The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nah it's beyond the pale. He's fecking 10 years old. Apology or not, she made a grave mistake and usually there's consequences for that.

There's enough material on Trump to last a lifetime without going after some kid who literally no choice about anything.
Barron seems like the only trump I could sit down with, smoke a joint and sip a whiskey sour without punching them in the neck.
 
It's so fecking immature. Being an adult involves making loads of tough decisions. You often have to choose the "least bad". That's life. You don't get to flounce off and do nothing because your perfect outcome isn't one of the choices available.

Yes, you do. You emphatically do. The point of a democracy is to vote for who you want to represent you. Even in Michigan, the closest state this time, the difference was 10,000+ votes. Each individual vote is symbolic. I chose not to send a symbolic message that I want Hillary Clinton, a centrist war mongering liar whose only interest is power for power's sake to be president. I sent that same message in the primaries where I and other Michigan voters helped Bernie Sanders to a historic upset.

The Democratic party chose not to heed those lessons nor pay any attention to her unprecedented unfavorables and rigged the primary in her favor. She chose not to campaign in the rust belt states or offer anything to the disaffected people here. Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party are not entitled to my vote, they have to earn it and they failed to do so. I didn't go around campaigning for people not to vote or whatever. I simply voted my conscience. The only way you'll get me to feel bad about it is if he won by 1 vote. But the presidential election wasn't decided by 1 vote and it never will be. Individual voting is symbolic and people should vote for what they believe in. Maybe then we might be able to vote for an actual liberal.
 
How can a fact be supportive of different sides of an argument.

A fact is a fact regardless of political affiliation.

Yet what actions you take upon seeing the facts is very much related to you political opinion.
Meaning, the same facts can indeed be - and usually are - supportive of different sides of an argument.
That's the very essence of different political views.
 
Not laughing now are you bitches?

President Donald Trump signs an executive order for a wall to be built along the southern US border with Mexico

trump-building-wall-gif.gif
 
Yes, you do. You emphatically do. The point of a democracy is to vote for who you want to represent you. Even in Michigan, the closest state this time, the difference was 10,000+ votes. Each individual vote is symbolic. I chose not to send a symbolic message that I want Hillary Clinton, a centrist war mongering liar whose only interest is power for power's sake to be president. I sent that same message in the primaries where I and other Michigan voters helped Bernie Sanders to a historic upset.

The Democratic party chose not to heed those lessons nor pay any attention to her unprecedented unfavorables and rigged the primary in her favor. She chose not to campaign in the rust belt states or offer anything to the disaffected people here. Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party are not entitled to my vote, they have to earn it and they failed to do so. I didn't go around campaigning for people not to vote or whatever. I simply voted my conscience. The only way you'll get me to feel bad about it is if he won by 1 vote. But the presidential election wasn't decided by 1 vote and it never will be. Individual voting is symbolic and people should vote for what they believe in. Maybe then we might be able to vote for an actual liberal.

I voted because I'm pragmatic to a fault but I agree with Eboue.
 
Yes, you do. You emphatically do. The point of a democracy is to vote for who you want to represent you. Even in Michigan, the closest state this time, the difference was 10,000+ votes. Each individual vote is symbolic. I chose not to send a symbolic message that I want Hillary Clinton, a centrist war mongering liar whose only interest is power for power's sake to be president. I sent that same message in the primaries where I and other Michigan voters helped Bernie Sanders to a historic upset.

The Democratic party chose not to heed those lessons nor pay any attention to her unprecedented unfavorables and rigged the primary in her favor. She chose not to campaign in the rust belt states or offer anything to the disaffected people here. Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party are not entitled to my vote, they have to earn it and they failed to do so. I didn't go around campaigning for people not to vote or whatever. I simply voted my conscience. The only way you'll get me to feel bad about it is if he won by 1 vote. But the presidential election wasn't decided by 1 vote and it never will be. Individual voting is symbolic and people should vote for what they believe in. Maybe then we might be able to vote for an actual liberal.

Your vote is your right. You and people like you succeeded in sending a message to Democratic party.

It also enabled a Trump win. It's fine telling the Democratic party to find the candidate that suits all of you, but good luck with the next 4/8 years. In the end, it boiled down to one party voting pragmatically and the other needing the party to find a good candidate.
 
Back on topic...

Holland says a big feck you to Trump and his archaic stance on abortion and women's reproductive rights and contraception.


Netherlands like a boss.
I'll consider trying to not feel schadenfreude wehen they miss the next major football tournament.
 
There's a good breakdown of the Kushner Foundation's donations to Israeli institutions and organizations here - http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.757068 . According to this - https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.91e674df3d20 - donations to institutions located in the West Bank amounted to $58,500 of a total of $8.5 million donated over a three year period.
The Kushner family donated 8.5 Million according to the article. I'm more concerned about their partiality.
 
Your vote is your right. You and people like you succeeded in sending a message to Democratic party.

It also enabled a Trump win. It's fine telling the Democratic party to find the candidate that suits all of you, but good luck with the next 4/8 years. In the end, it boiled down to one party voting pragmatically and the other needing the party to find a good candidate.

But it's not quite a "your people" situation. There wasn't a neverhillary campaign. Some people just couldn't in good conscience vote for someone who doesn't represent them.
 
Yes, you do. You emphatically do. The point of a democracy is to vote for who you want to represent you. Even in Michigan, the closest state this time, the difference was 10,000+ votes. Each individual vote is symbolic. I chose not to send a symbolic message that I want Hillary Clinton, a centrist war mongering liar whose only interest is power for power's sake to be president. I sent that same message in the primaries where I and other Michigan voters helped Bernie Sanders to a historic upset.

The Democratic party chose not to heed those lessons nor pay any attention to her unprecedented unfavorables and rigged the primary in her favor. She chose not to campaign in the rust belt states or offer anything to the disaffected people here. Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party are not entitled to my vote, they have to earn it and they failed to do so. I didn't go around campaigning for people not to vote or whatever. I simply voted my conscience. The only way you'll get me to feel bad about it is if he won by 1 vote. But the presidential election wasn't decided by 1 vote and it never will be. Individual voting is symbolic and people should vote for what they believe in. Maybe then we might be able to vote for an actual liberal.
No, it didn't. There's plenty of stuff to legitimately get pissed about, rigging isn't one of them.
 
But it's not quite a "your people" situation. There wasn't a neverhillary campaign. Some people just couldn't in good conscience vote for someone who doesn't represent them.
But the only thing that was ever going to cause is President Trump.
 
But the only thing that was ever going to cause is President Trump.

Because I have a predisposition to dislike socialists, I'm blaming Bernie for Trump. Look out for "MTF's History of America", Chapter 13 in the future. "A socialist seriously thought he might become POTUS, but all that resulted was a populist. Don't trust socialists."
 
But it's not quite a "your people" situation. There wasn't a neverhillary campaign. Some people just couldn't in good conscience vote for someone who doesn't represent them.

It is a high price for good conscience to pay when you inadvertently end up enabling Trump with an agenda that may be harmful for all of us for sometime, and when you consider the SC judges appointment and re-districting, probably decades. Again, I admire your values, but the pragmatic side in me thinks you've cut your nose to spite your face.

It is the most striking aspect of this election for me. Religious votes ideally should go for the candidate with high moral values as necessitated by their religious belief. That bloc voted pragmatically for the Supreme court factor.
 
It is the most striking aspect of this election for me. Religious votes ideally should go for the candidate with high moral values as necessitated by their religious belief. That bloc voted pragmatically for the Supreme court factor.
Evangelicals in this country have been hypocrites longer than most politicians. They are the perfect example of 'a means to an end' - values be damned.

C3CPAjKUUAAB-aV.jpg:large
 

The ban in stupid (not least because, if he's going to be consistent in terms of what he's supposedly trying to achieve then Saudi Arabia and Pakistan belong on the list) and illiberal, but the countries covered only include a small minority of the world's Muslims.

The Kushner family donated 8.5 Million according to the article. I'm more concerned about their partiality.

Yes $8.5 million to Israeli institutions as a whole, but with only $58,500 of that going to institutions beyond the Green Line, i.e. in the West Bank - it's a minuscule amount.

Also, of that $8.5 million it looks like most of it has gone to hospitals such as Shaare Zedek in Jerusalem which, like all hospitals in Israel, both treat and are staffed by Jews and Arabs alike (see here for an article on Shaare Zedek - https://www.google.ie/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/shaare-zedek-the-hospital-where-israeli-and-arab-doctors-are-working-together-to-save-lives-a7458466.html?amp?client=safari)

So it's probably reasonable to conclude that the Kushners' money has done more to help Arabs in Israel than most, and almost certainly more than anyone criticizing them for these donations. This is not to deny their Zionism or the problems with the son's suitability and probable partiality in his new role.
 
Evangelicals in this country have been hypocrites longer than most politicians. They are the perfect example of 'a means to an end' - values be damned.

C3CPAjKUUAAB-aV.jpg:large

Agreed. I would also say that there is a decent base of left leaning evangelicals too. All methodist churches in Connecticut were strongly anti Trump.
 
Evangelicals in this country have been hypocrites longer than most politicians. They are the perfect example of 'a means to an end' - values be damned.

C3CPAjKUUAAB-aV.jpg:large
My favourite poll result relating to that:

C2BtsPlUUAI8fTr.jpg
 
Yet what actions you take upon seeing the facts is very much related to you political opinion.
Meaning, the same facts can indeed be - and usually are - supportive of different sides of an argument.
That's the very essence of different political views.

Well no, because the facts remain factual.
How you choose to present them doesn't take away the fact that they are still facts, or make them any less true.
Skewing facts to suit your viewpoint is the essence of politics.
 


They aren't even trying to camouflage their intent here.
 
This was brought up in a HuffPo article a couple of days ago, but he hasn't figured out yet to ask people to be seated when he arrives to deliver a speech for a government crowd. He did it at the CIA, and right now at DHS.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.