in the US in the US. We have lost several industries over the last thirty years. Aerospace manufacturing, car factories, furniture making, cut and sew apparel, and mortgage banking have disappeared. Even with the high tax structure, Southern California is a living laboratory of Schumpeter's creative destruction principles.
http://www.economist.com/news/business/21709564-cheaper-location-tech-companies-takes-los-angeles-booms-startup-hub
Will Obama pardon Hillary? Since she, like Nixon, has not been charged a pardon is tantamount to an admission of guilt.
But how can he, after all he said she had done nothing wrong. If he does, how about Bill and Chelsea, they are into the corrupt Foundation up to their necks?
If there are no pardons, will there be a special prosecutor appointed?
Don B.
Will Obama pardon Hillary? Since she, like Nixon, has not been charged a pardon is tantamount to an admission of guilt.
But how can he, after all he said she had done nothing wrong. If he does, how about Bill and Chelsea, they are into the corrupt Foundation up to their necks?
If there are no pardons, will there be a special prosecutor appointed?
Don B.No matter what happens, I do not think any of the Clintons will do any jail time. They know where too many bodies are buried.
Tres3.
Daddy Rulz
11-11-16, 16:28
Protesters - wow anyone remember the protests by Republicans in 2008 and 2012? Probably not because they did not happen. Now we have the spoiled rotten kids out in the streets raising hell. So we live in a democracy so long as it goes the way the want? Gentlemen that is not democracy that's anarchy.Brotherman I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the 1st amendment. It's a right of a citizen in the US to protest. Obviously that doesn't include destruction of private property, violence, blocking streets ect. Those are crimes not protest, doesn't matter if it's "spoiled rotten kids" or spoiled rotten ranchers used to grazing their cattle on government land for free. But protest? They can hold up all the signs saying Trump sucks that they want as long as they want. It also means the KKK (who I personally abhor) can do the same thing. It also means the during the campaign the Trump organization could throw people out of the halls they rented for rallies.
I don't think it's right to denigrate people for wanting to be involved in a country that had a 35% (I think) voter turnout.
My answer is to totally shut down the Federal Medicaid and Welfare Programs and turn them over to the states. If the taxpayers in the individual states want to fund the welfare state they are free to do so (The Peoples Republic of Southern California comes to mind) and if not then to not do so.I'd be cool with that, and not putting in means testing for the Medicaid expansion was insane. So, a lot of states are raising their minimum wages, and states have different tax structures, and US citizens can choose to live in any state. This liberal is fine with that.
The primary failing of ObamaCare was the one size fits all approach. Everyone's policy had to include drug rehab, psyc benefits, and for women maternity benefits (for 70 year old women - right) rather the folks wanted them or not. So instead of letting folks purchase the insurance they wanted the liberal elite once again decided they knew better and forced this albatross on the nation. Those are your cost drivers gentlemen.
The second failing of ObamaCare is the liberal elite's failure to ever consider normal human behavior.
National healthcare? Right - the welfare and medicaid systems work so well, not.
Which brings me to one of favorite rants - the elite's are always talking about Medicare and Social Security are going bankrupt (you know the programs the folks who worked and their employers paid for via payroll taxes), never do you hear about welfare and Medicaid running out of money.
My answer is to totally shut down the Federal Medicaid and Welfare Programs and turn them over to the states. If the taxpayers in the individual states want to fund the welfare state they are free to do so (The Peoples Republic of Southern California comes to mind) and if not then to not do so.
Protesters - wow anyone remember the protests by Republicans in 2008 and 2012? Probably not because they did not happen. Now we have the spoiled rotten kids out in the streets raising hell. So we live in a democracy so long as it goes the way the want? Gentlemen that is not democracy that's anarchy.
I'm with Reagan on this one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggUeDa48V4gOf course the Republicans did not riot......they could not.....they had to go to work.
Wild Walleye
11-12-16, 11:47
Well, call me whatever you want but the electoral college system will not change because that would require a constitutional amendment, and why would the less populous states vote to give up their disproportionate influence? But if you know the history behind it, you know it's not necessary any more. Personally, I would also like to see run-offs so that whoever eventually gets elected has a majority and not just a plurality. Any system that you can't explain to educated Europeans has got to be a little strange. I said the same thing when Benjamin Harrison was elected.The electoral college was and is a brilliant means to distribute representation around the country and to ensure (to some degree) that all geographical portions of the country have some representation. This was a huge concern during drafting of the Constitution (as chronicled in the Federalist papers). I think that we need it more now, than ever. Without getting into the weeds of policy, I think it would be fair to say that flyover country has been pretty well ignored, over the last 8+ years. Without the electoral college, the northeast and west coast only need a handful of additional votes to win an election. A couple of those cycles and flyover country will be boxed out of DC for good.
WorldTravel69
11-12-16, 12:45
This was on the Morning Joe.
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/michael-moore-donald-trump-president-republican/2016/11/11/id/758427/
Gary.
Protesters - wow anyone remember the protests by Republicans in 2008 and 2012? Probably not because they did not happen. Now we have the spoiled rotten kids out in the streets raising hell. So we live in a democracy so long as it goes the way the want? Gentlemen that is not democracy that's anarchy.
But you conveniently ignore the Republicans who vowed to protest with violence if Trump lost. This ex Congressman is just one of many. http://www.salon.com/2016/10/27/joe-walsh-defends-if-trump-loses-im-grabbing-my-musket-tweet-it-means-protesting/.
And the Republicans demand that Trump is respected as the elected President. How does that compare with the Congress and Senate treating Obama with total contempt and obstructing his every move since he gained office. And not to even consider his very mainstream choice for the Supreme Court. Then there's McCain and co who vowed not to consider any candidate for the court proposed by Clinton if she won. And the 'the people' did not vote for Trump, Clinton won the popular vote. The antiquated electoral college system won it for him. Time for a constitutional amendment on that score as its produced W Bush and now Trump. I would not have voted for either candidate, but there's a whole shit load of double standards coming from the right.
Clinton is blaming Comey for her loss. She neglects to mention that Comey would not even be in the picture if she had not installed the private email server in her home. She also neglects to mention that she was so unpopular that any of the other top three Republicans who lost to Trump in the primaries could have beaten her. Trump was the only candidate where she had a chance to win, and she still lost. For Clinton it is always someone else's fault. She is never to blame. I disliked both Trump and Clinton, but probably disliked Clinton more.
As to the protesters, under the First Amendment they have a right to protest, but the First Amendment does not give them the right to break the law.
Tres3.
Big Boss Man
11-13-16, 14:37
Clinton is blaming Comey for her loss. She neglects to mention that Comey would not even be in the picture if she had not installed the private email server in her home. She also neglects to mention that she was so unpopular that any of the other top three Republicans who lost to Trump in the primaries could have beaten her. Trump was the only candidate where she had a chance to win, and she still lost. For Clinton it is always someone else's fault. She is never to blame. I disliked both Trump and Clinton, but probably disliked Clinton more.
As to the protesters, under the First Amendment they have a right to protest, but the First Amendment does not give them the right to break the law.
Tres3.I think everybody agrees that this was a corrupt and rigged election. That is common ground for both sides although the reasons why the election was rigged are different. The FBI feeding inside information to the Trump campaign will never be investigated because Giuliani was the conduit. Why was the letter released on a Friday? Probably the same reason the sex tape was released on a Friday. It was coordinated.
The FBI feeding inside information to the Trump campaign will never be investigated because Giuliani was the conduit. How do you know Guilani was the "conduit"? Do you have proof? There have already been so many "twisting of the facts" and outright lies by both candidates, that we do not need more from some disgruntled poster. Put up or shut up.
Tres3.
Big Boss Man
11-13-16, 17:38
How do you know Guilani was the "conduit"? Do you have proof? There have already been so many "twisting of the facts" and outright lies by both candidates, that we do not need more from some disgruntled poster. Put up or shut up.
Tres3.He said two days before the Comey letter that there was going to be a big surprise in a couple of days and he was laughing. What was the surprise if it was not the Comey letter?
Kellyanne Conway said on this morning's talk shows that the system is rigged. Everybody agrees with her.
It does not have to be true. The appearance of rigging is enough.
Giuliani said in TV interviews he had inside knowledge about the FBI and their efforts. The additional emails were known to exist several weeks before it was announced. Why did FBI agents wait until 12 days before the election to inform Comey? And why did Comey, a Republican who used to work for Giuliani, ignore guidance and convention and inform Congressional Republicans the next day? It certainly appears an attempt to influence the election. Yes Hillary would not have had to deal with this had she not decided to use a private server. But the FBI's actions also had a clear impact on voters, knocking Hillary's lead down several points in the run-up to election day, and gave fuel to Trump's campaign and the lying right wing media. Although it won't change the results now, the FBI should be investigated for election interference.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/04/politics/rudy-giuliani-hillary-clinton-email-fbi/
BTW- While I consider myself center-left and supported Hillary, I accept Trump's win and wish him success.
Member #4112
11-14-16, 10:34
But you conveniently ignore the Republicans who vowed to protest with violence if Trump lost. This ex Congressman is just one of many. http://www.salon.com/2016/10/27/joe-walsh-defends-if-trump-loses-im-grabbing-my-musket-tweet-it-means-protesting/.
But that congressman did not follow threw on his "threat", just like all the Hollywood idiots who said they would leave the country if Trump was elected are not packing their bags, but I wish they would.
Freedom of speech is one thing, vandalism and brigandage is altogether a different thing.
As far as the kids waving the signs Not My President, I would invite them to move to a country they like better as this one has become so onerous to them.
Big Boss Man
11-14-16, 15:30
But that congressman did not follow threw on his "threat", just like all the Hollywood idiots who said they would leave the country if Trump was elected are not packing their bags, but I wish they would.
Freedom of speech is one thing, vandalism and brigandage is altogether a different thing.
As far as the kids waving the signs Not My President, I would invite them to move to a country they like better as this one has become so onerous to them.Maybe Trump and the Republican Congress will reduce the tax hit to renounce citizenship and leave the country? Most of the Hollywood types that would make news that they are leaving the country are rich enough to buy a second home. Whatever country they are in they will not stop working.
The protests are dying out.
If we are going to restrict immigration, we need the young people to work and grow the economy and fight Islamic terrorism. I don't think we want them to leave.
Member #4112
11-14-16, 19:59
You get those whinny little as**holes out on the streets to do something other than bit*h about Trump.
I changed the name of the thread because this isn't going anywhere.
Flame on
TejanoLibre
11-15-16, 13:50
Maybe Trump and the Republican Congress will reduce the tax hit to renounce citizenship and leave the country? Most of the Hollywood types that would make news that they are leaving the country are rich enough to buy a second home. Whatever country they are in they will not stop working.
The protests are dying out.
If we are going to restrict immigration, we need the young people to work and grow the economy and fight Islamic terrorism. I don't think we want them to leave.Of course we want them to leave.
The talelentless Rappers and Actors the left-wing Nuts and the Thankless Athletes that refuse to stand-up and pledge their Allegiance .
They would be working at McDonald's if they couldn't catch a football or a basketball .
Fuck the Youth and their brainwashed ldeas.
TL.
Big Boss Man
11-15-16, 14:59
You get those whinny little as**holes out on the streets to do something other than bit*h about Trump.Just remember that by 1990s, all the acid taking, pot smoking Deadheads were putting stickers on their Cadillacs. :).
Big Boss Man
11-15-16, 15:18
Conway keeps using the word "sacrifice." Trump has made a great sacrifice to become President of the United States. Priebus and Bannon are making great sacrifices to become Chief of Staff and Chief Strategist. What exactly are they sacrificing to become some of the most powerful people in the world? I realize this probably appeals born again Christian crowd to which I do not belong.
I always hated John Lennon's song "The Ballad of John and Yoko.".
"Christ you know it ain't easy.
You know how hard it can be.
The way things are going.
They're going to crucify me".
I actually shiver every time I hear it.
According to the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, Clinton's popular vote total now stands at 61,964,263 compared to 60,961,967 Trump. Four years ago Trump called the Electoral College 'a disaster', now he calls it 'a genius'. But consistency never was his forte.
Member #4112
11-16-16, 11:07
According to the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, Clinton's popular vote total now stands at 61,964,263 compared to 60,961,967 Trump. Four years ago Trump called the Electoral College 'a disaster', now he calls it 'a genius'. But consistency never was his forte.I guess you are going to tell me that neither Clinton nor Trump were aware of the Electoral College when running for office?
The press consistently reminded us the Democrats have a built in advantage in the Electoral College.
The looser always complains, so what. Consistency? Liberal's are consistently ignoring basic human behavior and have now reaped the whirlwind.
Guys, down load and read the Federalist Papers. The founding fathers were pretty smart guys when it came to balancing power between the most populous states and the other states in the union.
By the way, what happened to all this "Tolerance" you liberals keep preaching about?
Daddy Rulz
11-16-16, 13:09
I guess you are going to tell me that neither Clinton nor Trump were aware of the Electoral College when running for office?
The press consistently reminded us the Democrats have a built in advantage in the Electoral College.
The looser always complains, so what. Consistency? Liberal's are consistently ignoring basic human behavior and have now reaped the whirlwind.
Guys, down load and read the Federalist Papers. The founding fathers were pretty smart guys when it came to balancing power between the most populous states and the other states in the union.
By the way, what happened to all this "Tolerance" you liberals keep preaching about?Seriously, you use the word liberal as if it was analogous to retarded. I'm a progressive, probably always will be and I have a job. I accept the fact that Donald J Trump is the legitimate president elect, I'm waiting to see what kind of government he forms before passing personal judgment, and I still think he's kind of a douchebag. Until this election I've voted for every Democratic candidate in every election since Mondale and I've always had a job. I'm not on the government tit I don't receive any subsidies and I have the ability to listen to reasonable arguments from people who believe differently than I do. I also continue to support the electoral college and think the founders were correct in protecting, wait for it, minority fucking rights.
If you, as I do, think it's wrong to say that every person who voted for Trump is a misogynist raciest then for the love of sweet baby Jesus please stop talking as if ALL liberals are the same, that my friend is the fucking problem and why we ended up with a choice like Trump/Clinton. Liberals are not your enemy, they are your Countrymen.
And for all you fucks that keep talking as if all liberals don't have fucking jobs and are all on welfare eat the corn out of my shit, I've had a fucking job since I was 13. Look at the national statistics of where the most welfare is issued and then look at a state by state breakdown for red v blue. It is right fucking there, red states take more welfare end of story.
I guess you are going to tell me that neither Clinton nor Trump were aware of the Electoral College when running for office?
.......The founding fathers were pretty smart guys when it came to balancing power between the most populous states and the other states in the union.If just the opposite had occurred and Clinton had won the electoral college and Trump the popular vote, I venture to say that we would still have crybabies, just different ones.
Tres3.
Big Boss Man
11-16-16, 14:15
You can't prove a counterfactual but if the election would have been based on a popular vote, I think Trump would have won. The difference in popular vote primarily occurred in California, Oregon and Washington where neither side campaigned. In States where the two campaigns competed, the vote was very tight but Trump won a majority of them. Clinton was a flawed candidate.
I read one report unverified that 60000 Democrats in Michigan voted but left their ballot blank on the vote for president. Trump won Michigan by 12000 votes.
We Democrats need to rethink our party and I really don't think we should follow Sander's path. Sanders already has a new book out so he is trying insert himself into the vacuum. It's like he anticipated this result.
Member #4112
11-17-16, 09:52
See DR even you are ashamed to be called a liberal, you changed it to progressive - the more aggressive form of liberalism. Woodrow Wilson would be proud.
I didn't call Liberals retards, but if the shoe fits....
Hey BBM, did you get that little factoid from the "fake" news on Facebook?
How big a part it played can be debated. But it played a role, and is par for the course for the right wing. Including their crescendo of deception in the last 1-2 weeks to help push them over the top.
Now we're learning that Facebook was another piece of the puzzle. Here's a very interesting article:
Facebook fake-news writer: 'I think Donald Trump is in the White House because of me'.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/11/17/facebook-fake-news-writer-i-think-donald-trump-is-in-the-white-house-because-of-me/
A quote from the article:
My sites were picked up by Trump supporters all the time. I think Trump is in the White House because of me. His followers dont fact-check anything theyll post everything, believe anything. His campaign manager posted my story about a protester getting paid $3,500 as fact. Like, I made that up. I posted a fake ad on Craigslist.
How big a part it played can be debated. But it played a role, and is par for the course for the right wing. Including their crescendo of deception in the last 1-2 weeks to help push them over the top.
Now we're learning that Facebook was another piece of the puzzle. Here's a very interesting article:
Facebook fake-news writer: 'I think Donald Trump is in the White House because of me'.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/11/17/facebook-fake-news-writer-i-think-donald-trump-is-in-the-white-house-because-of-me/Argentina isn't the only country with Low Information Voters (LIV). I guess we now have to add another category--False Information Voters (FIV).
Tres3.
WorldTravel69
11-17-16, 14:35
Usually when the President Elect or the President wants a meeting with a Foreign Countries Leaders they notify the State Department.
Trump has met a few Leaders of other Countries and has not notified the State Department.
Big Boss Man
11-17-16, 15:12
Hey BBM, did you get that little factoid from the "fake" news on Facebook?Usually I do not click on Facebook news. That was why I qualified my statement as unverified. From my Facebook friends, I would say half of the vocal Sander's supporters (how's that for a scientific sample:)) did not vote for Clinton.
I use RealClearPolitics as my politics reader. Unfortunately RealClearPolitics does not keep their browsing history past 3 days.
David Plouffe said that Clinton received 70,000 fewer votes in Detroit than Obama did. I imagine Detroit would split somewhere between Los Angeles and Dallas. Los Angeles went 75% to 25% Clinton over Trump and Dallas went 66% to 34% Clinton over Trump.
Doppelganger, it's your ball now, don't turn it over. Right now I would advise that Trump prioritize the agenda at least in foreign affairs. In his campaign, Trump wanted to reset strategies and tactics at minimum with Russia, NATO, ISIL, Mexico, Canada, China and Japan. It seems like a large agenda.
Really the only policy of Trump's that scares me is the 35% tariffs on Chinese and Mexican imports. That would really hurt my economic base in California.
Repealing and replacing Obamacare does not affect me. It sounds like now they are just going to change how it is financed but Clinton was going to do that too. Changing the tax code will probably raise my taxes in the short run because I take every deduction currently available. Tax code changes will not affect me because I already save 20% of my income so I have room for error. Gay marriage and abortion does not affect me.
So basically if Trump does not screw up the economy, I will be okay. I think Navarro and Kudlow are in fantasy land projecting 5% growth under Trump's economic policies. I will be more than happy to be wrong on that one. I will probably earn more money on that scenario than most of the Trump supporters on my Facebook page.
Big Boss Man
11-17-16, 20:59
It would ease many of my concerns about Trump.
Daddy Rulz
11-17-16, 22:17
It would ease many of my concerns about Trump.I've never been a huge fan of his but as soon as I read this I could see it. Certainly not the worst idea I've seen. I don't think it will happen though because he dissed him in the campaign. If it does it would certainly show his willingness to mend fences.
This whole "he doesn't know who he's going to pick because he didn't have a plan" shit is starting to piss me off a little. I'm still not a Trump fan but most President elects don't start announcing the major positions until well into December.
Usually when the President Elect or the President wants a meeting with a Foreign Countries Leaders they notify the State Department.
Trump has met a few Leaders of other Countries and has not notified the State Department."Let me know if you're passing by'. With typical British understatement The Times reported that the "informality of the invitation raised eyebrows among British officials".
http://www.smh.com.au/world/let-me-know-if-youre-passing-by-what-donald-trump-said-to-theresa-may-20161117-gsrzr3.html
In this age when everyone is well connected and we can inform ourselves about the quality of the candidates, even those outside our city and state, the college needs reform. California has a population of 38,800,000 and 55 votes, Wyoming has 584,200 and 3 votes. Thus each vote from Wyoming is worth 362% of those from California. At the moment virtually no campaigning is done in many states because the result is never in doubt. If every vote counted, as in a direct election, more attention would be paid to everyone, not just in swing states.
A useful brief history of the electoral college is here: http://uselectionatlas.org/INFORMATION/INFORMATION/electcollege_history.php.
"Direct election was rejected not because the Framers of the Constitution doubted public intelligence but rather because they feared that without sufficient information about candidates from outside their State, people would naturally vote for a "favorite son" from their own State or region.".
Big Boss Man
11-18-16, 14:26
I've never been a huge fan of his but as soon as I read this I could see it. Certainly not the worst idea I've seen. I don't think it will happen though because he dissed him in the campaign. If it does it would certainly show his willingness to mend fences.
This whole "he doesn't know who he's going to pick because he didn't have a plan" shit is starting to piss me off a little. I'm still not a Trump fan but most President elects don't start announcing the major positions until well into December.What Romney has over the other candidates mentioned is gravitas. Giuliani reminds me of a hit man plus he has Bernard Kerik in his background. Gingrich left office in disgrace in 1998. Haley is a rising star but I question her experience for Secretary of State.
WorldTravel69
11-18-16, 20:41
Trump tweeted that he just stopped Ford Motor Company in Kentucky from moving to Mexico.
Ford had no plans to Move.
Why is he still trying to Blow Smoke up his believers Ass?
Rock Harders
11-18-16, 20:54
Trump tweeted that he just stopped Ford Motor Company in Kentucky from moving to Mexico.
Ford had no plans to Move.
Why is he still trying to Blow Smoke up his believers Ass?http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-18/trump-says-ford-called-to-say-keeping-lincoln-plant-in-kentucky
Check your facts, sir. Ford DID plan to move production of the MKC model from Kentucky to Mexico, fortunately TRUMP talked them out of it.
WorldTravel69
11-18-16, 21:15
Ford said they had no plans to move.
I guess they lied.
Trump tweeted that he just stopped Ford Motor Company in Kentucky from moving to Mexico.
Ford had no plans to Move.
Why is he still trying to Blow Smoke up his believers Ass?
I agree Romney would be a good choice for Secretary of State. Anyone reasonably normal, grounded and respectful will help smooth relations with other countries. I think it will be a tough choice for Romney though.
As far as others on the right, there are many I dislike: Giuliani, Gingrich, Cruz, Huckabee. Nasty and arrogant.
I don't see the Electoral College going away anytime soon, nor would I wish for it. I get the point that it's not normalized to each state's population. But going by the popular vote just gives more influence to big cities vs. Smaller cities/rural areas. Although it might help Dems, I don't think I like the idea of big cities having so much influence. Hillary winning the popular vote is a good thing though. I expect it will be brought up many times over the next 4 years.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-18/trump-says-ford-called-to-say-keeping-lincoln-plant-in-kentucky
Check your facts, sir. Ford DID plan to move production of the MKC model from Kentucky to Mexico, fortunately TRUMP talked them out of it.Fox News (Shep Smith), AP and just about every news source I can find who commented on this called out the serial liar's (Trump) bullshit on this. It was the union that persuaded Ford not to move. Disclaimer: I am not a Clinton supporter or whinging that she lost. In a way I'm glad she lost, but the duplicity of any politician should be reported.
I personally think that most politicians are duplicitous because the voters and media let them get away with it. Democracy is better than other systems, but it is still imperfect. The average voter has the attention span of an ant, and votes for the politician who tells them what they want to hear, not the facts. I wish I had coined the phrase "A good lie is half way around the world before the truth gets its boots on". Trump and Clinton are both guilty of lying, but I guess that Trump's lies resonated louder with the voters in the electoral college "battle ground" states. Thanks to the Founding Fathers, the country may go downhill for a while, but it will survive.
Tres3.
I personally think that most politicians are duplicitous because the voters and media let them get away with it. Democracy is better than other systems, but it is still imperfect. The average voter has the attention span of an ant, and votes for the politician who tells them what they want to hear, not the facts. I wish I had coined the phrase "A good lie is half way around the world before the truth gets its boots on". Trump and Clinton are both guilty of lying, but I guess that Trump's lies resonated louder with the voters in the electoral college "battle ground" states. Thanks to the Founding Fathers, the country may go downhill for a while, but it will survive.
Tres3.Agreed. And its the duty of a free press to call them out every time they do lie.
I don't see the Electoral College going away anytime soon, nor would I wish for it. I get the point that it's not normalized to each state's population. But going by the popular vote just gives more influence to big cities vs. Smaller cities/rural areas. Although it might help Dems, I don't think I like the idea of big cities having so much influence. Hillary winning the popular vote is a good thing though. I expect it will be brought up many times over the next 4 years.The popular vote win is now about 1.7 million. The electoral college system is looking a lot like affirmative action for rural areas!
Member #4112
11-21-16, 21:43
The popular vote win is now about 1.7 million. The electoral college system is looking a lot like affirmative action for rural areas!As it was intended - please download and read the Federalist Papers.
WorldTravel69
11-22-16, 16:04
They were written in the late 1780s.
How is that have anything to do with today's changing Politics?
There have been updates to other Constitutional amendments.
So should the 12th Amendment; the Electoral College created on February 01, 1877.
As it was intended - please download and read the Federalist Papers.
As it was intended - please download and read the Federalist Papers.Have read them extensively thanks. That research supports my belief that conditions as experienced by the writers of the Constitution have changed so radically that an amendment should be considered.
Member #4112
11-23-16, 11:39
The 12 Amendment was passed by Congress on December 9, 1803 and ratified on June 15, 1804, not thirty years earlier as you stated.
They sought balance in the election process just as balance was achieved by compromise in the House (apportioned on the basis of population) and the Senate (apportioned equally). The 12 Amendment was designed to balance the power of the populace states with those of less populous states.
As this is an amendment it may be repealed just as the 18th Amendment was repealed by the 21st Amendment. Gentlemen I would direct your attention to the election map either by state or by county as well as the distribution of power in the House and Senate, the likelihood of such an amendment passing is unlikely in the extreme.
I am sure our liberal/progressive brothers here would love the country to be governed by the east and west coast and to hell with the rest of the country.
Big Boss Man
11-23-16, 14:49
I am sure our liberal/progressive brothers here would love the country to be governed by the east and west coast and to hell with the rest of the country.Brooking Institute created an interesting map weighting the vote by county GDP. By their analysis, 64% of GDP occurs in Blue counties.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/22/donald-trump-lost-most-of-the-american-economy-in-this-election/
What needs to happen is that foreign direct investment and venture capital need to spread beyond California and Texas where it is mostly concentrated.
For example, Elon Musk should have built his Tesla factories in the Midwest instead of California and Nevada.
However, I am surprised that members of this Board would think that economic nationalism is the solution given our familiarity with Peronism, Argentina's particular form of economic nationalism. Like the Kirchner's, I think Trump intends to enrich himself in office. He said that the president legally cannot have a conflict of interest. His daughter, presumptive new CEO of his business, was included in a meeting with the head of state of Japan. Also Trump's views on tariffs seem in line with Peronism. I would be interested to hear Board member's views on economic nationalism.
Is there any limit to the popular vote loss of a President Elect before the supporters of the current arrangements for the electoral college would consider a change?
Is there any limit to the popular vote loss of a President Elect before the supporters of the current arrangements for the electoral college would consider a change?Does it really matter ...SHE LOST .. GET OVER IT..AND MOVE ON..
The quicker the American nation pulls together as a whole and not as opposing sides. The quicker you will turn your nation around.
Daddy Rulz
11-24-16, 13:52
Does it really matter ...SHE LOST .. GET OVER IT..AND MOVE ON..
The quicker the American nation pulls together as a whole and not as opposing sides. The quicker you will turn your nation around.I don't support changing the electoral college but the question is a legitimate one. In the last couple elections what used to be rare has become more common.
As far as the getting over it, that's got about as much chance of happening as when (insert whichever party) has of getting over their loss. Republicans never got over Clinton nor Obama and the Democrats never got over Bush and it's highly unlikely that they will get over Trump.
The media will insure that the nation never pulls together, divisiveness sells advertising.
These guys still think one is better or worse than the other and every cycle the "end of the world as we know it" guys shout louder. I'm really interested if the wolf crying ever stops. One would figure that after more than 20 years it would but they show no signs of slowing. Wasn't Obama supposed to lead us into a socialist government where all the rich people lost everything they owned and guns were outlawed?
Does it really matter ...SHE LOST .. GET OVER IT..AND MOVE ON..
The quicker the American nation pulls together as a whole and not as opposing sides. The quicker you will turn your nation around.The hypocrisy of the right (I don't necessarily include you in this) is astonishing. The Republicans never got over Obama winning, vowed to obstruct him at every turn and succeeded in fucking up his Presidency. Now they want everyone to accept this racist corrupt bully as President even though he lost the popular vote by over two million votes and is appointing out and out racists, homophobes and unqualified people to senior positions. If Trump wants to pull the country together he's sure going about it the wrong way.
The hypocrisy of the right (I don't necessarily include you in this) is astonishing. The Republicans never got over Obama winning, vowed to obstruct him at every turn and succeeded in fucking up his Presidency. Now they want everyone to accept this racist corrupt bully as President even though he lost the popular vote by over two million votes and is appointing out and out racists, homophobes and unqualified people to senior positions. If Trump wants to pull the country together he's sure going about it the wrong way.Did Hilary really win the popular vote? Or did she win the illegal vote? They have had illegals protesting Hillary did not win and their votes did not matter. With over 12 million illegals in this country do you think at least 3 million of them voted for her...if so Trump won the popular vote. Hard to believe the illegals voted? Especially in states that harbor them...right? Obama did not get his way? Seems like he rolled the rhinos over in the congress....when did they stop him? The only thing they should not have done is they blocked his appointment for the Supreme court. It is not like he died a month before the election. Illegals in this country are pandered too without question. What is the cost in our schools and social programs? We need to shut the door. It is bad for the illegals because they are subject to abuses and they stifle wages for citizens. Once we close the door everyone will start screaming and we can have a program to have documented workers here and not their dependents.
WorldTravel69
11-25-16, 14:58
There is an Impeachment questionnaire out for Trump.
Great reasons why he is not qualified to be President.
Daddy Rulz
11-25-16, 17:54
There is an Impeachment questionnaire out for Trump.
Great reasons why he is not qualified to be President.Can one be properly impeached if one hasn't assumed office yet?
Thank you.
Member #4112
11-27-16, 15:25
What is the racial makeup of the United States?
White Americans are the racial majority, with a 77.7% share of the U.S. Population. African Americans are the largest racial minority, amounting to 13.2% of the population. Hispanic and Latino Americans amount to 17.1% of the population, making up the largest ethnic minority.
Google it guys, the facts are the facts. To listen to the major media outlet you would think Blacks and Hispanics were were near parity with whites in the population. They sure make the most noise until this election.
Trump will become President, he will govern the United States and things are going to change is some big ways. Liberals/progressives can complain all they want but it will not change those simple facts. I was most unhappy with Obama and very happy to see him go. You guys need to get used to being on the short end of the stick. Obama cost the democrats the House, the Senate, and now the Presidency.
Your turn in the wilderness my friends.
Says Doppelganger beating his chest like King Kong :)
Member #4112
11-28-16, 10:03
Says Doppelganger beating his chest like King Kong :)Esten, I refer you to your posts when Obama won in 2008 and 2012. I find my post restrained when compared to yours from that period.
Monger on Dude.
Big Boss Man
11-28-16, 15:07
I do find it strange that supposedly Trump loyalists, Conway, Huckabee and Gingrich are arguing Trump's cabinet choices on the talk shows. Of course, if Democrats make their views known on the choices then we are in Conway's words 'crybabies'.
The more I read about economic nationalism, the more I think it will lead the USA in the wrong direction. Take for example the Putin's version of economic nationalism in Russia. In 2009, Russia per capita GDP was $8562. In 2015, it was $9057 or about .9% annual growth. In the under performing economy during the Obama years, the USA went from $47,000 to $55,836 GDP per capita which is 2.9% annual compound growth. This is data from the World Bank as found on Google.
Member #4112
11-29-16, 11:00
The more I read about economic nationalism, the more I think it will lead the USA in the wrong direction. Take for example the Putin's version of economic nationalism in Russia. In 2009, Russia per capita GDP was $8562. In 2015, it was $9057 or about .9% annual growth. In the under performing economy during the Obama years, the USA went from $47,000 to $55,836 GDP per capita which is 2.9% annual compound growth. This is data from the World Bank as found on Google.BBM, according to the polls you are in a distinct minority with over 70% of the country believing we are headed in the WRONG direction under Obama.
Daddy Rulz
11-29-16, 11:50
BBM, according to the polls you are in a distinct minority with over 70% of the country believing we are headed in the WRONG direction under Obama.No Barry fan here but I am a fan of data. Gallup has Obama's approval rating sitting a little under 60%. 70% of Americans can't agree on anything anymore.
I know, I know, vast left wing conspiracy in the media. Anything that doesn't condemn Democrats and praise Republicans is part of the left wing media elite.
Big Boss Man
11-30-16, 14:15
BBM, according to the polls you are in a distinct minority with over 70% of the country believing we are headed in the WRONG direction under Obama.However hiring Mnuchin and Ross gave me solace this morning.
"Mnuchin and Ross also appeared to step back from some of Trumps most confrontational rhetoric on the campaign trail. Trump has repeatedly threatened to levy double-digit tariffs on goods coming from China and Mexico and pull out of existing free-trade deals. But Ross said Wednesday those measures may only be a last resort.
"Everybody talks about tariffs as the first things. Tariffs are the last thing. Tariffs are a part of the negotiation, he said. "The real trick is going to be increase American exports..
Like I said in an earlier post, we are going to have to export Californians and Texans and their capital to the Midwest to teach them to be entrepreneurial again.
Believe me I am not a Democrat in the camp of Sanders and Warren. Warren came out strongly against Mnuchin yesterday. The moderate Democratic view is leaderless right now as Clinton and Biden ride into the sunset.
The election also has created for me some strange bedfellows. Yesterday, found me agreeing with a George Mason economist.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-11-29/trump-s-disastrous-pledge-to-keep-jobs-in-the-u-s
WorldTravel69
11-30-16, 14:31
The People got what they wanted.
The People got what they wanted.Not the first time, see for example Obama.
BTW, I left my ballot blank for President, after all the 4 candidates were all blanks.
Don B.
Your turn in the wilderness my friends.I think a better term would be Twilight Zone.
Member #4112
12-01-16, 10:49
I think a better term would be Twilight Zone.Well Esten, since liberals/progressives have been living in the Twilight Zone all their lives you should not even notice the difference.
WorldTravel69
12-01-16, 13:01
Most of his cabinet are Billionaires.
Goldman Sacks
Trump is not emptying the Swamp, he is adding Predators to it.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/30/goldman-sachs-as-bank-friendly-trump-administration-appears-to-take-shape.html
Carrier Air Conditioning
http://www.investors.com/news/trump-carrier-reach-deal-on-keeping-jobs-at-indiana-plant/
Pence did not quit his Governor job so he could use Public state funds of $700,000 to pay Carrier not to leave.
Member #4112
12-01-16, 16:06
Most of his cabinet are Billionaires.
Goldman Sacks
Trump is not emptying the Swamp, he is adding Predators to it.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/30/goldman-sachs-as-bank-friendly-trump-administration-appears-to-take-shape.html
Carrier Air Conditioning
http://www.investors.com/news/trump-carrier-reach-deal-on-keeping-jobs-at-indiana-plant/
Pence did not quit his Governor job so he could use Public state funds of $700,000 to pay Carrier not to leave.Billionaire cabinet appointments are not a problem, they don't need to steal or cut deals for access like the Clintons ect. Or the rest of the politicians.
Goldman Sacs - who better to close the flood gates than someone who used them? Also see "billionaires" above.
Better for the state to give the money to KEEP PEOPLE WORKING than paying it out in welfare to KEEP PEOPLE FROM WORKING.
Billionaire cabinet appointments are not a problem, they don't need to steal or cut deals for access like the Clintons ect. Or the rest of the politicians.
Goldman Sacs - who better to close the flood gates than someone who used them? Also see "billionaires" above.
Better for the state to give the money to KEEP PEOPLE WORKING than paying it out in welfare to KEEP PEOPLE FROM WORKING.How much is enough profit? Wall Street, Corporate America. It is sickening. Trump is part of the old boy's club and the American people got taken.
Most of his cabinet are Billionaires.
Goldman Sacks
Trump is not emptying the Swamp, he is adding Predators to it.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/30/goldman-sachs-as-bank-friendly-trump-administration-appears-to-take-shape.html
Carrier Air Conditioning
http://www.investors.com/news/trump-carrier-reach-deal-on-keeping-jobs-at-indiana-plant/
Pence did not quit his Governor job so he could use Public state funds of $700,000 to pay Carrier not to leave.I am waiting to hear what else was given to Carrier. Sickening. Americans don't care about Americans. Burn the Stars and Stripes and praise the new American flag....A dollar bill.
Member #4112
12-02-16, 10:37
I am waiting to hear what else was given to Carrier. Sickening. Americans don't care about Americans. Burn the Stars and Stripes and praise the new American flag....A dollar bill.Yes the same old Liberal/Progressive chant.
Who exactly do you think pays the taxes that Liberals/Progressives want to give away for "Social Justice" - the people who go to work everyday and the corporations and small businesses that employ them.
So what if the state gave Carrier tax breaks, its not like they wrote them a check for that amount. No they just REDUCED their tax burden. Tax reduction, the absolute boogieman for Liberals/Progressives. No wonder Trump scares them so much with his talk of reducing both corporate and personal tax rates as well as simplifying the tax code.
Not mention both Carrier and their employees will continue to pay taxes to the state to help replenish those funds.
A much better solution than writing checks to the welfare crowd who contribute nothing and are a drag on the economy.
WorldTravel69
12-02-16, 13:36
It gets better.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/what-just-happened-with-carrier-is-crazy-223106708.html
Also, What prevents other Companies from saying that they going to move out of the country just to get our money, but not really intending to move?
Yes the same old Liberal/Progressive chant.
Who exactly do you think pays the taxes that Liberals/Progressives want to give away for "Social Justice" - the people who go to work everyday and the corporations and small businesses that employ them.
So what if the state gave Carrier tax breaks, its not like they wrote them a check for that amount. No they just REDUCED their tax burden. Tax reduction, the absolute boogieman for Liberals/Progressives. No wonder Trump scares them so much with his talk of reducing both corporate and personal tax rates as well as simplifying the tax code.
Not mention both Carrier and their employees will continue to pay taxes to the state to help replenish those funds.
A much better solution than writing checks to the welfare crowd who contribute nothing and are a drag on the economy.
AllIWantIsLove
12-02-16, 13:47
Yes the same old Liberal/Progressive chant.
<snip>
So what if the state gave Carrier tax breaks, its not like they wrote them a check for that amount. No they just REDUCED their tax burden. <snip> Unless the state also reduced their budget/spending, other tax payers will be paying what Carrier will not be paying. There is no government money. There is only tax payer money.
It gets better.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/what-just-happened-with-carrier-is-crazy-223106708.html
Also, What prevents other Companies from saying that they going to move out of the country just to get our money, but not really intending to move?Now if we just had a government that stuck to its only real purpose, the protection of individual rights, this wouldn't happen.
On the subject of individual rights, in all of the debates leading up to the nominations and the election, I did not hear the phrase "individual rights" uttered even once.
The progressive/leftists are all for minority rights, the smallest minority is the individual, so if you are in favor of minority rights why are you not in favor of individual rights?
Don B.
Unless the state also reduced their budget/spending, other tax payers will be paying what Carrier will not be paying. There is no government money. There is only tax payer money.You failed to consider Indiana's structural budget surplus and its much larger state reserve account.
To state that "There is no government money. There is only taxpayer money." is a conflation of the source of funds (taxes) with spending authority (government). Taxpayer monies collected by government and deposited into government coffers indeed become government funds to be statutorily used by government for the benefit of its citizens / residents as was done in the case of Carrier in Indianapolis.
You failed to consider Indiana's structural budget surplus and its much larger state reserve account.
To state that "There is no government money. There is only taxpayer money." is a conflation of the source of funds (taxes) with spending authority (government). Taxpayer monies collected by government and deposited into government coffers indeed become government funds to be statutorily used by government for the benefit of its citizens / residents as was done in the case of Carrier in Indianapolis.The Carrier money was collected from ALL of the taxpayers, but was expended by the Government for the benefit of a few. Did all of the citizens of Indiana benefit?
Tres3.
AllIWantIsLove
12-03-16, 15:22
You failed to consider Indiana's structural budget surplus and its much larger state reserve account.
To state that "There is no government money. There is only taxpayer money." is a conflation of the source of funds (taxes) with spending authority (government). Taxpayer monies collected by government and deposited into government coffers indeed become government funds to be statutorily used by government for the benefit of its citizens / residents as was done in the case of Carrier in Indianapolis.I prefer my terminology because if we don't think of "government money" as taxpayer money we get careless about how it is spent. And thus we care less about welfare cheats, ear marks, and unnecessary defense spending. This, i.e. Forgetting the source of "government money", is especially true in government bureaucrats.
The Carrier money was collected from ALL of the taxpayers, but was expended by the Government for the benefit of a few. Did all of the citizens of Indiana benefit?
Tres3. And the point of your non sequitur post is what?
And the point of your non sequitur post is what?Why is it a non sequitur?
Don B.
Why is it a non sequitur?
Don B. Why is it not?
Big Boss Man
12-04-16, 15:21
I wish Sanders and Palin would keep their mouths shut? Trump doing the work of a mayor or governor does not hurt anything and gives him a good photo op. Today he is back onto the 35% tariffs. Weirdly, I think the agricultural senators will join with the coastal senators to prevent it. Here's Sasse's comment. "Pres-Elect Trump means well. But won't his 35% tariff idea raise prices on American families? How would it not be a new 35% tax on families?".
Why is it not?The onus of proof is upon he who asserts the positive.
On second thought, go to hell.
Don B.
Silver Star
12-04-16, 21:22
I wish Sanders and Palin would keep their mouths shut? Trump doing the work of a mayor or governor does not hurt anything and gives him a good photo op. Today he is back onto the 35% tariffs. Weirdly, I think the agricultural senators will join with the coastal senators to prevent it. Here's Sasse's comment. "Pres-Elect Trump means well. But won't his 35% tariff idea raise prices on American families? How would it not be a new 35% tax on families?".Would the new 35% tariff apply to Trump aparrel, which is made in China and Vietnam.
Member #4112
12-07-16, 09:55
I ask all my liberal / progressive brothers here on the board to watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbjPJsqvLjo
WorldTravel69
12-07-16, 12:53
This is part of same article as I posted way back when.
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/michael-moore-donald-trump-president-republican/2016/11/11/id/758427/
I ask all my liberal / progressive brothers here on the board to watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbjPJsqvLjo
Big Boss Man
12-15-16, 17:35
For the same reasons, I liked Romney as Secretary of State I think Tillerson is a good choice. I think he will be a countervailing force against moving towards an economic nationalism movement as he was a proponent of PTT. I think we have Putin by the balls so I do not think we should let up on economic sanctions. But I suppose those within the administration have more Putin love and it is going to change.
I am a little curious about Trump attacks on the F-35. From my casual reading and understanding, the Russian Air Force has not been competitive with the US Air Force since the Korean War.
Economic policy is also going to be interesting. The guys Trump hired are more associated with Brooking Institute and Goldman Sachs which are more traditionally associated with Democrats. I think there will be some conflicts with Ryan and the American Enterprise Institute boys.
James Baker said this yesterday and I was thinking the same thing that Trump should stop shooting from the hip (phone calls with the Taiwanese) on foreign policy until he has all the levers under his control. Obama may be unwittingly or purposely taking actions counter to Trump's strategy. There are only 35 more days to wait.
Daddy Rulz
12-15-16, 23:28
I ask all my liberal / progressive brothers here on the board to watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbjPJsqvLjoYou wanted us to watch a Honda commercial?
The onus of proof is upon he who asserts the positive.
On second thought, go to hell.
Don B.
Don't lash out at others for your marginal reading comprehension skills.
BTW, here's a hint for you - it is by definition.
Cheers
WorldTravel69
12-26-16, 13:29
They discovered Oil in Chad.
Three oil companies worked out a deal to produce it for them. They built a pipe line to the coast.
Part of the deal was to educate the people of Chad and give them a better life.
Tillerson talked the President of Chad into dumping the other two oil companies and just use Exxon.
The President of Chad decided to build up his Military and not educate his people or make their lives easier.
For the same reasons, I liked Romney as Secretary of State I think Tillerson is a good choice. I think he will be a countervailing force against moving towards an economic nationalism movement as he was a proponent of PTT. I think we have Putin by the balls so I do not think we should let up on economic sanctions. But I suppose those within the administration have more Putin love and it is going to change.
I am a little curious about Trump attacks on the F-35. From my casual reading and understanding, the Russian Air Force has not been competitive with the US Air Force since the Korean War.
Economic policy is also going to be interesting. The guys Trump hired are more associated with Brooking Institute and Goldman Sachs which are more traditionally associated with Democrats. I think there will be some conflicts with Ryan and the American Enterprise Institute boys.
James Baker said this yesterday and I was thinking the same thing that Trump should stop shooting from the hip (phone calls with the Taiwanese) on foreign policy until he has all the levers under his control. Obama may be unwittingly or purposely taking actions counter to Trump's strategy. There are only 35 more days to wait.
Member #4112
12-27-16, 11:47
President Elect Trump announced all the necessary building materials for the wall between the USA and Mexico have now been acquired.
When asked about the source of the sudden supply of building materials President Elect Trump responded ....
Upon my election every Democrat / liberal / Progressive shit a brick - materials problem solved.
WorldTravel69
01-14-17, 14:39
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/12/trump-remains-unpopular-voters-prefer-obama-on-scotus-pick.html
As Trump would say I "heard on the internet"; that his popularity is getting worst after his Press conference.
Extra extra!, Latest news No Tax Cuts for the Rich.
I wonder how many of the Trumpers will want to change their vote for him.
I hope all the Obama haters that used to complain about him issuing executive orders (when obstructed by the Repubs in the House and Senate) are going to comment on the validity of Trump's style of governing. How many executive orders has he passed since he took office? And here's to a country without Ambassadors. Its getting started.
WorldTravel69
01-31-17, 01:54
Are you Trump Tweeters happy?
He just fired his Acting Attorney General and the guy in charge of Immigration and enforcement.
http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/01/trump_fires_acting_attorney_ge.html
https://www.follownews.com/trump-fires-acting-director-of-immigration-and-customs-enforcement-2gyhi
What a Fuck up guy.
I heard that he said in the 1980s, when he was a Democrat and that if he ran for President he would run as a Republican, because the were dumb enough to elect me.
Was that You?
And you said O'Bama was a lousy President.
Member #4112
01-31-17, 13:32
WT, he had the right to fire the acting AG - an Obama holdover - who refused to defend the executive order. She does not get to decide what she will defend and not defend. As far as the INS guy - the union guys you know the ones actually doing the job - wanted him out and they supported Trump so now he is gone too. There are consequences to winning and losing elections.
As far as executive orders - guys it comes with the territory. Many of Trump's exec orders are undoing Obama's- hey in Obamanations famous words "We won you lost get use to it".
I was noticing all the up roar about the statute of liberty - perhaps you forgot but that was a gift from France and they chose the inscription not us.
You think we are getting tough on immigration take a look at the Scandinavian countries - now they are locking it down. In Germany Merkle is now worried about if she will get reelected. I was in Germany in August and I can tell you the average Herman the German is tired of the ragheads screwing up their country - think they would have learned that lesson back when they imported labor from Turkey and now they can not get rid of them.
I am absolutely loving the Hollywood melt down. People who make their living pretending to be someone else are now the social, environmental and foreign policy experts, give me a break. I am all for rounding up the democrats and Hollywood elites and and dropping them off in the tribal regions or Pakistan - let's let them get up close and personal with all these poor down trodden misunderstood folks they love so much. Polesi in a berka - I'm loving it.
Hey you guys in the last 8 years have lost governorship's, state legislatures, the House, the Senate and now POTUS, and the only bastions you have left are the east and west coasts as well as a few liberal cities in between. The rest of the country in between the east and west coast just told you to go fu#k yourselves and you still don't get it.
End of rant.
Trump's 90 day freeze on immigrants from 7 predominantly Muslum countries did not go far enough. He should have included Saudi Arabia (birthplace of 9/11 terrorists), Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, and Egypt. But wait, doesn't Trump have business interests in some, or all, of those countries?? Before applauding Trump, let's get rid of the double standard.
Tres3.
Member #4112
01-31-17, 15:35
The list that was acted upon was from your boy Obama, so maybe you should ask him why those countries got a pass.
That said, I have no problem adding them.
I noticed you omitted Jordan, could that be because they are taking to the radicals in spades?
The rest of the country in between the east and west coast just told you to go fu#k yourselves and you still don't get it.
Three million more Americans told Trump to go fuck himself than voted for him. You still don't get it.... And once they implement their masterplan of abolishing the ACA with no replacement, there'll be a few million more telling him to go fuck himself.
AllIWantIsLove
01-31-17, 20:39
WT, he had the right to fire the acting AG - an Obama holdover - <snip> If the President can fire the AG for any reason then who polices the President? Some presidents have not been models of virtue. Perhaps even the present one.
Member #4112
02-01-17, 00:44
Three million more Americans told Trump to go fuck himself than voted for him. You still don't get it.... And once they implement their masterplan of abolishing the ACA with no replacement, there'll be a few million more telling him to go fuck himself.The Electoral College is in place for the very reason Trump won, the east and west coast (most populous) portions of the county can not elect the president - it takes the WHOLE COUNTRY. Read the amendment and try to understand the reason still exists today as it did then. The liberals LOST the conservatives and middle of road folks WON.
As for the three million - lets see what the investigation of voter fraud has to say at the end of the day. Good example is the immigrant who finally got citizenship and was able to vote, but guess what he had been voting for years in California. Don't even want to go there on all the dead people who keep rising from the grave and voting. Voter ID is a good thing, its not discriminatory if you have to show ID to cash a check, open an account or get on an aircraft why not voting? If you are too lazy or too stupid to get an ID then you are too stupid and too lazy to vote.
Thank God for Harry Reid - remember when he changed the Senate rules for federal judges - the nuclear option - when the Democrats ran everything? Well you are looking at nuke 2 for the Supreme Court and Reid's reasons for nuke 1 are going to be exactly the same for the Republicans with nuke 2. So suck it up buttercup.
You sound like a conspiracy nut with the ACA BS - the Republican's and Trump have been trying to get rid of it for years. While he is at it lets get rid of the EPA, Federal Energy Dept, Health and Human Services and Education (oxymoron) Department - let the states run them. If they want to tax the shxt out of their residences like California does to hand out goodies more power to them and if they don't - you want a hand - look on the end of your arm.
TejanoLibre
02-01-17, 10:19
If the President can fire the AG for any reason then who polices the President? Some presidents have not been models of virtue. Perhaps even the present one.Sally Yates , You're Fired !
TL.
Three million more Americans told Trump to go fuck himself than voted for him. You still don't get it.... And once they implement their masterplan of abolishing the ACA with no replacement, there'll be a few million more telling him to go fuck himself.Need a tissue bro?
WorldTravel69
02-01-17, 12:06
I guess that states you live in don't announce to many things about the truth.
Such as the Pew report in 2012.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/donald-trump-voter-fraud-math-214695
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/18/us/voter-fraud.html?_r=0
We started building the Wall along our California Border and Trump Country.
The Electoral College is in place for the very reason Trump won, the east and west coast (most populous) portions of the county can not elect the president - it takes the WHOLE COUNTRY. Read the amendment and try to understand the reason still exists today as it did then. The liberals LOST the conservatives and middle of road folks WON.
As for the three million - lets see what the investigation of voter fraud has to say at the end of the day. Good example is the immigrant who finally got citizenship and was able to vote, but guess what he had been voting for years in California. Don't even want to go there on all the dead people who keep rising from the grave and voting. Voter ID is a good thing, its not discriminatory if you have to show ID to cash a check, open an account or get on an aircraft why not voting? If you are too lazy or too stupid to get an ID then you are too stupid and too lazy to vote.
Thank God for Harry Reid - remember when he changed the Senate rules for federal judges - the nuclear option - when the Democrats ran everything? Well you are looking at nuke 2 for the Supreme Court and Reid's reasons for nuke 1 are going to be exactly the same for the Republicans with nuke 2. So suck it up buttercup.
You sound like a conspiracy nut with the ACA BS - the Republican's and Trump have been trying to get rid of it for years. While he is at it lets get rid of the EPA, Federal Energy Dept, Health and Human Services and Education (oxymoron) Department - let the states run them. If they want to tax the shxt out of their residences like California does to hand out goodies more power to them and if they don't - you want a hand - look on the end of your arm.
Big Boss Man
02-01-17, 12:15
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444374/income-tax-eliminate-mortgage-interest-deduction-standard-deduction-state-taxes-housing-prices
For me, it is a social war and nobody really cares about the economics.
I think we are going to a have an Atlas Shrugged situation. All the liberals are going to quit working because the taxes are too high and the Republicans living off social security will no longer be able to afford their guns. Basically that is what is happening right. Impose tariffs on international companies so that some idiot in Ohio can get a job.
Never understood the fascination with Ayn Rand which I read as a teenager. I mean Rand liked kinky sex so those parts were good. But Ryan and Tillerman are mature men now to continue to say Atlas Shrugged is their favorite book.
Read Ethan Canin's America America and you will have a better understanding why liberalism failed.
WorldTravel69
02-02-17, 01:39
He slams the PM of Australia on a phone call.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/317480-trump-fields-tense-phone-call-with-australian-pm-report
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/no-gday-mate-on-call-with-australian-pm-trump-badgers-and-brags/2017/02/01/88a3bfb0-e8bf-11e6-80c2-30e57e57e05d_story.html?utm_term=.cbedf6aae740
http://nypost.com/2017/02/01/trump-blasted-australian-prime-minister-during-worst-call-by-far/
FOXTV says "You will not see this on this Channel".
This just came out on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/826990079738540033
What the Fuck is he Smoking.
I think he still thinks he thinks he is running his a Game Show on non really TV.
Need a tissue bro?No, I'm fine pal, you keep them all, I think you're going to need them before too long. I'm just watching this train wreck from a distance, enjoying the hypocrisy and double standards of the Republicans. Like Orrin Hatch whinging about the Democrats opposing a totally ideological SCOTUS appointment, after they delayed the Dem's pick for 11 months. A total moral vacuum is taking shape in the US atm.
No, I'm fine pal, you keep them all, I think you're going to need them before too long. I'm just watching this train wreck from a distance, enjoying the hypocrisy and double standards of the Republicans. Like Orrin Hatch whinging about the Democrats opposing a totally ideological SCOTUS appointment, after they delayed the Dem's pick for 11 months. A total moral vacuum is taking shape in the US atm.You seem upset. Don't cry, OK?
Daddy Rulz
02-02-17, 20:55
No, I'm fine pal, you keep them all, I think you're going to need them before too long. I'm just watching this train wreck from a distance, enjoying the hypocrisy and double standards of the Republicans. Like Orrin Hatch whinging about the Democrats opposing a totally ideological SCOTUS appointment, after they delayed the Dem's pick for 11 months. A total moral vacuum is taking shape in the US atm.He's a troll, he's probably on other boards where he pretends to be a progressive and says shit like that to enflame conservatives.
It's not about the issues for them, it's about getting you to notice them. Most likely he's somebody that's already been banned here multiple times
You seem upset. Don't cry, OK?Not upset at all mate. The fact that this prick is ruining your country's reputation is very sad as I've always admired the US. The rest of the world thought Bush was bad, this is going to be even worse. The only thing I'm worried about is if he starts another war.
He's a troll, he's probably on other boards where he pretends to be a progressive and says shit like that to enflame conservatives.
It's not about the issues for them, it's about getting you to notice them. Most likely he's somebody that's already been banned here multiple timesIf you're talking about me, wrong on all counts. And sorry to read that someone calling out Trump's shit upsets you so much. Well, not really sorry, and not surprised either.
Member #4112
02-03-17, 13:40
To all my Liberal Progressive & Conservative brothers here on the board. Rave on my brothers because no one really cares and you are not going to change anyone's mind but vent your spleen to your heart's delight.
As with the Obamanation and now with the Trumpian it is going to play out as plays out and there is absolutely nothing either side of discussion can do about it but piss, bit#h and moan.
So take a chill pill, drink a beer and enjoy the Super Bowl.
My Best to you ALL.
Monger on dudes!
WorldTravel69
03-17-17, 00:28
Obama has been on Twitter since 2007, posted over 15000 posts.
Not one has come to the attention of any Government agency.
But, lots of Trumps Tweet's are in the news.
Why?
What drug is he on?
What an egotistical liar.
Obama has been on Twitter since 2007, posted over 15000 posts.
Not one has come to the attention of any Government agency.
But, lots of Trumps Tweet's are in the news.
Why?
What drug is he on?
What an egotistical liar.Arn't all Politicians ..Sort of comes with the Job...
Just an Observation ??
Rc Collins
03-17-17, 04:52
Obama has been on Twitter since 2007, posted over 15000 posts.
Not one has come to the attention of any Government agency.
But, lots of Trumps Tweet's are in the news.
Why?
What drug is he on?
What an egotistical liar.You would be quiet too if you had a maniac like this leading you. Btw, remember when Trump and the republicans and even some members here used to bash Obama for his positive job report/unemployment numbers. Predictability now they are out there embracing those same job report numbers and the first one was even left over numbers from the Obama Admin.
Member #4112
03-17-17, 09:53
Come on guys give the man a chance, it's only been a bit more than 50 Day's.
Unemployment and job numbers are still being cooked, they have not pivoted yet but will have to when the U3 goes negative indicating we are employing more people than are available. Guess they will start using the U6 then.
Don't forget the market, that too is just a figment of the imagination, since it skyrocketed as soon as Trump was elected.
How could he go wrong by firing 3,200 eggheads at the EPA?
I just wish he would abolish the Department of Energy, which was set up under Jimmy Carter during the Arab oil embargo to insure we had adequate oil supplies. Anyone notice we have an oil glut - so the reason for continuing the white elephant is what?
Abolish the Department of Education, what an oxymoron at the federal level, let the states run their own programs as before.
Start impeaching liberal federal judges when they clearly engage in judicial overreach. Damn sure need to split the 9th Circuit Count of Appeals and let the Peoples Republic of California, Washington and Hawaii live in LaLa Land. It can be done as it was with the 12th. The 9th is the most reversed count in the country.
Big Boss Man
03-17-17, 13:01
I count cranes on my drive to work. We were at a high of 17 cranes 6 months ago. Yesterday there were only 6. So new construction projects are not being started as old ones finish. I think fiscal policy is needed to keep the economy moving forward. Hopefully that new investment money will go to places were it is more needed and less congested like Trump counties. We forecast 180000 jobs lost in Los Angeles County if we put a 35% tariff is put on trade with China. A large portion of the goods you find at Walmart and Costco come through the Ports of Los Angles and Long Beach.
Another interesting experience I had recently is that I bought a maple leaf gold coin for someone's birthday at one of these gold exchanges. The other 3 people in the store were all selling. I have never been a gold bug but I always want to buying what others are selling. I am trying to decide was this a freak coincidence or is there really a low demand for gold right now and a buying opportunity.
Big Boss Man
03-17-17, 13:14
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/opinion/why-im-moving-home.html?_r=0
The talent will start to move to where the money is.
Rc Collins
03-17-17, 19:40
This is so rich, its only been 50 days, give the man a chance. How many days did the right wing attack dogs give Obama to clean up the mess he inherited? Not even a day but now they want to give Trump a chance, so hypocritical. Trump, Fox News and the people on the right complained and demeaned the job reports for 8 years but as soon as Trump took office and the jobs report came out which was actually Obama's numbers they change their tune and now are in love with the jobs report.
Yes, lets also impeach liberal judges who over reach but look the other way when hypocritical far right judges do the same, what a fair and balance stand but it is to be expected from the people on the right.
President Tweet is now a victims of wire tapping according to him, accusing his predecessor of doing so and providing no evidence of it because there is none. This pathological liar who said he is a deal maker and will bring the country together has gotten off on the wrong foot according to many including the conservative WSJ but please give him time as he will surely make things worst.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-wrong-way-trump-1474841860
This is so rich, its only been 50 days, give the man a chance. How many days did the right wing attack dogs give Obama to clean up the mess he inherited? Not even a day but now they want to give Trump a chance, so hypocritical. Trump, Fox News and the people on the right complained and demeaned the job reports for 8 years but as soon as Trump took office and the jobs report came out which was actually Obama's numbers they change their tune and now are in love with the jobs report.
Yes, lets also impeach liberal judges who over reach but look the other way when hypocritical far right judges do the same, what a fair and balance stand but it is to be expected from the people on the right.
President Tweet is now a victims of wire tapping according to him, accusing his predecessor of doing so and providing no evidence of it because there is none. This pathological liar who said he is a deal maker and will bring the country together has gotten off on the wrong foot according to many including the conservative WSJ but please give him time as he will surely make things worst.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-wrong-way-trump-1474841860Just curious, how is the February 2017 United States Department of Labour jobs report "Obama's numbers"?
Rc Collins
03-17-17, 21:28
Just curious, how is the February 2017 United States Department of Labour jobs report "Obama's numbers"?The report was in Jan 2017, hence the statement "as soon as Trump took office and the jobs report came out."
http://www.businessinsider.com/january-2017-jobs-report-is-obama-not-trump-2017-2
http://thedailybanter.com/2017/02/trump-takes-credit-for-january-jobs-numbers/
WorldTravel69
03-19-17, 15:34
He wants to spend tons of our money to build a Wall to keep out illegals.
There are almost the same number of Illegals that Flew in and never left.
Who's going to check the overstayed Visas.
They don't check those Yet.
Member #4112
03-20-17, 10:06
The man has been in office for 58 days and you expect him to undue 8 years of Obama's open borders in that time?
Does a wall work? Ask Israel.
Should INS go after those who overstay their visa and deport them, absolutely. If this is your concern, then where was your anger the last 8 years under Obama? Getting rid of the worst is not a bad priority and working you way down. What seems to be the problem here.
Worried about Russia interfering in our elections, how quickly you forget Obama/Kerry/US State Department openly interfering in Israel's elections and it's not like it was the first time we have done so in other countries - it's OK if we do it but not if someone else returns the favor? It has already been shown the "Russians" did not get into any voting systems, they just exposed the hypocrites in the DNC. Even if the hacks of the DNC were by the Russians they leaked the DNC's dirty laundry so the people screaming are the one's whose ox got gored and by their own emails no less.
WorldTravel69
03-20-17, 12:00
Israel's wall is 152 miles.
Korea's wall is 155 miles.
The US wall would be 1,989 miles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border
Deportation: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obamas-deportation-policy-numbers/story?id=41715661.
The man has been in office for 58 days and you expect him to undue 8 years of Obama's open borders in that time?
Does a wall work? Ask Israel.
Should INS go after those who overstay their visa and deport them, absolutely. If this is your concern, then where was your anger the last 8 years under Obama? Getting rid of the worst is not a bad priority and working you way down. What seems to be the problem here.
Worried about Russia interfering in our elections, how quickly you forget Obama/Kerry/US State Department openly interfering in Israel's elections and it's not like it was the first time we have done so in other countries - it's OK if we do it but not if someone else returns the favor? It has already been shown the "Russians" did not get into any voting systems, they just exposed the hypocrites in the DNC. Even if the hacks of the DNC were by the Russians they leaked the DNC's dirty laundry so the people screaming are the one's whose ox got gored and by their own emails no less.
Israel's wall is 152 miles.
Korea's wall is 155 miles.
The US wall would be 1,989 miles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico%E2%80%93United_States_border
Deportation: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obamas-deportation-policy-numbers/story?id=41715661.Again arguing about particulars, the Great Wall of China was, with all of its branches, over 13,000 miles long. So what?
Don B.
WorldTravel69
03-20-17, 14:28
It was most likely built with slave labor, not our money.
Again arguing about particulars, the Great Wall of China was, with all of its branches, over 13,000 miles long. So what?
Don B.
Member #4112
03-20-17, 16:57
It was most likely built with slave labor, not our money.What a great idea, you are a genius WT. I'm with you on this one.
Put a tax on goods coming in from Mexico and round up all the illegals and force them to build the wall then deport them! No transportation costs, they just walk to the other side of the wall.
Hey Don you beat me to the punch with the Great Wall of China and them WT came back with his fantastic idea.
What a great idea, you are a genius WT. I'm with you on this one.
Put a tax on goods coming in from Mexico and round up all the illegals and force them to build the wall then deport them! No transportation costs, they just walk to the other side of the wall.
Hey Don you beat me to the punch with the Great Wall of China and them WT came back with his fantastic idea.A tax on incoming products means that we pay, not them! A tax on money transfers into Mexico is a better idea since its mostly Mexicans sending money anyway.
When Trump was elected, I congratulated my conservative friends, and I vowed I would give him six months from the time of his election, and it's only been 4.5. I have not read the board since a few days after the election. I'm still going to give him a full six months. I have a couple of questions, though.
1) How can we reconcile the Electoral College with the concept of "one man / person, one vote?" Seems contradictory to me. One of my conservative friends posted about how the EC keeps urban areas from having disproportionate influence. Well, if people from less populous areas want more influence, couldn't they just relocate?
2) One of my liberal friends posted that we needed a constitutional amendment to abolish the EC. Seems unlikely to me. It would be like voting to give yourself a pay cut and to give everybody else a pay raise. On the one hand, I don't agree that voters in less populous states should have disproportionate influence. On the other hand, they would be insane to vote away this disproportionate influence.
I guess that wasn't actually a question. Sorry about that.
3) Mr. Trump and I agree that each and every person who is in the country illegally needs to be removed, so then to me, the question would be: if they were to be removed and then apply for re-entry on their own merit, should the fact that they originally entered illegally be:
A) not considered at all?
B) weighed against what they did positively or negatively while in the US (gainfully employed and paying into OASDI even though they would not benefit from it, versus getting arrested, etc)?, or.
C) eliminate them from consideration completely?
I would vote for "b" but they must be ejected in the meantime.
4) An issue that is frequently raised concerning Muslim immigration is that they don't seem to want to assimilate as much as other immigrants, and often begin to demand that Sharia law be followed. So:
A) Is that a legitimate concern? In other words, is it factually true that they don't assimilate as much, and is it true that they begin to demand Sharia law?
B) If it is a legitimate concern, does that justify Mr. Trump's travel ban?
I pretty much agree with his travel ban in its second iteration, although not in its first iteration due to the inclusion of permanent resident aliens. Regardless, I think it's fairly clear that immigration policy is the province of the executive branch, and not the judicial branch.
5) Should the eligibility to participate in Medicaid and to receive the current ACA subsidies or the proposed AHCA tax credits be based solely on current taxable income as currently configured, or should a person's assets be considered as well?
I think it was a big mistake for the ACA not to consider assets, and as I've stated a couple of times in years past, I'm shamelessly manipulating that. The proposed AHCA does nothing to ameliorate that. On the one hand, you don't want older folks to have to spend all their retirement funds on health care. On the other hand, there is a difference between someone with a million dollars in assets and a current taxable income of thirty thousand dollars, versus someone with little or no savings and a current taxable income of thirty thousand dollars. So I think these ACA subsidies and proposed AHCA tax credits need to distinguish between these two classes of recipients. You could, for example, look at assets and exclude an increasing amount of assets based on age, since they would be needed for retirement, without ignoring wealth completely.
6) Birthright citizenship. Should someone from Country X be able to enter the US on a tourist visa (or illegally), give birth, and have this child get automatic citizenship? The US and Canada are the only developed countries I could find that do this. Canada needs people, and the US law dated back to the Emancipation Proclamation to make sure that children of slaves had citizenship = obsolete.
So I agree with Mr. Trump that this policy needs to be changed.
5) What about the fact that Mr. Trump keeps going to Mar al Lago instead of Camp David, and that this seems to be burdening the infrastructure down there? That seems kind of rude to me, and I don't think it's appropriate since he has Camp David available.
A) Should Mr. Trump pay out of his own pocket for Mar al Lagos' and the taxpayers' cost to provide security when he goes there?
B) Should taxpayers pay for security for Mr. Trump's sons to gallivant all over the world in pursuit of the Trump family's business empire?
I'm keeping an open mind and so far I agree with about 32% of Mr. Trump's policies, which is just slightly below his overall approval rate in the latest polls. I do think he is parvenu, though.
Member #4112
03-21-17, 09:25
A tax on incoming products means that we pay, not them! A tax on money transfers into Mexico is a better idea since its mostly Mexicans sending money anyway.You are correct, money flowing from legal and illegal immigrants in the US to Mexico makes up a considerable amount of the Mexican economy. See the attached, $69 Billion, a greater portion of the GDP than oil.
A tax on those transfers seems appropriate - and "departure fee" as it were.
http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/02/10/514172676/mexicans-in-the-u-s-are-sending-home-more-money-than-ever
In all of the debate over immigration, an important fact has been, and continues to be, ignored. The USA needs immigrant workers, documented or undocumented, to do the work that most Americans will not do. This has been true for over 200 years, and will be true for the foreseeable future. When the politicians find a politically acceptable solution to this stark, historical reality, we can put the immigration debate behind us. This is easier said than done, but the fact remains that If there was no opportunity to find remunerative work in the USA, alien immigration would slow to a manageable level, and we would not need an expensive wall. The demagogues could find something else to rant about.
Tres3.
Member #4112
03-21-17, 19:13
In all of the debate over immigration, an important fact has been, and continues to be, ignored. The USA needs immigrant workers, documented or undocumented, to do the work that most Americans will not do. This has been true for over 200 years, and will be true for the foreseeable future. When the politicians find a politically acceptable solution to this stark, historical reality, we can put the immigration debate behind us. This is easier said than done, but the fact remains that If there was no opportunity to find remunerative work in the USA, alien immigration would slow to a manageable level, and we would not need an expensive wall. The demagogues could find something else to rant about.
Tres3.Tres, I don't dispute your argument, but the catch phrase "to do the work that most Americans will not do" is a bit off putting since I have cleaned toilets; mowed lawns, picked okra, beans, berries ie stoop labor; thrown newspapers; sacked groceries; cleaned rat cages for medical studies; dug ditches and footings and sundry other low level labor. It did not pay much but it did pay something.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "to do the work that most Americans are to LAZY to do".
The "social safety net" is both too large and much too generous. We have too many physically able people who simply will not work and would rather be supported by the state. Perhaps the "safety net" should be reserved for those unable to work or fend for themselves but the able bodied should be off of all support and perhaps those jobs will disappear.
Hell, even Bill Clinton forced very moderate changes in the system that resulted the hundreds of thousands coming of the assistance rolls until the Obamanation used an executive order to suspend those modest requirements.
WorldTravel69
03-22-17, 03:00
Check all the last 20 President's?
Who has fired the most the United Sates Attorney Generals at one time and why?
Russians wanted that. Big cover up.
I read this on Twitter.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/10/us/politics/us-attorney-justice-department-trump.html?_r=0
Tres, I don't dispute your argument, but the catch phrase "to do the work that most Americans will not do" is a bit off putting since I have cleaned toilets; mowed lawns, picked okra, beans, berries ie stoop labor; thrown newspapers; sacked groceries; cleaned rat cages for medical studies; dug ditches and footings and sundry other low level labor. It did not pay much but it did pay something.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "to do the work that most Americans are to LAZY to do".
The "social safety net" is both too large and much too generous. We have too many physically able people who simply will not work and would rather be supported by the state. Perhaps the "safety net" should be reserved for those unable to work or fend for themselves but the able bodied should be off of all support and perhaps those jobs will disappear.
Hell, even Bill Clinton forced very moderate changes in the system that resulted the hundreds of thousands coming of the assistance rolls until the Obamanation used an executive order to suspend those modest requirements.
In all of the debate over immigration, an important fact has been, and continues to be, ignored. The USA needs immigrant workers, documented or undocumented, to do the work that most Americans will not do. This has been true for over 200 years, and will be true for the foreseeable future. When the politicians find a politically acceptable solution to this stark, historical reality, we can put the immigration debate behind us. This is easier said than done, but the fact remains that If there was no opportunity to find remunerative work in the USA, alien immigration would slow to a manageable level, and we would not need an expensive wall. The demagogues could find something else to rant about.Tres3.I would suggest that "most Americans" are only unwilling to certain types of work because the wages are ridiculously low. $7.25 an hour as a federal minimum wage is just plain unrealistic. Some states have raised the minimum wage, but others, including my own, have not. So the answer is higher wages, not immigration. Increasing the supply of available workers only depresses the price of labor, and workers are very, very far from receiving the marginal value they add to the product, as can be seen by the ever-increasing ratio of CEO to worker wages and the ever-increasing disparity of income and wealth. Always and everywhere, supply and demand dictate. If the supply of labor is held constant or at a natural level of increase, wages will rise until demand is met. Period, end of story. And yes, this will be reflected in increased prices for some goods and services, but higher wages stimulate the economy because the working classes spend their money, while the rentier class hoards its money, which decreases the velocity of money and is economically stagnating.
Member #4112
03-22-17, 11:06
Check all the last 20 President's?
Who has fired the most the United Sates Attorney Generals at one time and why?
Russians wanted that. Big cover up.
I read this on Twitter.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/10/us/politics/us-attorney-justice-department-trump.html?_r=0WT, your quoting the Gray Lady - New York Times. Hey weren't they the ones who broke the story of Trump Tower being "wiretapped" the suddenly forgot about it?
When the party holding the White House changes they all get the ax. Obama did it after George, George the younger did it after Clinton, Reagan did it after Carter. It is the nature of things - to the victors go the spoils. The Russians? Please don't tok before you post - wait until you finish. Yep the Russians are part of the great Right Wing Conspiracy.
Member #4112
03-22-17, 11:31
I would suggest that "most Americans" are only unwilling to certain types of work because the wages are ridiculously low. $7.25 an hour as a federal minimum wage is just plain unrealistic. Some states have raised the minimum wage, but others, including my own, have not. So the answer is higher wages, not immigration. Increasing the supply of available workers only depresses the price of labor, and workers are very, very far from receiving the marginal value they add to the product, as can be seen by the ever-increasing ratio of CEO to worker wages and the ever-increasing disparity of income and wealth. Always and everywhere, supply and demand dictate. If the supply of labor is held constant or at a natural level of increase, wages will rise until demand is met. Period, end of story. And yes, this will be reflected in increased prices for some goods and services, but higher wages stimulate the economy because the working classes spend their money, while the rentier class hoards its money, which decreases the velocity of money and is economically stagnating.Thanks for the econ 101 lesson, but liberals always forget the other half of the equation. As wages rise so does the cost of the products being produced, resulting in increases in price, which puts the people you are trying to help by raising the minimum wage right back where they started.
But then liberals never understood economics anyway.
Daddy Rulz
03-22-17, 11:33
The Russians? Please don't tok before you post - wait until you finish. Yep the Russians are part of the great Right Wing Conspiracy.The director of the FBI smokes weed? I never knew.
I still think that 45 is going to give way to 46 and that religious whackadoodle will be far worse, I for one am not happy with the impending switch of NCA.
WorldTravel69
03-22-17, 13:41
Yes, you are right.
But no President has fired them all at once, with no replacements ready to step in.
WT, your quoting the Gray Lady - New York Times. Hey weren't they the ones who broke the story of Trump Tower being "wiretapped" the suddenly forgot about it?
When the party holding the White House changes they all get the ax. Obama did it after George, George the younger did it after Clinton, Reagan did it after Carter. It is the nature of things - to the victors go the spoils. The Russians? Please don't tok before you post - wait until you finish. Yep the Russians are part of the great Right Wing Conspiracy.
Rock Harders
03-22-17, 15:25
Thanks for the econ 101 lesson, but liberals always forget the other half of the equation. As wages rise so does the cost of the products being produced, resulting in increases in price, which puts the people you are trying to help by raising the minimum wage right back where they started.
But then liberals never understood economics anyway.Interestingly enough, it is TRUMP (not liberals as you claim) who wants to deport all illegal immigrants and focus on economic nationalism as a way of improving the lot of American workers. As Dickhead correctly states if millions of low skilled ILLEGAL immigrants are removed from the labor supply the wages for the jobs they were ILLEGALLY employed in would be forced upward to the equilibrium point in which American workers would take those jobs. Yes, this in theory has the potential to stimulate some inflation and/or reduce corporate profit margins; as is there is massive asset inflation with no corresponding wage growth so a different approach is certainly warranted.
Daddy Rulz
03-22-17, 16:56
Interestingly enough, it is TRUMP (not liberals as you claim) who wants to deport all illegal immigrants and focus on economic nationalism as a way of improving the lot of American workers. As Dickhead correctly states if millions of low skilled ILLEGAL immigrants are removed from the labor supply the wages for the jobs they were ILLEGALLY employed in would be forced upward to the equilibrium point in which American workers would take those jobs. Yes, this in theory has the potential to stimulate some inflation and/or reduce corporate profit margins; as is there is massive asset inflation with no corresponding wage growth so a different approach is certainly warranted.Katya Adler did a special for the BBC (sorry, can't remember the name) about what's happening in Europe after Brexit and she interviewed Marine le Pen (I think I have the name right) and she kept referring to le Pen as a conservative and le Pen finally said words to the effect that those who continue to describe this as a liberal/conservative fight are on the wrong page. It has moved on past liberal/conservative and what it is now is Nationalism v Globalism. She identifies that as why Brexit happened and why Trump won.
I don't keep up with this stuff as much as most of you guys do but hearing that struck me as ringing true. I think that's what people have been fearing more and more over the last 20 years. Used to be a person could get and keep a gig, raise a family, do all that dad stuff and unless something catastrophic happened you could be stuck in that fucking rut (shudder) that some, hell maybe a lot, of people take comfort in. Now that's not the case and navigating a 50 year life from College to the casket is a lot trickier. That may or may not be true in fact but I think that is the core of the voter rebellion over the last 2 years. It's also the thing that the DNC has to get a handle on if they ever want to get out of the wilderness.
Member #4112
03-22-17, 18:20
Yes, you are right.
But no President has fired them all at once, with no replacements ready to step in.Since they serve at the pleasure of the president and all 90 something of them get the pink slip when the White House changes hands. I did not check to see who holds the record fo firing how many at once but it really does not matter as the AG (Sessions in this case) immediately appoints place holders from ranks of the career AG's so the wheels of justice don't grand to a halt. Probably moves more smoothly with the political appointees out of the picture.
Here is a link regarding the good the bad and the ugly from froth parties regarding replacements of AGs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_of_U.S._attorneys_controversy
Member #4112
03-22-17, 18:35
Interestingly enough, it is TRUMP (not liberals as you claim) who wants to deport all illegal immigrants and focus on economic nationalism as a way of improving the lot of American workers. As Dickhead correctly states if millions of low skilled ILLEGAL immigrants are removed from the labor supply the wages for the jobs they were ILLEGALLY employed in would be forced upward to the equilibrium point in which American workers would take those jobs. Yes, this in theory has the potential to stimulate some inflation and/or reduce corporate profit margins; as is there is massive asset inflation with no corresponding wage growth so a different approach is certainly warranted.First it is the Democrat/Liberal/Progressives who what to raise the minimum wage not Republicans.
Yes it is Trump who wants to deport the illegals drying up the "cheap labor" market - by the way the illegals with skills are in many cases being paid a the normal rate because they will come to work.
Now let's take Clinton's modest work requirement for participation in the social safety net which discharged hundreds of thousands from the federal plantation of welfare and expand it so only the truly needy are assisted then perhaps the LAZY will decide its better to work than starve.
You are going to have to accept the fact many people are just plan lazy, stupid, and simply will not work. You could give them a million dollars and come back a year later and they be right back where they were to start with. Read some of the stories of those who won the lottery millions of dollars and they are right back to squire one and some times worse off.
Daddy Rulz
03-22-17, 19:12
First it is the Democrat/Liberal/Progressives who what to raise the minimum wage not Republicans.Not what he said.
What he said:
Interestingly enough, it is TRUMP (not liberals as you claim) who wants to deport all illegal immigrants and focus on economic nationalism as a way of improving the lot of American workers.That has nothing to do with raising the Federal minimum wage.
You are aware that there are a lot of liberals that are smarter than you are right? You use the world liberal like some people use retard. There are also a lot of conservatives that are smarter than I am. The point is that when all of your ideas come from one side of the pool you can never have a fully developed thought.
Member #4112
03-22-17, 21:41
Not what he said.
What he said:
That has nothing to do with raising the Federal minimum wage.
You are aware that there are a lot of liberals that are smarter than you are right? You use the world liberal like some people use retard. There are also a lot of conservatives that are smarter than I am. The point is that when all of your ideas come from one side of the pool you can never have a fully developed thought.Einstein said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. By that yard stick if the shoe fits wear it. The far far right and left are pretty close to being clinically insane. But the run of the mill Democrat / Liberal / Progressive are trying the same old socialist solutions which totally ignore human nature with the same result over and over again.
Look at the great liberal "successes" welfare, food stamps, Medicaid which were designed according to LBJ to give the poor a leg up and elimate poverty in a generation. That was in the mid 1960's and 55 years later we have more on those programs than ever before.
There is plenty of stupid to go around on both the left and right. It's the same old story of the ant and the grasshopper - guess you guys are the grasshopper since you always want someone else to foot the bill.
TejanoLibre
03-22-17, 21:53
It's really interesting that everything that President Trump said was going to happen or is going to happen or is happening eventually Happens.
Absolutely everything from the smallest and seemingly insignificant pieces of information to the most significant prophecies eventually occur exactly like he said they would no matter how absurd they may have sounded at the time.
And this started a long time before he won the election.
The so called half truths and rants and boasts eventually happen.
Dumb like a Fox ?
Smart enough to win.
Wait and see.
TL.
How come the European countries with the most elements of socialism in their mixed economies consistently rate as the happiest countries in the world? Denmark, Finland, and Sweden are the ones that are always at the top of the happiness scores. Been to all of those countries and they sure seem happy to me, or at least very content. And that's even given the shitty weather.
I agree some people are lazy, stupid, worthless, etc. My prof for intro econ, same guy for micro and macro, big time Republican conservative, called them "4 percenters," and said that this was why the unemployment rate would never get below 4% for any length of time. I took intermediate micro from a member of the Lehman family, who was left of center, and he claimed that a combination of socialism and free trade produced the best results, although that's more of a macro topic. That was the hardest fucking class I ever took at any level, and one thing he did prove to my satisfaction is that tariffs are always wrong due to the "deadweight loss." Took me a couple of weeks to understand the math he put up on that one but when I finally did, I was convinced. Had another prof, Dr. Wen Hai from China, who guest lectured in my graduate level managerial economics class, who proved the same thing with some simpler math that used some calculus. I think Trump knows all this too, and is just pandering to the ignorant with all his talk of tariffs.
So then the question becomes, what do you do with the 4%? Shoot them? Feed them but don't house them such that they are begging on the street? Sterilize them? I tell you what: I would be okay with basing the 4%ers' eligibility for welfare on getting Norplants. That would not bother me a bit. But that only works for females given current technology. Vasectomies are a bit permanent and that shit they make sex offenders take to blunt their sex drives seems a bit extreme. Depo Provera, I think it's called. But if you give all the female welfare recipients Norplant, then you only have to deal with males knocking up women who are not on welfare and can presumably support them. Given women's tendency to hook up with losers for reasons I've never understood, that's probably happening already and I don't see why it would increase.
Maybe instead of giving the 4%er men Depo Provera, we could just make them wear vests in public saying, "I am a lazy, useless fuck and thanks for feeding me!".
Here's someone who should be shot:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/rachel-dolezal-struggles-after-racial-identity-scandal/ar-BByFxyo?li=BBnbfcL
Went to an historically black university and sued for being discriminated against for being white. Then decided she was black and got a job at a public university based on being black. Probably would be categorized as having "borderline personality disorder", based on modern theory. I had a roommate a long time ago who was a dumb ass redneck, and I think he had a more appropriate category, which he called "MFC." The last letter stands for "crazy" and I will let the readers figure out what the first two stand for.
It's really interesting that everything that President Trump said was going to happen or is going to happen or is happening eventually Happens.
Absolutely everything from the smallest and seemingly insignificant pieces of information to the most significant prophecies eventually occur exactly like he said they would no matter how absurd they may have sounded at the time.
And this started a long time before he won the election.
The so called half truths and rants and boasts eventually happen.
Dumb like a Fox ?
Smart enough to win.
Wait and see.
TL.http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/how-president-trumps-predictions-pan-out/ar-BByElXS?li=BBnbcA1
It's pretty easy to predict something will happen if you predict both that it will happen and will not happen. Maybe Trump will change his policy against illegal immigrants with criminal records, and then you can go back to the US! And commit some more crimes there! He changes his policies every day so maybe there is some hope for you!!
So the mean-spirited attempt to gut health care coverage failed miserably. I am LMAO. Now, let's take a serious look at what is right and wrong with Obamacare. I know "liberals don't know anything about economics" but apparently conservatives know less, because the Republicans could not get the job done. I will examine the ACA's most important provisions from the standpoint of a socialist with a fiscal conscience, who was a CPA and hates waste.
1) Universal coverage = good. Every other civilized country has it.
PROS: A more productive and inclusive workforce, fewer people going to the emergency room for minor bullshit, fewer bankruptcies, and it's just the right thing to do.
CONS: 4%ers will milk the system. Per the Canadian experience, wait times for elective procedures will probably increase.
2) The ten "essential services" = mostly good.
PROS: Women can get maternity care. Mentally ill people can get treatment. Drug addicts can get treatment so might not steal your shit.
CONS: Drug addicts can get treatment. I don't like the way this is being done, by substituting other addictive drugs like methadone and suboxone. Junk is junk. Dependency continues.
Non-parents are subsidizing parents. Having children is a personal choice. Of course, property taxes funding schools contain the same subsidies. Education is a public good but those with more children should pay more. Maybe not on a one-to-one basis, simply because it is a public good, but more. Suggest the base be a two-child family. Those with zero pay half that amount, those with one pay 75%, those with three pay 125% and so forth.
Treating the mentally ill is also a public good, and the right thing to do. But, non-compliant schizophrenics and bipolars who will not take their meds should have it stuffed down their throats or be involuntarily confined. This is a revolving door type situation that must be addressed.
3) Income-based subsidies = bad. Must be asset-based as well. Otherwise, assholes like me retire earlier and manipulate the system, rich assholes' kids get a free ride after age 26, and lottery winners don't have to share for their past subsidies.
SOLUTION: Suggest that anyone who has assets equal to ten years' worth of health insurance premiums be ineligible for subsidies. Suggest that retirement funds be included on a sliding scale based on age. For example, a 25 year old making 399% of poverty level and contributing to his or her 401k would be eligible under current rules, plus the retirement contribution would not be counted towards the 399%. They don't need help. So the 401k and IRA contributions that are currently excluded for the purpose of calculating income should be included. Then let's say for the 10x asset test, include 100% of retirement accounts up to age 30 and then reduced that by 3% per year so that by Medicare age, almost all retirement funds would be excluded, because those people will need those to survive. The exact numbers can be be negotiated, but you get my drift.
4) Limiting the re-payment of the subsidy when income is "misunderestimated" = bad. Ripe for manipulation by anyone with any math skills. So get rid of this or maybe make it a once-in-a-lifetime type deal. Or make it less generous, or make it progressively less generous the more times you use it.
5) The 3-1 age ratio, where the oldest can only be charged 3 times as much as the youngest = good. Young people got subsidized for a hell of a long time in all kinds of ways and so now it is payback time. Don't fuck with this.
6) Charging smokers 50% more than non-smokers = good but I'd like to see some numbers on how much more health services they actually use. Of course, they die earlier so help the Social Security system. 50% seems like a number some Democrat pulled out of their ass, so let's see what the budget folks have to say about this. My gut feeling is it should be higher, but then you could argue drinkers and parachute jumpers should be charged more. The smokers I know are lying and not getting caught, similar to what they do with their life insurance. But, life insurance companies investigate and deny claims while the current ACA is just a "check the box and get a discount" type of thing for smokers. Smokers are drug addicts and need to be classified and treated like such for health insurance purposes.
7) Medicaid expansion = mostly good but why cover more than the "10 essentials"? Righties would freak out if they knew Medicaid patients get taxpayer funded transportation to doctors' appointments, and then can get picked up any time later in the day, so they do their shopping, buy their heroin, etc. Entire taxi services have sprung up in small towns in response to this. I know; I worked for one.
8) Lack of work requirements to receive subsidies = bad. Suggest implementing the same requirements as are currently in place to receive TANF and SNAP, and would support raising the age requirement from 50 to 55 or 60. You're still gonna have the 4%ers to deal with but maybe you get it down to 3.7% or something. Have them pick up litter or fill in pot holes or something.
9) Staying on the parents' policy until age 26 = bad. This is ridiculous. 21 and gone unless full time college student and then gone at 23. This messes up the underwriting and is another subsidy for having more unneeded children. I can't believe how infantalized these younger generations are. And also, if you can afford body art and mutilating yourself with piercings, you can afford your own insurance.
That's all I have for now but guys, even in a fucked up country like Argentina, if you are sick you can get treatment without it bankrupting you. I know most argies are technically bankrupt anyway but every reasonably developed country gives its citizens some kind of health care safety net as a matter of course.
AllIWantIsLove
03-25-17, 12:59
...
Non-parents are subsidizing parents. Having children is a personal choice.
...
3) Income-based subsidies = bad. Must be asset-based as well.
...
But we do all benefit from children. Children pay our Social Security. And who cares for old folks in nursing homes? Not other old folks.
My problem with asset based benefits is that it rewards irresponsible spending. Spend every cent you ever earn and you get more benefits than someone who was responsible and saved some of their income. Doesn't seem right to me.
But we do all benefit from children. Children pay our Social Security. And who cares for old folks in nursing homes? Not other old folks.
My problem with asset based benefits is that it rewards irresponsible spending. Spend every cent you ever earn and you get more benefits than someone who was responsible and saved some of their income. Doesn't seem right to me.Are Marxist would probably not.
Are Marxist would probably not.A Marxist.
But we do all benefit from children. Children pay our Social Security. And who cares for old folks in nursing homes? Not other old folks.
My problem with asset based benefits is that it rewards irresponsible spending. Spend every cent you ever earn and you get more benefits than someone who was responsible and saved some of their income. Doesn't seem right to me.It seems to me that if someone else's children pay my Social Security, that's paying me back for paying for quite a bit of their education. You do have a point about the assets, but isolating how they affect the ACA, I for one would not be spending my retirement funds just to get the health insurance subsidy. That would leave me pretty well screwed at age 65. Plus, my plan to exclude some of the retirement assets from the asset calculation would ameliorate this aspect. If you like, we can also put in a "look back" period similar to what Medicaid uses for nursing home eligibility. Come to think of it, that would probably be a good idea.
See? I'm letting others' input shape my plan. If the Republicans had been more willing to do that, they might have gotten something passed.
Thanks for the econ 101 lesson, but liberals always forget the other half of the equation. As wages rise so does the cost of the products being produced, resulting in increases in price, which puts the people you are trying to help by raising the minimum wage right back where they started.
But then liberals never understood economics anyway.Hmm. I stated, "And yes, this will be reflected in increased prices for some goods and services," so could you explain to me again how I forgot the other half of the equation?
But then conservatives never had good reading comprehension skills anyway. Generalize much, Doppelganger?
WorldTravel69
03-25-17, 21:49
https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-maher-says-president-trump-184200198.html
Trump calls himself a good negotiator, but he seems to have forgotten that no one likes an ultimatum. Ultimatums tend to make the other party dig in their heels, unless they are afraid. In this case only a small number of Republicans had to be unafraid, daring, and dig in their heels. As a result Ryan was thrown under the bus. BTW, it was also a bad bill. I do not like Obamacare, but bad as it is, it is better than what the Republicans cobbled together. I had hopes for tax reform, but after this debacle, am not so sure.
Tres3.
Member #4112
03-26-17, 22:02
Hmm. I stated, "And yes, this will be reflected in increased prices for some goods and services," so could you explain to me again how I forgot the other half of the equation?
But then conservatives never had good reading comprehension skills anyway. Generalize much, Doppelganger?In Vegas gambling, getting drunk and chasing women. Short answer get rid of the cheap labor and allow the market to equalize. You said "some" last time I checked that looked a bit like generalization. Raising the minimum wage always ends hurting the people your trying to help, prices for companies using minimum wage workers goes up, their prices go up, company cuts employees. Good example - ObamaCare - cost to provide insurance goes up companies now have part time workers so they don't have to provide expensives health insurance.
You guys always try to control everything and ignore human nature as well as basic economics. People and companies will always maximize to their best interest.
Could not agree with you more on executive compensation. Again go back to the 70's when executives were paid 10's of multiples of a floor worker - The Liberal thinkers of the day decided the executives were too conservative and not aggressive enough. So to increase the executives aggressiveness they decided to tie compensation to productivity. What we got was shortened planning horizons and a focus on short term not on long term health of the company or stockholder value. Now we have this where people are paid 10's of millions. Nobody is worth that much money. Well I might be ;-).
WorldTravel69
03-27-17, 03:06
They do not want your and the Right Wing Bullshit any more.
They want Health Care.
I guess you make a shit load of money and say Fuck all you losers!!!
That is the Real World!!!
And is it not ObamaCare it is the AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE ACT. NOT YOUR RACIST NAME.
I guess FOX did not mention this how the Republicans would Fuck their voters?
SEE Photo.
This is what the Republicans want to Kill all what is needed by the people so that their Health Care would Die with Them.
The rest of what you say, is what You Are Doing Around the World. What a Theocratic you Are. I guess you don't want go to Vegas, because you can get cheap pussy elsewhere?
Your are one selfish Asshole!
In Vegas gambling, getting drunk and chasing women. Short answer get rid of the cheap labor and allow the market to equalize. You said "some" last time I checked that looked a bit like generalization. Raising the minimum wage always ends hurting the people your trying to help, prices for companies using minimum wage workers goes up, their prices go up, company cuts employees. Good example - ObamaCare - cost to provide insurance goes up companies now have part time workers so they don't have to provide expensive health insurance.
You guys always try to control everything and ignore human nature as well as basic economics. People and companies will always maximize to their best interest.
Could not agree with you more on executive compensation. Again go back to the 70's when executives were paid 10's of multiples of a floor worker - The Liberal thinkers of the day decided the executives were too conservative and not aggressive enough. So to increase the executives aggressiveness they decided to tie compensation to productivity. What we got was shortened planning horizons and a focus on short term not on long term health of the company or stockholder value. Now we have this where people are paid 10's of millions. Nobody is worth that much money. Well I might be ;-).
Member #4112
03-27-17, 12:23
You need to stop watching the Communist News Network CNN so much WT69.
Yep those evil Republicans want to kill everyone and cut everyone's healthcare or do they want to only give the average citizen a CHOICE in what that they decide THEY want to buy coverage for? I have three women with their tubes tied but they are still FORCED to have maternity coverage, or employees who don't drink or do drugs have to have rehab coverage and have not had a single employee in over 35 years who needed mental health benefits but I'm still paying pay for those benefits.
My employee benefits costs are much more expensive today where I am FORCED to pay for a basket of "benefits" the government says I have to have but no one wants and it's not just me but my employee's costs are up when they add their dependents.
What about your OBAMACARE individual mandate - all those young kids who where going to pay for all the old farts that gave Obama the finger and just did not sign up.
I have no interest in paying for druggies, alcoholics, smokers, and obese people's health problems. Those problems are theirs not mine, let them pay for their own healthcare problems.
Let'm starve and let'm die. You liberals / progressives / democrats want to save the world - do it with your money NOT MINE.
WorldTravel69
03-27-17, 12:41
Why do they want to Repeal it?
Just fix it. That sounds so much easier and less expensive.
No, they won't do it because it wasn't their program.
You need to stop watching the Communist News Network CNN so much WT69.
Yep those evil Republicans want to kill everyone and cut everyone's healthcare or do they want to only give the average citizen a CHOICE in what that they decide THEY want to buy coverage for? I have three women with their tubes tied but they are still FORCED to have maternity coverage, or employees who don't drink or do drugs have to have rehab coverage and have not had a single employee in over 35 years who needed mental health benefits but I'm still paying pay for those benefits.
My employee benefits costs are much more expensive today where I am FORCED to pay for a basket of "benefits" the government says I have to have but no one wants and it's not just me but my employee's costs are up when they add their dependents.
What about your OBAMACARE individual mandate - all those young kids who where going to pay for all the old farts that gave Obama the finger and just did not sign up.
I have no interest in paying for druggies, alcoholics, smokers, and obese people's health problems. Those problems are theirs not mine, let them pay for their own healthcare problems.
Let'm starve and let'm die. You liberals / progressives / democrats want to save the world - do it with your money NOT MINE.
Member #4112
03-27-17, 13:31
Why do they want to Repeal it?
Just fix it. That sounds so much easier and less expensive.
No, they won't do it because it wasn't their program.There is no way to "fix" this Frankenstein piece of legislation.
Everything which was predicted to happen has happened with this monstrosity as it continues to fail. Double and triple digit increases in premiums, reduction of carriers, soaring deductibles, reduction of services and providers. It just does not work.
The Republican plan while not as onerous as ObamaCare simply did not go far enough in freeing healthcare from government control. Still to many mandated coverage such as drug and mental health. Let the people chose what they want for coverage not the government.
WorldTravel69
03-27-17, 13:36
First, get rid of the blood sucking insurance companies.
Or like my State they told them they can not raise the rates more than 5%.
There is no way to "fix" this Frankenstein piece of legislation.
Everything which was predicted to happen has happened with this monstrosity as it continues to fail. Double and triple digit increases in premiums, reduction of carriers, soaring deductibles, reduction of services and providers. It just does not work.
The Republican plan while not as onerous as ObamaCare simply did not go far enough in freeing healthcare from government control. Still to many mandated coverage such as drug and mental health. Let the people chose what they want for coverage not the government.
I was pleased to see that today a commentator from the conservative Federalist agreed with me that letting Baby Boomers' precious snowflakes stay on their parents' insurance until age 26 was infantilizing them. Of course, he recommended that the provision be kept anyway, for heinous and venal political reasons.
This is an instance where I thought Obamacare barked up some wrong trees, because the idea was to get younger, presumably healthier people to sign up on the subsidized exchanges. Umm, why would they do that if they can continue to suck at their parents' tits for several more years? Plus at this point I am not sure that younger people are all that much healthier since so many of them are fucking junkies. So should the 'core benefits' of health insurance policies include drug treatment? Umm well maybe once but that's it. And I am probably more aligned with my more conservative brethren when I say that not only should there be a single opportunity for drug rehab at insurance policy's (read: subsidizing taxpayers' expense) expense, but there should also be a data base built showing who has already been revived once by Narcan. The second time, let the junkie die. They have made their choice.
Oh, and by the way, 'drug rehab' does not mean just giving them some other yet legal kind of junk, like methadone or suboxone. Again, I am willing to give you one shot at that type of re-hab, or any other type of re-hab, and then you can kick cold turkey in jail or wherever.
Some states seem to be moving in the right direction, such as limiting initial opiate prescriptions to a five days' supply. On the one hand you could say that the opiate epidemic is the confluence of a number of highly complex social factors. On the other hand, I would say that is a complete crock of shit, and the first time you stuck a needle in your arm, you lost your soul forever.
Mental health care is a different story and that needs to remain a basic benefit. The alternatives for society for not treating these people are far worse, and unlike these fucking junkies, they are not responsible for their condition in many if not most cases.
Spassmusssein
03-29-17, 19:48
Keep.
It.
Short and.
Simple!
Repeating 4 the fifth time arguments of last year is worthless + booring.
Let's see what Trump really moves and changes.
And let's talk about having sex.
WorldTravel69
03-30-17, 15:24
Wrong Country.
Argentina is almost dead.
Go Here.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?hl=en&authuser=0&mid=1JsytdNc-5HFJnH8bOOuoHxREvG0&ll=13.734595289093516%2C100.545823571028&z=16
Keep.
It.
Short and.
Simple!
Repeating 4 the fifth time arguments of last year is worthless + booring.
Let's see what Trump really moves and changes.
And let's talk about having sex.
Member #4112
03-30-17, 18:39
Wrong Country.
Argentina is almost dead.
Go Here.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?hl=en&authuser=0&mid=1JsytdNc-5HFJnH8bOOuoHxREvG0&ll=13.734595289093516%2C100.545823571028&z=16After my visit back in 70-71 I can't stand orientals, would do one from the DR first and that's a real reach for an old southern boy.
WorldTravel69
04-01-17, 00:36
So, Doppelganger and a few of you Trump Supports, do you believe in what the Commander and Chief Tweets?
The guy with his hand on the Button?
P. S. I thought they were trying to teach our Kids in School not to be Bullies.
WorldTravel69
04-23-17, 18:51
I guess this fits here, since it is Trumps favorite phrase.
O'Reilly and Fox.
Member #4112
04-24-17, 10:31
Give it a rest WT69. Maybe you need to join the other snowflakes in a group support hug. So what if he kicks ass and does not bother with taking names. While the liberals are teaching their kids to be kind and accepting of other religions and life styles the muslin radicals are teaching their kids how to kill your kids.
While you complaining about the bully stuff how about explaining the fascists on left shutting down free speech on campus?
Go back and look at history - Stalin, Mussolini, Mao - stilling free speech just like our current little group of left wing brown shirts.
WorldTravel69
04-26-17, 21:06
Are you talking about UC Berkeley?
They want another day, May 2nd, so it does not interfere with classes in session.
http://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Ann-Coulter-s-appearance-at-Berkeley-isn-t-11098597.php?cmpid=gsa-sfgate-result
The dumb Blond wants to talk about Alternate Facts. It will just be Her the 3 other Republicans on campus.
Give it a rest WT69. Maybe you need to join the other snowflakes in a group support hug. So what if he kicks ass and does not bother with taking names. While the liberals are teaching their kids to be kind and accepting of other religions and life styles the muslin radicals are teaching their kids how to kill your kids.
While you complaining about the bully stuff how about explaining the fascists on left shutting down free speech on campus?
Go back and look at history - Stalin, Mussolini, Mao - stilling free speech just like our current little group of left wing brown shirts.
Member #4112
04-27-17, 10:40
WT69 come on guy you know it's not just Berkeley. Also it was not a schedule change it was the threat of bodily injury. I guess you missed all the video of the $100,000 in damage from the last "demonstration".
So being a republican and a dumb blond cancels her 1st amendment rights? What's you shirt, pants and shoe size? I'll be sending your Brown Shirt uniform via Federal Express ASAP.
When Warren and Sanders say they are embarrassed by these folks actions and Coulter should be allowed to speak you know your on the wrong side of this.
WorldTravel69
04-27-17, 11:23
She has some Smarts.
She Cancelled.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Ann-Coulter-backing-out-of-UC-Berkeley-speech-11100585.php
I don't care if she speaks, I just don't like the Violence, like when that alt-right personality Milo Yiannopoulos wanted to speak.
In the past, I was there to protest the Vietnam War.
There was no violence at that time.
Just "4 Dead In Ohio.".
WT69 come on guy you know it's not just Berkeley. Also it was not a schedule change it was the threat of bodily injury. I guess you missed all the video of the $100,000 in damage from the last "demonstration".
So being a republican and a dumb blond cancels her 1st amendment rights? What's you shirt, pants and shoe size? I'll be sending your Brown Shirt uniform via Federal Express ASAP.
When Warren and Sanders say they are embarrassed by these folks actions and Coulter should be allowed to speak you know your on the wrong side of this.
Member #4112
04-28-17, 09:53
She has some Smarts.
She Cancelled.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Ann-Coulter-backing-out-of-UC-Berkeley-speech-11100585.php
I don't care if she speaks, I just don't like the Violence, like when that alt-right personality Milo Yiannopoulos wanted to speak.
In the past, I was there to protest the Vietnam War.
There was no violence at that time.
Just "4 Dead In Ohio.".Lets start with Milo, he did not cause the damage and mayhem which occurred - that was the liberal brown shirts who attacked the venue.
The Vietnam protests were anything but peaceful, Does the weather underground, Bill Aires ect. Ring a bell.
Kent State, where a bunch of college idiots charged a group of National Guardsmen armed with rifles & fixed bayonets, separated a small group of Guardsmen, surrounded them on a hill and threatened them to the point they were in fear of their lives. They should have shot more of the idiots. Go back and look at the news reels - the students were in no way "peaceful".
I'm sure you would have sided with England and locked up Ben Franklin, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton - as their speaking freely caused problems.
WorldTravel69
04-28-17, 14:42
In Oakland and Berkeley there are a group of Anarchists. They are not the students of U.C.
They are the ones who starts most of the riots whenever some group wants to make a speech or protest.
It has nothing to do with what you call Brown Shirts.
Most of the violence was done during and after Vietnam was by The Weather Underground, not from California. Yes, there was the Black Panther Party in Oakland, but that was mostly Racial protests.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Weather_Underground#Background.
I have lots photos of the peaceful San Francisco March in 1967.
http://hrmediaarchive.estuarypress.com/san-francisco-march-against-the-war-in-vietnam/
Lets start with Milo, he did not cause the damage and mayhem which occurred - that was the liberal brown shirts who attacked the venue.
The Vietnam protests were anything but peaceful, Does the weather underground, Bill Aires etc. Ring a bell.
Kent State, where a bunch of college idiots charged a group of National Guardsmen armed with rifles & fixed bayonets, separated a small group of Guardsmen, surrounded them on a hill and threatened them to the point they were in fear of their lives. They should have shot more of the idiots. Go back and look at the news reels - the students were in no way "peaceful".
I'm sure you would have sided with England and locked up Ben Franklin, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton - as their speaking freely caused problems.
It makes Your posts sound More erudite when You randomly Capitalize about every Third word.
Or not.
The Pres. Trump report card after 100 days.
1. Tried to block Muslims from coming into the US from certain countries. That idea was blocked by the courts.
2. Promised the faithful that the Affordable Care Act would be repealed by now. That idea hasn't worked out, even with his own Republicans.
3. Promised to build a wall on the US-Mexican border AND Mexico would pay for it. I guess that idea hasn't worked out since he's asking for the money from Congress.
4. Wants to punish 'Sanctuary Cities' for stopping the local police dept. From deporting illegals, by withholding fed. Money from the cities. The courts have stopped that idea.
5. Has repealed all the environmental standards implemented during the Obama years. And gutted the Environmental Protection Dept. By cutting its. Budget.
6. Got us into a very tense situation with North Korea. And has managed to piss off China, Russia, Iran, Syria and a few other countries.
The Pres. Trump report card after 100 days.
1. Tried to block Muslims from coming into the US from certain countries. That idea was blocked by the courts.
2. Promised the faithful that the Affordable Care Act would be repealed by now. That idea hasn't worked out, even with his own Republicans.
3. Promised to build a wall on the US-Mexican border AND Mexico would pay for it. I guess that idea hasn't worked out since he's asking for the money from Congress.
4. Wants to punish 'Sanctuary Cities' for stopping the local police dept. From deporting illegals, by withholding fed. Money from the cities. The courts have stopped that idea.
5. Has repealed all the environmental standards implemented during the Obama years. And gutted the Environmental Protection Dept. By cutting its. Budget.
6. Got us into a very tense situation with North Korea. And has managed to piss off China, Russia, Iran, Syria and a few other countries. Sounds like Trump is living rent-free in your head and you can't get him out.
WorldTravel69
05-01-17, 18:38
You will not here it on FOX.
He compares himself with Andrew Jackson.
He said that Andrew Jackson could have put a stop to the Civil War.
He said that Jackson did not like the way the War was going.
The problem is that he died 16 years before the War.
And he also owned over 200 slaves.
You will not here it on FOX.
He compares himself with Andrew Jackson.
He said that Andrew Jackson could have put a stop to the Civil War.
He said that Jackson did not like the way the War was going.
The problem is that he died 16 years before the War.
And he also owned over 200 slaves.Besides the fake Carla and Pia photos, we get fake news from worldtravel69. This is what Trump actually said regarding his opinion that Andrew Jackson could have prevented the U.S. Civil War: "I mean, had Andrew Jackson been a little later you wouldn't have had the Civil War.'' Continuing, Trump said: "He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War." Trump's reference was correct as Andrew Jackson was really angry about the Nullification Crisis which occurred during his lifetime and which was a seminal event of the ensuing Civil War; the seeds of which were sown long before April 12th, 1861.
WorldTravel69
05-02-17, 01:08
Or Is that what Fox said?
"This is what he said President Trump made a puzzling claim about Andrew Jackson and the Civil War in an interview.
Speaking to the Washington Examiner, Trump wondered why issues that triggered the war could not have been worked out in order to prevent the bloody conflict. Trump praised the accomplishments of Jackson, the populist president he has cited as a role model.
He made the puzzling claim that Jackson was really angry that he saw what was happening in regard to the Civil War. But Jackson died in 1845, and the Civil War didn't begin until 16 years later, in 1861.
Trump then said, People don't ask the question, but why was there the Civil War?.
I wonder why? I guess he skipped history in class.
Besides the fake Carla and Pia photos, we get fake news from worldtravel69. This is what Trump actually said regarding his opinion that Andrew Jackson could have prevented the U.S. Civil War: "I mean, had Andrew Jackson been a little later you wouldn't have had the Civil War.'' Continuing, Trump said: "He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War." Trump's reference was correct as Andrew Jackson was really angry about the Nullification Crisis which occurred during his lifetime and which was a seminal event of the ensuing Civil War; the seeds of which were sown long before April 12th, 1861.
Or Is that what Fox said?
"This is what he said President Trump made a puzzling claim about Andrew Jackson and the Civil War in an interview.
Speaking to the Washington Examiner, Trump wondered why issues that triggered the war could not have been worked out in order to prevent the bloody conflict. Trump praised the accomplishments of Jackson, the populist president he has cited as a role model.
He made the puzzling claim that Jackson was really angry that he saw what was happening in regard to the Civil War. But Jackson died in 1845, and the Civil War didn't begin until 16 years later, in 1861.
Trump then said, People don't ask the question, but why was there the Civil War?.
I wonder why? I guess he skipped history in class.Again, Trump correctly referred to the Ordinance of Nullification. Again, the seeds of the Civil War were sown over a rather extended period of time before the watershed event of April 12th 1861 at Fort Sumter, SC.
It's really not that difficult. Maybe you skipped history class. After skipping reading comprehension class. Again, fake news on your part.
Huh. I read the transcript and Trump did not mention the Ordinance of Nullification at all.
WorldTravel69
05-02-17, 15:48
Was between North and South Carolina in 1832. The Civil War was 1861. Almost 30 years.
The same time period today would have encompassed War World II, Korean, and Vietnam Wars.
I guess not much happened in the South then, except the using of the whip.
I know they were busy in others wars. The Indians wars was one of the longest. 1776 to 1924.
And these few others:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_at_war
The think the Ordinance line was thrown in by FOX to muddy of up what Trump said. The real originators of Fake News.
Huh. I read the transcript and Trump did not mention the Ordinance of Nullification at all.
Well, there was that one little incident between 1832 and 1861 where we stole half of México. Plus the Black Hawk War was in 1832 so there were 3 wars during a thirty year period back then as well. Maybe you were sick that day of class.
I bet Donald J. Trump couldn't spell either 'ordinance' or 'nullification,' and would bet the ranch he had never heard of the Ordinance of Nullification when he said all that nonsense about Andrew Jackson. But tariffs are stupid so that is one thing Andrew Jackson and Trump have in common, supporting stupid tariffs.
For those who aren't convinced that tariffs are stupid, the relevant economic concept is 'deadweight loss.' Neither party benefits, and retaliation always takes place. This goes all the way back to Adam Smith, so Andrew Jackson has no excuse. Donald Trump probably thinks Adam Smith was a golf pro at one of his courses in Scotland.
Here's the math for any of you who can hack it. I learned it from Dale Lehman of the notorious Lehman Brothers, and from Wen Hai, a fairly famous Chinese economist.
http://catalog.flatworldknowledge.com/bookhub/13?e=mcafee-ch05_s03
Oh, and by the way, I hate to tell all those who are so enthralled with Trump's idea of cutting the corporate tax rate, but the corporate tax is completely irrelevant. That tax falls on either shareholders or consumers, or both to some extent. The relevant concept there is the incidence of a tax. So all taxes and tariffs reduce economic activity, always and everywhere. Who bears that burden depends on the basic concepts of elasticity of supply and demand. Tax a necessity and it will fall on the consumer, tax a luxury and it will fall on the producer. That's elasticity of demand. Elasticity of demand tends to be higher in the short run because you have to eat. Elasticity of supply depends on how quickly more of the good can be brought to market. That's more of a long-term concept. We see this with oil. If market prices go up, more oil can be supplied, but not necessarily tomorrow. That's one reason buffer stocks of commodities exist, so that more product can be brought to market immediately when prices are favorable to the producers. But buffers stocks have storage costs, so the more costly the good is to store and insure, the less buffer stock will be held. Perishable goods imply low buffer stocks, and thus price volatility. We see this with fresh fruits and vegetables, cut flowers, etc.
So, one may ask, what about pussy? First of all, it's important to realize the unique nature of pussy. As one of my sociology professors noted, 'pussy is the only thing where you can sell it but you still have it.' The implications are quite profound. Demand for pussy is stable in the long run, but fluctuates in the short run: it increases at closing time, for example. Supply of pussy is virtually infinite but quite elastic: every woman has her price but for those who pretend they don't sell it, the bid price must be very high in terms of long-run economic security, an upper class lifestyle, blah blah blah. See, for example, Melania Trump, or Ivanka Trump.
This is why we as mongers often face 'cartelization,' where chicas at for example Hook refuse, or pretend to refuse, to go for less than some alleged minimum price. But, just as with OPEC, there will always be those who cheat the cartel by going for less, if properly and discreetly approached. Cartelization or price fixing is supposed to be illegal in the US under the Sherman Act and other related legislation, but the current plutocracy has allowed so much industry concentration that the whole economy is one big oligopolized cartel, with prices being rigged in favor of corporations and against the workers.
I'm still waiting for Trump to show his income tax returns. He seems to have a problem with that. I guess he's hideing something. Like not having paid taxes for the last 20 years or more. I know, he's writing off all his losses on failed businesses; like casinos, golf courses and country clubs. Businesses that he used taxpayer money or other peoples money to finance.
Its the middle class / working class people who are the ones paying the taxes in the US.
WorldTravel69
05-03-17, 04:35
This is why:
http://www.argentinaprivate.com/forum/showthread.php?9048-American-Politics-during-the-Trump-Presidency
You Pick:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/331558-trump-spending-bill-a-clear-win
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/congress-spending-bill-wall-trump.html?_r=0
Shut down your Health Care, Until the pour rich spoil child gets what he wants!
Huh. I read the transcript and Trump did not mention the Ordinance of Nullification at all.He didn't have to. He referred to what Andrew Jackson was angry about with regard to the building conflict between the north and the south. And that, according to historians and Jackson himself, was the Nullification Crisis; an important part of South Carolina, Southern and U.S. history.
Was between North and South Carolina in 1832. The Civil War was 1861. Almost 30 years.
The same time period today would have encompassed War World II, Korean, and Vietnam Wars.
I guess not much happened in the South then, except the using of the whip.
I know they were busy in others wars. The Indians wars was one of the longest. 1776 to 1924.
And these few others:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_at_war
The think the Ordinance line was thrown in by FOX to muddy of up what Trump said. The real originators of Fake News.The Civil War was in 1861? Really? Your command of "facts" is even worse than that for which you criticize Trump.
When did the U.S. Civil War start? When South Carolina seceded? When the CSA was formed or when it seceded? When Fort Sumter was attacked? When Lincoln declared war? When the first Union Army soldier stepped into Virginian territory? When the first shot was fired at the Battle of First Manassas? When did the Civil War end? On April 9th 1865? (not 1861). Or did it end after the 1964 Civil Rights Act? To the military wing of the Democratic Party, the Ku Klux Klan, the war never ended.
No rational person considers a conflict of the magnitude of the Civil War without the prologue and epilogue. Your hatred of Trump aside, try putting things into context, as Trump did concerning the matter at hand. Towards that end, you might find Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" helpful.
WorldTravel69
05-03-17, 13:33
It started in 1861 as I said.
How old are you 14.
http://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/american-civil-war-history
The Civil War was in 1861? Really? Your command of "facts" is even worse than that for which you criticize Trump.
When did the U.S. Civil War start? When South Carolina seceded? When the CSA was formed or when it seceded? When Fort Sumter was attacked? When Lincoln declared war? When the first Union Army soldier stepped into Virginian territory? When the first shot was fired at the Battle of First Manassas? When did the Civil War end? On April 9th 1865? (not 1861). Or did it end after the 1964 Civil Rights Act? To the military wing of the Democratic Party, the Ku Klux Klan, the war never ended.
No rational person considers a conflict of the magnitude of the Civil War without the prologue and epilogue. Your hatred of Trump aside, try putting things into context, as Trump did concerning the matter at hand. Towards that end, you might find Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" helpful.
He didn't have to. He referred to what Andrew Jackson was angry about with regard to the building conflict between the north and the south. And that, according to historians and Jackson himself, was the Nullification Crisis; an important part of South Carolina, Southern and U.S. history.He didn't refer to squat. He just bloviated vaguely. The transcript speaks for itself.
WorldTravel69
05-05-17, 03:12
It made it through Congress.
Trump did not read the Bill, he has his people read it to him, in the way he wanted to hear it, with the Crowds cheering in the background, just like on TV.
The problem is that almost 90% of the Congressmen or Women that voted do not know what they voted for.
They had their Interns read the bill. So, they only understood only bits and pieces on what they voted for.
They pushed it onto the Senate, hoping they would know what to do, Because they had no idea what they voted for.
So, all the Medical groups, aka Hospitals and Medical associations said No.
But the insurance companies are Happy with Their Bonus.
Especially the 1% taxes payers. The got a great big tax break.
And we will have to make up the different in the medical costs so they can enjoy it.
So, for the rest of us, like you and Me that do not make over $100,000.000.00 a year, you will have to sell your house to pay for your Hospital bills for you and your Family. And Maybe your Mom and Dad and or maybe your Grandparents.
The only way to have Universal Health like the other 11 or so countries in the world with "Health Care For All" is that we have is too get rid of the Insurance Companies.
The ones with the Great Big Buildings that just collect YOUR money and have nothing to do with your Health Care.
Please think about that.
Please.
Big Boss Man
05-05-17, 18:11
It made it through Congress.
So, for the rest of us, like you and Me that do not make over $100,000.000.00 a year, you will have to sell your house to pay for your Hospital bills for you and your Family. And Maybe your Mom and Dad and or maybe your Grandparents.
Please think about that.
Please.Actually if you are 65, single and make over $85k a year you received a tax break as the bill is currently written. I estimated around $2.4k in taxes saved for myself. However, I am in favor of single payer. I am amazed how often I agree with Charles Krauthammer these days. I guess I failed to follow Robert Frost's advice. "I never dared to be radical when young for fear it would make me conservative when old.".
Actually if you are 65, single and make over $85k a year you received a tax break as the bill is currently written.Can you explain that? $85k is not enough for the investment taxes to kick in, so where is the break? But of course it would be logical for the Republicans to give a tax break to someone making approximately twice the average salary; I just don't see what provision you are talking about.
It made it through Congress. Umm well no because there is the slight matter of the upper house of Congress. It's called the Senate.
To review for those who were sick that day: House of Representatives + Senate = Congress. This is what is known as a bicameral legislature, a feature of the US federal government and also 49 of the 50 states.
msn.com is currently conducting the following poll: 'Would you like to see the GOP health care plan pass into law in its current form?' With over 300k responses so far, 'no' votes are 3 times the number of 'yes' votes. I'm sure Dump will just dismiss it as a fake poll conducted by a fake website with fake viewers.
Big Boss Man
05-05-17, 22:00
Can you explain that? $85k is not enough for the investment taxes to kick in, so where is the break? But of course it would be logical for the Republicans to give a tax break to someone making approximately twice the average salary; I just don't see what provision you are talking about.From what I read, they eliminated the Medicare Part B Premium Adjustment.
From what I read, they eliminated the Medicare Part B Premium Adjustment.You are referring to the IRMAA (income related monthly adjustment amount). Researching this, I see no mention of this being eliminated, only the 0.9% additional Medicare premium and the investment income surtax. Can you post a link or PM me with more info? I doubt I would ever be subject to the IRMAA, but I do advise a few people who might be.
The thing about the IRMAA is it has a two year lookback (it's based on the tax return you filed two years before the year you pay the premium). That really fucks recent retirees who may have been making over $85k when working but sure aren't in retirement. Does that difference get reconciled in some way?
Answer is yes but it sounds like a bit of a hassle:
https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10536.pdf
So you have to file:
https://www.ssa.gov/forms/ssa-44.pdf
But I still don't see any evidence that the IRMAA is repealed under the House bill.
Umm well no because there is the slight matter of the upper house of Congress. It's called the Senate.
To review for those who were sick that day: House of Representatives + Senate = Congress. This is what is known as a bicameral legislature, a feature of the US federal government and also 49 of the 50 states.There's also one big difference bet. The House and the Senate. Its called the filibuster. Which is something I'm sure the Dems will be using to try and stop the repeal efforts by Trumpmeister and his Republican friends in the Senate. So the repeal efforts will have a much harder time getting thru the Senate than the House.
The fact of the matter is the main tenacles of the Affordable Care Act will stay in place no matter what happens.
There's also one big difference bet. The House and the Senate. Its called the filibuster. Which is something I'm sure the Dems will be using to try and stop the repeal efforts by Trumpmeister and his Republican friends in the Senate. I am not sure you have been keeping up with current events, as the filibuster has been greatly bowdlerized by the Rs recently. See "nuclear option.".
DallasNorte
05-06-17, 12:13
I am not sure you have been keeping up with current events, as the filibuster has been greatly bowdlerized by the Rs recently. See "nuclear option.".Thank you Harry Reed (D). ;).
Big Boss Man
05-06-17, 12:13
You are referring to the IRMAA (income related monthly adjustment amount). Researching this, I see no mention of this being eliminated, only the 0.9% additional Medicare premium and the investment income surtax. Can you post a link or PM me with more info? I doubt I would ever be subject to the IRMAA, but I do advise a few people who might be.
The thing about the IRMAA is it has a two year lookback (it's based on the tax return you filed two years before the year you pay the premium). That really fucks recent retirees who may have been making over $85k when working but sure aren't in retirement. Does that difference get reconciled in some way?
Answer is yes but it sounds like a bit of a hassle:
https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10536.pdf
So you have to file:
https://www.ssa.gov/forms/ssa-44.pdf
But I still don't see any evidence that the IRMAA is repealed under the House bill.This was my source.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2017/03/22/in-amended-health-care-bill-gop-doubles-down-on-tax-breaks-for-the-rich-reduced-medicaid-funding/#7169d3fd6b7d.
This was my source.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2017/03/22/in-amended-health-care-bill-gop-doubles-down-on-tax-breaks-for-the-rich-reduced-medicaid-funding/#7169d3fd6b7d.Thanks. As I suspected, there is no mention of the IRMAA. The additional Medicare tax referred to is the 0.9% surcharge that kicks in at $200k for single filers. That tax only applies to wages and self-employment income; in other words, it just increases the existing 1.45% tax on that stuff to 2.35%. Retirement income and investment income are not affected by that. But judging from your estimate of how much of a tax cut you mistakenly thought you would get, your income is high enough that you will probably be able to avoid the soup kitchen without a cut in your Medicare Part B premium. And, if you are subject to the net investment surtax, which also kicks in at $200k for single filers, that 3.8% would go away under this gift to the wealthy. From your calculation, I can glean that your income is at least $214k, but of course I don't know the character of that income.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news but you're barking up the wrong tree on that one. I'm sure the plutocrats will give you a nice cut in your marginal income tax rate, though.
Thank you Harry Reed (D). ;).Yeah, that was one calculated risk that was sure miscalculated. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Or I think a wise man once said something about paybacks.
From what I read, they eliminated the Medicare Part B Premium Adjustment.The Part B Premium Adjustment was Marxist......the cost of goods and services should be the same for all.....not based on ones ability to pay.
This was my source.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2017/03/22/in-amended-health-care-bill-gop-doubles-down-on-tax-breaks-for-the-rich-reduced-medicaid-funding/#7169d3fd6b7d.BBM....I do not see anything in your source that addressed Part B cost. Part B escalation was in place before the Obamanation.
The Part B Premium Adjustment was Marxist......the cost of goods and services should be the same for all.....not based on ones ability to pay.Well, I am not a Marxist but a bit to the left, but I agree with you, albeit for a different reason. Once the Medicaid payroll ceiling was lifted, everyone was paying the same 1.45% of their income for a defined benefit. Hence the higher wage earners have already paid in more nominal dollars for the same benefit. So I think the premium adjustment is double taxation. I think the same thing about taxation of Social Security, and let's not forget what asshole started that. Hmm? Any guesses on that one? Hint: the same cocksucker that decided to tax unemployment benefits.
I guess Medicare and health insurance really don't matter because Rep. Raul Labrador, R-ID, assures us that 'no one ever died from not having health care.' I predict that Representative Labrador's remark will dog him for quite some time.
I guess Medicare and health insurance really don't matter because Rep. Raul Labrador, R-ID, assures us that 'no one ever died from not having health care.' I predict that Representative Labrador's remark will dog him for quite some time.Senator Labrador is as bad as former Republican Idaho Sen. Larry Craig who was caught hanging around men's bathroom stalls, looking thru the peep holes, trying for gay sex sessions. He and his 'wide stance' excuse was laughable. He also was seen cruising around Wash. DC in gay neighborhoods trying to pick up guys, and at train stations. Plus was seen in dept. Stores trying to do the same thing. A real sicko.
All the while professing his love of God, home and how much he loved his wife; and wasn't gay.
It's questionable if Labrador will be able to retrieve his reputation after this.
WorldTravel69
05-14-17, 13:18
Very strange things happening.
http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2017/05/10/oval-office-fumigated-after-complaints-of-overwhelming-smell-of-bullshit/
WorldTravel69
05-18-17, 18:40
Here is how much Trump is costing us in his first 118 days.
How much will it be in 4 years?
Daddy Rulz
05-18-17, 19:20
Here is how much Trump is costing us in his first 118 days.
How much will it be in 4 years?Pence won't cost nearly as much per day.
WorldTravel69
05-26-17, 19:13
Trump is having trouble coming back to the U.S.
Rc Collins
06-08-17, 21:43
Conservative Republican Neil Cavuto who is known for occasionally blasting his republican party members has now done it to the Donald. In classic Cavuto fashion he tells Trump he is the problem not the media. This comes on the heels of the WSJ scorching piece on Trump not even a year into his presidency!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZN7inuPXA8
The only real question at this point is if Dump is a bigger asshole than Nixon. Personally I think Nixon was the more evil of the two but Dump is much stupider. I think the end result will be the same for both, but Dump will walk away with a lot more money than Nixon did. My guess is that at this point, Dump regrets ever getting involved in politics. He's in way over his square orange head.
WorldTravel69
06-17-17, 20:56
He just almost closed the door on Cuba, because of their Human Rights violations.
But, Russia is Okay.
Watch this. I guess Trump does not know about this.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3182620/?ref_=nv_sr_1
The movie "Bitter Harvest.".
Stalin killed over 7-10 million Ukrainians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
HappyGoLucky
07-10-17, 19:41
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/29/health/hookers-for-health-care/index.html
He just almost closed the door on Cuba, because of their Human Rights violations.
But, Russia is Okay.
Trump uses "alternative facts", so he is never confused by the actual facts.
Tres3.
PickCherry12
07-11-17, 17:48
He just almost closed the door on Cuba, because of their Human Rights violations.
But, Russia is Okay.
Watch this. I guess Trump does not know about this.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3182620/?ref_=nv_sr_1
The movie "Bitter Harvest.".
Stalin killed over 7-10 million Ukrainians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HolodomorIronically, the Cubans in Miami support him on this one even though they know that their people back home will then continue to suffer from economic hardship for many years to come. Hard to believe eh!
Ironically, the Cubans in Miami support him on this one even though they know that their people back home will then continue to suffer from economic hardship for many years to come. Hard to believe eh!You are correct. It is very hard to believe. I live in Miami and am constantly amazed by the folks who ignore that the embargo hurts "man in the street" Cubans far more than it hurts the Castros. Just like Fat Boy in North Korea, the poor people suffer so that the elites can get fat.
Tres3.
WorldTravel69
07-25-17, 03:33
Here is part of John McCain's plan for his brain Surgery.
https://www.bustle.com/p/would-john-mccains-surgery-be-covered-under-trumpcare-the-costs-could-be-atrocious-71427
Can You afford it?
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/17/15983944/mccain-uninsured-surgery-cost-76000
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.4 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.