US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Funny how this "sheep" thing is always used by those who can't think for themselves.

Don't worry, we don't hold it against you. You pretty much gave yourself away with your Avatar and your postings in this thread.

[Dowly]

It's an alpaca you ignorant racist!

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Dowly

It's an alpaca you ignorant racist!

yup, proving my point yet again about so called "tolerant liberals".

you are so easy to bait...

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

yup, proving my point yet again about so called "tolerant liberals".

you are so easy to bait...

Talk about being easily baited.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by vienna

Well, you know, there were darn few of them who actually did vote for Trump, himself, and all those who voted for him because they didn't want vote for Hillary now have no real reason to continue to vote for him...


<O>

Au contraire. Speaking as someone who did not vote for Donald Trump 2 years ago, now that I see he means what he says and does support the conservative agenda, I sure will vote for him next time. And I work with and know quite a few other guys that say the same thing. There are a lot of votes he did not get in his first election that he is earned by taking on the left and the dishonest media and not buckling under.

[August]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Au contraire. Speaking as someone who did not vote for Donald Trump 2 years ago, now that I see he means what he says and does support the conservative agenda, I sure will vote for him next time. And I work with and know quite a few other guys that say the same thing. There are a lot of votes he did not get in his first election that he is earned by taking on the left and the dishonest media and not buckling under.

Add me to that list. Last time I voted for Johnson, mainly because he had a slightly better shot at beating Clinton in this state than Trump did but this time i'm gonna waste my vote on Trump (Dems will take the state regardless). First president in my lifetime that actually tries to keep his campaign promises.

[Platapus]

Well at least we know that Trump tries to tell the truth.

He is just not very good at it I guess.

[nikimcbee]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Au contraire. Speaking as someone who did not vote for Donald Trump 2 years ago, now that I see he means what he says and does support the conservative agenda, I sure will vote for him next time. And I work with and know quite a few other guys that say the same thing. There are a lot of votes he did not get in his first election that he is earned by taking on the left and the dishonest media and not buckling under.

Ditto.


Who do you think will be the pre-selected dem candidate?

[nikimcbee]

The beast?
Token Bernie?

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by vienna

It depends on what you mean by 'correct'. Do you mean are they legal? they are, unless they violate the Constitution, something the court system, with the SCOTUS being the final arbiter, has to determine if there is a challenge. Do you mean are they properly issued? If they follow the process set down for the vetting of an EO before issuance, they very most likely are 'correct', although, again, if found to be un-Constitutional, then they are not 'correct'. F you mean are they ethically or morally 'correct', that is determined on an order by order basis and is more likely to be judged by history. The forced internment of American citizens of Japanese descent in concentration camps by the US military in 1942 upon an Executive Order issued by Franklin Roosevelt, was a grossly immoral, unethical, and, ultimately, illegal use of the power of the EO; it is still a great national embarrassment for a nation that prides itself of equal rights, morality, ethics, and the evenly applied rule of law...














<O>

I was thinking more like in the voters point-of-view

I have been rethinking ´cause a voter whether he or she is for or against the President will base his or her " it's a correct EO" or "it's not a correct EP" on their political standpoint and not from a neutral standpoint.

I still say it must not depend on how many EO a president makes or do.

Markus

[Buddahaid]

Of course, it's not a contest to see who make the most. I wish they could make none personally as it stinks of imperial edict. My vote will depend on who stinks less to me, not the party they represent.

The first thing I do is toss every bit of mail sloganeering into the paper recycle bin without a glance.

[eddie]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Au contraire. Speaking as someone who did not vote for Donald Trump 2 years ago, now that I see he means what he says and does support the conservative agenda, I sure will vote for him next time. And I work with and know quite a few other guys that say the same thing. There are a lot of votes he did not get in his first election that he is earned by taking on the left and the dishonest media and not buckling under.

Dishonest media? Because it doesn't flatter the huckster called Trump,lol You and the rest of the conservatives seem to forget the dishonest Bull crap you put out about Obama at times! Forget about Operation Jade Helm 15 already!?! What a stupid bunch of BS that was. Obama going to declare Martial Law down in Texas, so even the stupid Governor of Texas fell for it!! Then you had to bring in big tough guy Chuck Norris to say the same thing! Such class! Then the next big bag of BS the right put out was about all the rounds of ammunition the Dept of Homeland Security was buying secretly, because Obama was going to declare Martial Law again and take over the country!! Then when the riots broke out in Baltimore in 2015 after the shooting of Freddy Gray, Obama was going to declare Martial Law AGAIN in that city this time!! Is all that Martial Law stuff still going to come true or do we still have to wait fror Obama to declare it,lol

[Catfish]

Sometimes i think i'm an alien when i read those pro-Trump comments

I just heard in the radio that the people in the rust belt are "a bit" disappointed with Trump, because he obviously did not mean the middle class and workers, when he promised all those benefits out of the blue. In the rust belt there are less jobs now, a rise of ~4 percent for those fewer who kept their jobs and steel is becoming so expensive that the economy does not really benefit.

True is Trump reduced taxes for big business, while taking the money for that from health care, firing workers, unemployment insurance and reducing job programs initiated by his predecessors. Did i mention his crashing the EPA with his puppet Pruitt, the reducing of former protected nature parks to allow companies to mine and driill in those areas.
While the whole world sans China and Russia has accepted to do something pro environment, Trump drops all of it and makes the USA step back fifty years.

That he rallies against women, stokes fear of foreigners and incites violence against anyone who has left a bit of common sense is his usual bull and it seems people there begin to see through that diversion. If he is a voice of something, it's that of big business.


OT since someone mentioned the Trump derangement syndrome.

Yes, i 'suffer' from it, 100 percent. And you know why?
The sheer sight of this man makes me vomit. He appeals to the lowest instincts. His body language, his hate speeches, his "trying-to-look-clever"-look, his grinning.. Yes. I despise him, completely. This "man" is a spoiled brat, a poser, dumb and incompetent. A divider and a liar.

And this has nothing to do with democrats or republicans, or with a step left or a step right, this is about stepping backward in all fields, a failure, from science, to empathy, to unification of US people, to diplomacy, to enlightenment, to sympathy, to economics. Incompetence on steroids.

So there you have it.
I know this will not change anything, i'm not that delusional

[Skybird]

Whatever the hidden and long-term costs of Trumponomics - they will need to be paid, without mercy. Those who now support them, then still will not admit the negative he brought, becasue that would mean they need to admit they failed in their judgement. And so, most likely the deepening rifts and divisions in society, this high employment rate at the cost of many workers being unable to plan for the future and their high age with the wages they are beign paid, the sharpening of conflicts between rich and not-so-rich, will continue, long after Trump is gone again one day.


I do not know if the Russians planned this far and expected this long- termed consequences when they started to invest into Trump. But it certainly is a great strategic benefit they enjoy from this, with even more geostrategic benefits resulting from it.


Much shine, little substance, in Trump. But many fall for right this: the shine. The willingness to get fooled like this, the easyness by which this folly can be imposed on people, shows how deep the dissatisfaction with the existing parties, and their rites and habits , egoism and corruption, indeed was and is.



I stick to it: Trump is not so much the cause, he is merely a symptom.

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Catfish

The sheer sight of this man makes me vomit.

:

Funny, that is how I feel about Merkel and most of the Euro-trash politicos who could not make a tough decision if their life depended on it. They love to criticize the U.S.A., but always expect the U.S.A. to bail them out.

What foreigners are too dense to realize is that the fact that foreigners, especially Europeans don't like POTUS is actually a bonus to Trump supporters. It means he is doing a good job for Americans.