The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Will Absolute said:
One of the links I quoted recognizes Kennedy as the wealthiest president, the other doesn't as he had yet to inherit the trust money when he died. As I said, it's not worth arguing about. How much 'work' he did depends on your view of the life of a rich, playboy politician.
Click to expand...

...or your ignorance, I suppose.
 
Will Absolute said:
In fairness to Bush and Clinton, it was a different era and a much less equivocal war. That's not to say their actions were morally justifiable.

As for JFK's war service, I may be overly cynical here but you have to remember that the Kennedy's were super competitive, both within the family and outside it, and saw the war as another arena in which to compete and excel.
Click to expand...

Yes because it could never be about patriotism or sense of duty. You simply can't entertain any other reason, can you?

What's this book that you read about JFK that formed your opinions for you?
 
Will Absolute said:
In fairness to Bush and Clinton, it was a different era and a much less equivocal war. That's not to say their actions were morally justifiable.

As for JFK's war service, I may be overly cynical here but you have to remember that the Kennedy's were super competitive, both within the family and outside it, and saw the war as another arena in which to compete and excel.
Click to expand...
He also continued serving into the following year after his older brother (and heir-apparent) was KIA on the Western Front. I don't see a reason to be dismissive of his service. And I am among those who think he was rather overrated as a President...
 
The Simpsons episode with Ralph Wiggum being courted for nominee of both parties for POTUS is currently on and it's depressingly close to reality.
 
Rado_N said:
The Simpsons episode with Ralph Wiggum being courted for nominee of both parties for POTUS is currently on and it's depressingly close to reality.
Click to expand...

The closest Simpsons parallel is Trash of the Titans, tbf.

Well, you know, other than that time they actually depicted him as President.
 
Mockney said:
The closest Simpsons parallel is Trash of the Titans, tbf.

Well, you know, other than that time they actually depicted him as President.
Click to expand...
Which according to Matt Groening was the most ridiculous thing they could think of.
 
Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal.
 
Grinner said:
Yes because it could never be about patriotism or sense of duty. You simply can't entertain any other reason, can you?

What's this book that you read about JFK that formed your opinions for you?
Click to expand...

When the person you're trying to oppose does something you'd otherwise approve of, question their motives!
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...ump-nepotism-laws_us_5859256ce4b0b3ddfd8e8f75

Nepotism laws should not apply to Trump.
It's OK if he offers presidential pardon to followers when they break the law.
Since the conflict of interest are unprecedented, old rules should be discarded and new ones thought up.

:lol: Welcome to the United States of Trumpica!
Click to expand...
if the argument is that the law is only 50 years old then will newt say the same for the part of the declaration that states "one nation under God"?
 
vi1lain said:
Not gonna happen that easy for 2 reasons

1 - Whites are unlikely to vote for another black president so soon after Obama and especially after Trump considering the racial vitriol he's come out with. Regardless of Trump's performance the "deplorables" will either feel justified in voting for Trump (if he does well) and therefore reject any "politically correct" candidate. Or, if Trump performs badly, they'll feel resentful and still reject the "corrupt" media et all, and still reject any politically correct candidate. The best way to get around this is to get someone who fits their idea of a success (powerful white male, preferably rich with a good looking wife and kids). 61 million voters who voted for Trump is nothing to be sniffed at or ignored, and the Dems need someone who can take quite a handful of those votes back.

2 - Obama didn't accommodate black people in quite the way he said he would while he was campaigning, and in the aftermath of a Trump presidency I doubt black people believe another black person can win, or they won't believe them even if they run anyway. Most black people I've spoken to voted for Hillary because the prospect of Trump was too scary, but actually preferred Bernie.

If the Dems can get a younger version of Bernie, who can still appeal to the blue collar bible belt, they'll be onto a winner.
Click to expand...

1. I don't think it's this simple. The vast majority of whites who voted for Trump were life long Republicans with maybe a few exceptions. Trump actually had significantly less votes than Romney or McCain, which puts into perspective this supposed 'whitelash'. People didn't switch parties, people who voted for Obama didn't suddenly think 'Oh I'm angry there's a black president today'. That wouldn't make sense, it's people who didn't vote for Obama who are angry. Hillary won the popular vote but couldn't get out enough of her base in the swing states. She even switched money from key states to unlikely states as she was aiming for a landslide.

Trump will have his base support and perform on par in terms of numbers in the next election. The question is if the Dem nominee can perform better than Hillary, not if they can win over 'The Deplorables.

2. Well Dems major issue was getting the black vote to actually vote this time. Whether that was voter supression or blacks not being enthused by Hillary is another matter. Obama though is the patron saint of Black America regardless of his actual performance.

Blacks actually overwhelmingly voted for Hillary over Bernie in the primaries.

I'd imagine anyone as far left as Bernie would be ripped up by the corporate media in the event of an election.
 
WackyWengerWorld said:
1. I don't think it's this simple. The vast majority of whites who voted for Trump were life long Republicans with maybe a few exceptions. Trump actually had significantly less votes than Romney or McCain, which puts into perspective this supposed 'whitelash'. People didn't switch parties, people who voted for Obama didn't suddenly think 'Oh I'm angry there's a black president today'. That wouldn't make sense, it's people who didn't vote for Obama who are angry. Hillary won the popular vote but couldn't get out enough of her base in the swing states. She even switched money from key states to unlikely states as she was aiming for a landslide.

Trump will have his base support and perform on par in terms of numbers in the next election. The question is if the Dem nominee can perform better than Hillary, not if they can win over 'The Deplorables.

2. Well Dems major issue was getting the black vote to actually vote this time. Whether that was voter supression or blacks not being enthused by Hillary is another matter. Obama though is the patron saint of Black America regardless of his actual performance.

Blacks actually overwhelmingly voted for Hillary over Bernie in the primaries.

I'd imagine anyone as far left as Bernie would be ripped up by the corporate media in the event of an election.
Click to expand...

Nah he beat both comfortably.
 
langster said:
I think you are confusing posters there. I think you meant Irwin instead.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Irwin's a Jeremy Corbyn supporter, hardly right-wing. The only right-winger he's liked is probably Ronaldo or Beckham.
 
langster said:
I think you are confusing posters there. I think you meant Irwin instead.
Click to expand...

I can't confirm or not now because the thread looks to be deleted but a thread about racial supremecy was started by a poster with both Dennis and Irwin in his username. If it's the same poster or not I can no longer confirm. But I tend to think it's the same poster.
 
WackyWengerWorld said:
I can't confirm or not now because the thread looks to be deleted but a thread about racial supremecy was started by a poster with both Dennis and Irwin in his username. If it's the same poster or not I can no longer confirm. But I tend to think it's the same poster.
Click to expand...
It's not, that one was just Irwin.
 
WackyWengerWorld said:
Apologies all round. His numbers must have gone up from last time I checked. Still not a massive amount more than Romney.
Click to expand...
Yeah there's been a few million more votes counted since election day, only been finalised in the last week or so. I'm sure you aren't the only one to get tripped up on it as there were plenty of images going around twitter citing it a month or so back.
 
WackyWengerWorld said:
Apologies all round. His numbers must have gone up from last time I checked. Still not a massive amount more than Romney.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're probably thinking of the immediate aftermath figures, but that was before they finished tallying up all the votes in California etc.
 
Ubik said:
Yeah there's been a few million more votes counted since election day, only been finalised in the last week or so. I'm sure you aren't the only one to get tripped up on it as there were plenty of images going around twitter citing it a month or so back.
Click to expand...

Cheesy said:
Yeah, you're probably thinking of the immediate aftermath figures, but that was before they finished tallying up all the votes in California etc.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, I was talking solace in him underperforming prior candidates. He's obviously swept up more populist votes though.....SAD....BIGLY
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
:lol:

It was only a matter of time.
Click to expand...

I'm still sort of sure the racial supremist poster had both Denis and Irwin in his username. Which would be blasphemy to United fans obviously but also football fans generally, I did like Irwin the player (note - not the racist poster).
 
WackyWengerWorld said:
Pretty much, I was talking solace in him underperforming prior candidates. He's obviously swept up more populist votes though.....SAD....BIGLY
Click to expand...
Well he still finished below Romney in %age terms, and Clinton got about 3 million votes more than he did, so he's not exactly in a strong position either. And his latest favourable net rating is still in the negative range, which is pretty unheard of for a President-elect.
 
WackyWengerWorld said:
I'm still sort of sure the racial supremist poster had both Denis and Irwin in his username. Which would be blasphemy to United fans obviously but also football fans generally, I did like Irwin the player (note - not the racist poster).
Click to expand...

No it was definitely Irwin, 100% certain, not only racist supremacy but gender supremacy as well, the thread was quickly deleted after his last post. He hasn't posted since.
 
DenisIrwin said:
Well, I used to go to the races regularly but decided it was a mug's game. So no, not a racist anymore.
Click to expand...

:lol: I know you have a similar username but you and the Irwin Wacky got you confused with couldn't be more different in posting style and your political views. You seem like a thoroughly decent chap and always post decent links or replies. Irwin, well, we all know what his views are like. :nervous:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.