NEClimbs.com forum

General => Climbing NOT (Bitch & moan, Politics) => Topic started by: Nemesis on February 04, 2016, 08:47:46 AM

Title: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 04, 2016, 08:47:46 AM
Anyone else getting nervous? :-\
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 04, 2016, 10:19:11 AM
Nope  Dead Clown Walking  will shoot himself hard pretty soon.

I wish i could vote Obama for 4 more......
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 04, 2016, 11:17:22 AM
Since you brought up this fucker......married 3 times   i would say "shows repeated poor judgement"


SO against   imigration....where did your wives come from ?     Moron
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nick Grant on February 04, 2016, 04:45:42 PM
Moron?  No question.

Great entertainment?  Absolutely!

I hope that the Trump Circus lasts as long as possible.  He makes Louis CK and Bill Burr seem dull in comparison.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 04, 2016, 04:58:47 PM
I have a couple of friends who seem obsessed with the gun thing and love Trump......I suggested that they be more concerned about health care for their young daughters....things got real quite
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on February 04, 2016, 07:59:00 PM
I have a couple of friends who seem obsessed with the gun thing and love Trump......I suggested that they be more concerned about health care for their young daughters....things got real quite

Good one, John. Trump is a disgusting asshole. It is really embarrassing to me as an American that of all the candidates only two (Bernie and O'Malley) don't make me want to barf and go "Holey Shit!". It is definitely Bernie for me. I am kind of surprised O'Malley didn't get a little more traction just because he wasn't  completely insane, but he has a slightly odd speaking style and the media completely treated him as invisible.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on February 04, 2016, 08:21:29 PM
Not for nothing but wasn't it O'Malley that proposed a "rain tax" in Baltimore?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on February 04, 2016, 08:44:26 PM
I had never heard that, but it may have been falsely framed by his opponents http://americablog.com/2015/09/martin-omalleys-rain-tax-is-actually-a-great-idea.html (http://americablog.com/2015/09/martin-omalleys-rain-tax-is-actually-a-great-idea.html)
I have to say I never dug very deeply into his policies, he just didn't strike me as somebody to immediately dismiss as with  Carson, Cruz, Fiorina, Trump, Santorum, Huckabee etc.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 04, 2016, 10:08:31 PM
Trump scares the shit out of me, as does Hillary.  I've got two small children and a business that I put 50+ hours a week into.  I'm ashamed to say, it's getting pretty goddam tough to look at the leadership in this country and remain optimistic about the future.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on February 05, 2016, 09:25:08 AM
Trump scares the shit out of me, as does Hillary.  I've got two small children and a business that I put 50+ hours a week into.  I'm ashamed to say, it's getting pretty goddam tough to look at the leadership in this country and remain optimistic about the future.

They are all ass-ponies for the corporations, Obama included.

Bernie isn't, which is why I will be voting for him, and also why he has no chance.   

Were he to actually win, there would b a terrible plane "accident" I'm sure.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 05, 2016, 12:12:29 PM
Rothschild Airways.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on February 05, 2016, 05:14:03 PM
Rothschild Airways.

It's a tough job lending governments money that you don't have, and then getting paid back with interest, but somebody's got to do it!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: markvnh on February 05, 2016, 06:29:43 PM
...so Bernie was the guest speaker this morning at a breakfast sponsored by Kinder Morgan. I was there. You know, the pipeline folks who want to dig up MA, NH and maybe even VT (if I remember correctly).

So please don't think Bernie is different than any of the other candidates. He's as beholden to big business as they all are. It's politics. Follow the money. He just talks about a "revolution" and all his small donors but don't be fooled!

Yep, was also at the CNN town hall in Derry the other night with Bernie and Hillary. And was supposed to have a lunch town hall with "the Donald" today (talk about one end of the political spectrum to the other!) but his plane got stuck in NYC.

Being an undeclared voter in NH is a blast!

Added - full disclosure. I have "connections" that enable me to partake in political events on both sides which is helpful when it comes to "small or high exposure" events. Mostly via business.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on February 05, 2016, 08:09:07 PM
A quick Google search shows Bernie has publicly opposed the pipeline since at least November. Did Bernie say anything at the speech that alluded to being for the pipeline? If not and if he wasn't paid by Kinder Morgan to speak than it was just another Platform for Sanders to put his message out in the world(I imagine these "sponsored" events are fairly common in states with influential primaries).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: markvnh on February 05, 2016, 08:21:27 PM
...sponsored by KM. Bernie was the speaker. I'd bet he wasn't paid as I doubt any candidate knowingly this close to the election would want that to come out. However if he's so against the pipeline he's certainly got plenty of opportunity to speak elsewhere where KM isn't the sponsor.

And yes it's all about face time right now. So if he gets the opportunity he should take it from my perspective if it's an audience he wants to reach. Same "talk" as you always hear (I've seen a couple candidates more than once - it's like pressing play on the cassette player!).

I guess my point is they all create a persona and while Bernie's is about the middle class I wouldn't be so fast to accept that persona.

You're not in politics your entire life without being beholden to some corporate interest. My take is that Bernie being "independent" (though caucusing with democrats in the senate) or "social democrat" or whatever you want to call him and coming across as anti-establishment isn't all it's cracked up to be.

He's just as much bullshit as the rest of them.

350 million or so people in our country and these are the 10 best we can come up with?!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 05, 2016, 08:25:22 PM
...sponsored by KM. Bernie was the speaker. I'd bet he wasn't paid as I doubt any candidate knowingly this close to the election would want that to come out. And yes it's all about face time right now. So if he gets the opportunity he should take it.

I guess my point is they all crate a persona and while Bernie's is about the middle class I wouldn't be so fast to accept that persona.

You're not in politics your entire life without being beholden to some corporate interest. My take is that Bernie being "independent" or "social democrat" or whatever you want to call him and coming across as anti-establishment isn't all it's cracked up to be.

He's just as much bullshit as the rest of them.

350 million or so people in our country and these are the 10 best we can come up with?!

Sad isn't it?

I just read an article about the Clintons receiving $153,000,000.  in speaking fees since 2001(an average of $207,000 per speech). Yeah, they can totally relate to the middle class ::)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on February 05, 2016, 09:00:54 PM
Bernie's message has pretty much been the same since mayor of Burlington. I've been a loyal supporter since the early 90's and have voted for him at every election. Even during periods not living in VT Bernie or his support staff responded to inquires in a friendly, informative, and timely matter. One great thing about all VT lawmakers is their willingness to listen and fight for their constituents, the fact that in almost every election Bernie has faced an upward battle and won speaks for his ability to hold a consistent message and listen to the people (VTers also don't tend to vote out incumbents that hold higher offices).

As to who is putting money in politicians pockets, look at Bernies donors, there's not a lot of big business donations. So while he may listen to and speak at events hosted by big business he's not accepting bribes like others.

While I'm not a Republican I would like to see Kasich rise above all the evangelical uber conservative bs that is currently swirling.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: markvnh on February 05, 2016, 09:13:11 PM
Bernie has conviction and I have utmost respect for that. His tune doesn't change. I'll give him that!

Though looking at his donor list doesn't mean he's not beholden to corpaorate business interests. If you're a lifelong politician it's a way of life. Unfortunately.

I had an opportunity to meet Kasich at a small business meeting with about five mins of one on one afterwards. Probably the most sensible one on that side.

Cruz (Huckabee, Santorum) are right wring religious zealots. They scare me as much as the far left wanting to tax us into oblivion by offering free "everything" and bankrupting us (single payer health will never work in the US -  case in point VT nixed it because it would have required something like tripling the current budget).

At the town hall the other night I couldn't believe when Anderson Cooper asked Hillary what about the 675k she aceepted from Wall St for speeches and she basically answered "well that's what they offered me!"

I'm a social liberal and fiscal conservative - neither party represents my political views. But I believe in the power of voting so I have to pay attention and choose who I think will do the best job.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 06, 2016, 10:40:12 AM
I'm not sure that anyone who advocates a massive tax increase is gonna do well ?

In CO, we have a governor who owned one of the first brew pubs in the state..now that's somebody i vote for !
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on February 06, 2016, 03:19:29 PM
True it would be a massive increase in taxes, but its really just a transfer of who receives your money. Let's say you currently pay 15% in taxes plus 10,000 a year in healthcare on a 100,000 a year salary. If you remove Insurance and shift it to taxes, you're being taxed at 25% which is a huge jump but overall the amount out of pocket is the same. Obviously there will be those that are at the top of their tax brackets that get kind of screwed, but if you're lucky and at the bottom you may actually see an increase in your yearly take home. While it's true that under ACA the majority have seen huge jumps in their monthly premiums compared to 8 years ago, the large reason for this is because of the private public republican healthcare mandates that the republicans put in place to make it fail.

It baffles me that people are so against spending for things like universal healthcare and infrastructure, but have no problem writing blank checks for the millitary. Case in point how many billions did Obama just earmark for our millitary to increase their presence in Eastern Europe to show Russia we back NATO.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 06, 2016, 05:23:23 PM
I don't disagree,,jus that the tax deal makes him un electable...and for sure congress would never approve any deal for health care...they all get health care , so they don't give a fuck about anybody else
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nick Grant on February 06, 2016, 07:14:32 PM
Bernie Sanders, the "Democratic Socialist," is following in the footsteps of Eugene McCarthy (1968) , George McGovern (1972), Fred Harris (1976), John Anderson (1980), Jesse Jackson (1984), and Ralph Nader (2000).

None of these guys had ANY SHOT WHATSOEVER at becoming the President of the United States, and neither does Bernie.  Given the conservative nature of most American voters, casting a vote for Bernie is like casting a vote for Jerry Garcia (who is dead).  Neither Bernie nor Jerry has any chance of winning.

So, "All aboard!"  Hop on the Hillary train!  We're heading to the White House!  (Or would you prefer Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio?)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on February 06, 2016, 11:20:02 PM
^ So Hillary wants us to think. Sorry, she is most definitely not getting my vote in the primary. I don't think you can put the guys you listed in the same league as Senator Sanders in popularity (maybe McGovern, but I was abt 8 years old, so wasn't following politics too closely). Harris, Anderson or Jesse Jackson?, Come on! Conditions are quite a bit different now in many ways and Sanders has already blown away expectations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLA6WdYzQwg#t=77.856 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLA6WdYzQwg#t=77.856)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 07, 2016, 08:59:18 PM
You got Hillary and prolly Cruz after Trump implodes...easy pick
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: z.st.jules on February 08, 2016, 08:30:25 AM
I'm Canadian. Educate me on the different parties and their core beliefs.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 08, 2016, 08:56:32 AM
I'm Canadian. Educate me on the different parties and their core beliefs.

Republicans would like to tear down the government brick by brick, with the exception of the military,  and create a privatized for-profit oligarchy.

Democrats would like to legislate everything right down to the toothpaste you use.  End result, a different brand of oligarchy.

Neither party gives a shit about Americans.  They're both in the business of stealing your productivity and redistributing it to their campaign contributors.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on February 08, 2016, 08:58:02 AM
In a nutshell: The Dems and Repubs take opposing sides on every issue which perpetuates itself as political theatre- which is really what it is. Keeps the masses occupied, so to speak.

The individual politicians themselves spend their entire being lining their own pockets while keeping their eye on the prize: to get re-elected.

Meanwhile, in the "background" are the real power brokers- the lobbyists' from corporate America (and beyond) who control the purse strings for the candidates to get re-elected.

Around and around we go.......
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Homeless Junkie on February 08, 2016, 09:05:14 AM
Take it from someone from Maryland, don't let Martin dazzle you with a good debate performance. He taxed people right outta Maryland, didn't do Baltimore a bit of good and cheats on his wife.

 The election is nothing to look forward to. Bernie would be best for the majority of Americans. Why he won't get elected is baffling. So the Clinton, Rubio, Cruz and Bush machine will reign. Wall Street will keep on keeping on. The middle class will spend their life away and the poor will get poorer.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 08, 2016, 10:14:23 AM
I'm Canadian. Educate me on the different parties and their core beliefs.

vancouver is democrats and winnepeg is republicans.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: z.st.jules on February 08, 2016, 01:30:53 PM
I'm Canadian. Educate me on the different parties and their core beliefs.

vancouver is democrats and winnepeg is republicans.

Ah, I understand. :)

I mostly just posted to see what folks said. I am quite familiar with US politics :)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 08, 2016, 01:54:14 PM
Quote

I am quite familiar with US politics :)

Well then, how would you describe their core beliefs?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: z.st.jules on February 08, 2016, 07:51:51 PM
Over simplifying, Id say big government vs. small government
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on February 08, 2016, 10:07:41 PM
Over simplifying, Id say big government vs. small government

no matter what the Repugs say, big government is here to stay. it's just big gov that is looking out for the rich and the military industrial complex.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 09, 2016, 05:30:29 AM
PLEASE VOTE TODAY!!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: markvnh on February 09, 2016, 06:55:22 AM
Like Nemesis says - get out and vote!

Al, republicans want small government (libertarians even smaller!), democrats want big government. No matter what side they all only look out for the rich.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: tradchick on February 09, 2016, 07:49:18 AM
Trump is a racist pig and promotes hate and will take this country backwards.  If he wins I'm moving across the border.  Bernie has my vote!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 09, 2016, 12:41:51 PM
Trump makes Regan look like a raving liberal
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 09, 2016, 08:11:22 PM
Bernie and Trump
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nick Grant on February 09, 2016, 09:04:07 PM
Just remember this:

Paul Tsongas (Democrat) won the NH primary in 1992. 
Pat Buchanan (Republican) won the NH primary in 1996.

And both of these guys went NOWHERE.  As Yogi said, "It ain't over 'til is over."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 10, 2016, 06:15:47 AM
I don't think the Clintons have ever done well in NH, even Bubba.  I thought I heard someone from the campaign say that the upcoming primaries were going to have different outcomes because of "more favorable demographics".  New Hampshire's 93% white and with the exception of 2008 the Clinton's usually win the Black vote.  We'll see
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on February 10, 2016, 08:24:16 AM
whatever happens, it's all going to be interesting...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on February 10, 2016, 09:55:45 AM
Kasich did exceptionally well, highlighting that there are at least some non racist evangelical tea baggers left in the Republican Party.

Go Bernie, the 20 point spread is what Hillary feared most. I guess a lot of NH women will be going to hell since they didn't vote for Hillary.

Trump's primary win speech was ridiculous, sounded like he was accepting an Oscar and not a paltry 34%.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 10, 2016, 10:43:40 AM
Remember when meghan kelley said " I'm not that into guys with orange hair"  i think the republicans like rubio , fiorina and cruz look like badly made up star wars monsters
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nick Grant on February 10, 2016, 10:10:47 PM
Not wanting to sound too uncool, too retro (like climbing in EB's), but . . . . . . I LIKE HILLARY.    (There.  I said it.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lesleyann-coker/i-like-hillary_b_9191222.html
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DaveR on February 11, 2016, 07:39:31 AM
Kasich did exceptionally well, highlighting that there are at least some non racist evangelical tea baggers left in the Republican Party.

Go Bernie, the 20 point spread is what Hillary feared most. I guess a lot of NH women will be going to hell since they didn't vote for Hillary.

Trump's primary win speech was ridiculous, sounded like he was accepting an Oscar and not a paltry 34%.

It's all rigged anyways, Bernie wins by a huge margin and Hillary walks away with almost all the delagates committed to her. Learn about "Super delagates" and you will understand your primary vote is a waste! I work with a NH "Super Delagate".

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-delegate-tracker/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: xcrag_corex on February 11, 2016, 09:39:48 AM
Kasich did exceptionally well, highlighting that there are at least some non racist evangelical tea baggers left in the Republican Party.

Go Bernie, the 20 point spread is what Hillary feared most. I guess a lot of NH women will be going to hell since they didn't vote for Hillary.

Trump's primary win speech was ridiculous, sounded like he was accepting an Oscar and not a paltry 34%.

It's all rigged anyways, Bernie wins by a huge margin and Hillary walks away with almost all the delagates committed to her. Learn about "Super delagates" and you will understand your primary vote is a waste! I work with a NH "Super Delagate".

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-delegate-tracker/



http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/02/after-sanders-big-win-in-new-hampshire-establishme.html Do you feel that this logic holds any weight?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DaveR on February 11, 2016, 09:59:31 AM
Kasich did exceptionally well, highlighting that there are at least some non racist evangelical tea baggers left in the Republican Party.

Go Bernie, the 20 point spread is what Hillary feared most. I guess a lot of NH women will be going to hell since they didn't vote for Hillary.

Trump's primary win speech was ridiculous, sounded like he was accepting an Oscar and not a paltry 34%.

It's all rigged anyways, Bernie wins by a huge margin and Hillary walks away with almost all the delagates committed to her. Learn about "Super delagates" and you will understand your primary vote is a waste! I work with a NH "Super Delagate".

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-delegate-tracker/



http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/02/after-sanders-big-win-in-new-hampshire-establishme.html Do you feel that this logic holds any weight?

Not really Jeremy, Having run for political office I have seen firsthand how the system is rigged to keep the outsiders on the outside. If it was not for mass. election laws I would have never been allowed to be part of the local debates. The establishment wanted to keep me out but the law in mass says that if you get enough signatures to get on the ballot they have to include you in the debates. That made the chosen ones in both parties VERY UNHAPPY!

In the end the incumbent spent $11,000 to get a job that pays $1,000 a year. Ask yourself why!?
I spent $15 and only lost by 63 votes thanks to the law letting me in the debates.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 11, 2016, 10:15:32 AM
Dave R

I felt the same way when I read about Hillary taking the delegates.  If Bernie had any sense, he make that into an issue on the campaign trail.  So much of his campaign is already based on millions of Americans being shut out of the political process,  I think it bolsters his case.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 11, 2016, 11:12:21 AM
The electoral college was designed to allow only certain people to elect officials..not the general public.

Do you really think that many americans will vote for a socialist, jewish, democratic candidate ?  not going to happen
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: xcrag_corex on February 11, 2016, 11:18:16 AM
Definitely will be interesting to see it all unfold.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on February 11, 2016, 11:54:08 AM
The electoral college was designed to allow only certain people to elect officials..not the general public.

Do you really think that many americans will vote for a socialist, jewish, democratic candidate ?  not going to happen

People said similar things about Obama. Plus he was both a Socialist and a Nazi Muslim  :o
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 11, 2016, 01:09:04 PM
The electoral college was designed to allow only certain people to elect officials..not the general public.

Do you really think that many americans will vote for a socialist, jewish, democratic candidate ?  not going to happen

To tell you the truth, I think NH was only a speed bump for Hillary.  I'm pretty sure she leads by ten points or more in most of the states set to primary within the next month or so.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on February 11, 2016, 03:33:48 PM
The above may be  true but polls are not actual outcomes as one pundit noted on VPR (I think she was from SC) she had received upward of 3 or more poll calls a day and was having her daughter answer them while other coworkers had yet to see one. 4 years ago I answered one poll call when I had a landline and from that day on I received poll calls about every Podunk session at 9am, 12:30, 4, and 6pm.

I wonder with Bernies win if Hillary will keep with the promise of not running "attack" ads.

Super delegates I doubt will vote heavily outside the popular vote, but if the popular vote is close in % there's no hope for Bernie, shit Shumlin and Leahy early on endorsed Hillary. It's possible with a strong showing on Super Tuesday Shumlin could change his mind (some of his political agendas are closer to Bernie's) but me thinks Leahy will stick regardless with Hillary. Regardless, I think the DNC is going to get heavily restructured in the upcoming years.

BTW, I'm still bitter about Dean and the lack of support from the DNC back when he ran. I was so pissed when they offered and he took the chair position, it basically destroyed any hope for him becoming President in future elections. IMO If they but a bit more energy towards his outsider campaign Bush may have still won a first term but he certainly would have lost a second term.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 11, 2016, 03:56:48 PM
The electoral college was designed to allow only certain people to elect officials..not the general public.

Do you really think that many americans will vote for a socialist, jewish, democratic candidate ?  not going to happen

People said similar things about Obama. Plus he was both a Socialist and a Nazi Muslim  :o

I have heard worse about Barry
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 11, 2016, 06:48:25 PM
BTW, I'm still bitter about Dean and the lack of support from the DNC back when he ran. I was so pissed when they offered and he took the chair position, it basically destroyed any hope for him becoming President in future elections. IMO If they but a bit more energy towards his outsider campaign Bush may have still won a first term but he certainly would have lost a second term.

^^^This completely soured my Brother on politics.  He still votes, but man he used to be a hardcore campaign worker type. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 24, 2016, 09:06:22 AM
Trump by twenty points in Nevada.  Brace yourselves, he's the nominee
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 24, 2016, 09:29:04 AM
 The Republican party is still in denial  I think
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: David_G48 on February 24, 2016, 03:37:44 PM
I think that both Republicans and Democrats are in denial about what the people want which is why Bernie and Trump are so popular. If either party had even a small clue both Bernie and Donald would be gone by now.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on February 24, 2016, 03:47:22 PM
I think that both Republicans and Democrats are in denial about what the people want which is why Bernie and Trump are so popular. If either party had even a small clue both Bernie and Donald would be gone by now.

Both "parties" (actually the left and right side of the Corporate party) DO have a clue, it is "Corporations First"

Trump and Bernie, despite their differences, are both the "Anything but the status quo" candidates.   Funny how the corporate media never points out that they are the only two candidates against the wonderful corprate-friendly Pacific Free Trade Bend Over pact that everyone seems to want to stick up our asses.  I'm sure it will make things better, look at all the great jobs NAFTA and GATT created!

I don't know where Trump is coming from and surely don't trust him.

I am also about as far as can be from a socialist, but I will be voting for Bernie next Tuesday as he actually seems like an honest guy.  In this election, that makes him the only one as far as I can tell.

I wouldn't vote for Hillary for town dog catcher.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 24, 2016, 04:29:35 PM
I recently read how basically the larger corporations aren't providing the jobs  "Uber affect"  they just hire as needed. of course that  means bennies also
I twas LA Times i think..the writer said we better realize this ,,the sooner the better..of course the $$ come from......

solar/wind industry now provides more jobs than oil/gas..by about 20%
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 24, 2016, 05:23:07 PM
I recently read how basically the larger corporations aren't providing the jobs  "Uber affect"  they just hire as needed. of course that  means bennies also
I twas LA Times i think..the writer said we better realize this ,,the sooner the better..of course the $$ come from......

solar/wind industry now provides more jobs than oil/gas..by about 20%

I'm not so sure this is all the corporations fault.   As someone who's been in business for fifteen years, I can tell you the young people coming into the workforce are about as useless and entitled as humanly possible.  Very few of them have the skills or even the work ethic to make themselves employable.  Corporations are absolutely calculating this into the formula
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: markvnh on February 24, 2016, 07:39:29 PM
...great points Nemesis! I ran a small business the last seven years (part of a team running a larger one prior) and my biggest problem was finding qualified employees to do jobs. I worked with and recruited from SNHU and was shocked at some of the entitled attitudes (what do you mean I have to be to work at 8:00!).
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DaveR on February 25, 2016, 08:24:44 AM
I'm not so sure this is all the corporations fault.   As someone who's been in business for fifteen years, I can tell you the young people coming into the workforce are about as useless and entitled as humanly possible.  Very few of them have the skills or even the work ethic to make themselves employable.  Corporations are absolutely calculating this into the formula

A+++

Education is not what it used to be either. We spend WAY more per student and get WAY less. I'm in my late 50's and my daughter went to a top ranked high school and was an A student. The education she got in math, science and the basics was pretty watered down compared to what I got graduating in the mid 70's. Many kids come out of school now without even the basic skills! Ask any kid today to do a simple math problem and without a calculator they are screwed. :(
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 25, 2016, 09:48:16 AM
I'm not saying it's all corporations..just that they don't do the amount of hiring that is perceived.  It's not like GM for instance goes out and hires 2,000 people anymore.  Flex time, part time whatever you call it.....it's like a temp agency to me.

An aside---how many of you would vote for Obama again if you could ?  I know I would,,,,maybe even Biden if he ran 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on February 25, 2016, 11:50:41 AM
An aside---how many of you would vote for Obama again if you could ?  I know I would,,,,maybe even Biden if he ran 

yup
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on February 25, 2016, 01:51:48 PM
An aside---how many of you would vote for Obama again if you could ?  I know I would,,,,maybe even Biden if he ran

Really? A "Constitutional Lawyer" who thinks it is just dandy to assassinate US citizens (including a minor) by predator drone because a secret panel said they were bad guys?  Funny I don't remember that part of the Constitution....

He is also for the Pacific  "free" trade pact, which shows that he answers to the same masters as the Republicans.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 25, 2016, 06:36:26 PM
Ward..please  american citizen s get killed all the time....if you  identitfy with  Al Queda or Isis or who ever..your fair fair fucking game.

The Gitmo "detainees
  are scheduled to come to super max in CO  I hope the fucking plane crashes and they all fucking die

It's a fucking war and people should realize it.....if you want to kill me for my views...fine let's go

Talk to thefamilies who had  people with heads chopped off    ...did they get  a trial ?

Want me to relate some stories about what really happens  in these shit holes ?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on February 25, 2016, 06:53:28 PM
Let me give you an example..my bud  a USMC guy did a security inSomalia..the purpose was to cut off the clitoros of 10-12 year old girls

No pain meds ..no anethesia...NOTHING   

The fucking savages were swarming because of the virgin thing

My bud switched  to full auto mode  "in one minute...Icall a helo and
save these girls " 

What would you do ?

His response  ---I'll never see my girls again. he didn't do it

sometimes we are the savior
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on February 25, 2016, 08:35:08 PM
An aside---how many of you would vote for Obama again if you could ?  I know I would,,,,maybe even Biden if he ran

Really? A "Constitutional Lawyer" who thinks it is just dandy to assassinate US citizens (including a minor) by predator drone because a secret panel said they were bad guys?  Funny I don't remember that part of the Constitution....

He is also for the Pacific  "free" trade pact, which shows that he answers to the same masters as the Republicans.
Ward, I have absolutely no problem with Obama ordering drone strikes on so called US citizens who as far as I am concerned effectively renounced that citizenship by calling for attacks and declaring war on us. I would go further and have ordered hits on Saudis who finance the terrorism and radical Wahhabi and Salafist madrasas even if they were high up in Saudi Royalty, covertly of course with the latter.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 25, 2016, 09:05:36 PM
An aside---how many of you would vote for Obama again if you could ?  I know I would,,,,maybe even Biden if he ran

Really? A "Constitutional Lawyer" who thinks it is just dandy to assassinate US citizens (including a minor) by predator drone because a secret panel said they were bad guys?  Funny I don't remember that part of the Constitution....

He is also for the Pacific  "free" trade pact, which shows that he answers to the same masters as the Republicans.
Ward, I have absolutely no problem with Obama ordering drone strikes on so called US citizens who as far as I am concerned effectively renounced that citizenship by calling for attacks and declaring war on us. I would go further and have ordered hits on Saudis who finance the terrorism and radical Wahhabi and Salafist madrasas even if they were high up in Saudi Royalty, covertly of course with the latter.
Without due process of law? No jury of your peers?  Judge, jury, and executioner all in one office free from public scrutiny.  What could possibly go wrong?

I'm totally cool with executing the sons of bitches, but not without the burden of proof...Not because some motherfucker who worked at Goldman Sach last week, treasury next week , Halliburton the week after, and finally the CIA just rubber stamped him a terrorist.  That's bullshit!! If we wanna keep our " good guys" pedestal, we had better start acting like the good guys again
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on February 25, 2016, 10:02:00 PM
Without due process of law? No jury of your peers?  Judge, jury, and executioner all in one office free from public scrutiny.  What could possibly go wrong?

I'm totally cool with executing the sons of bitches, but not without the burden of proof...Not because some motherfucker who worked at Goldman Sach last week, treasury next week , Halliburton the week after, and finally the CIA just rubber stamped him a terrorist.  That's bullshit!! If we wanna keep our " good guys" pedestal, we had better start acting like the good guys again

Yes, it's time we take the high road, lets "make America great again" and screw all the hate. Let's stop pandering to peoples fears real or imagined and work towards compassion. What we need as a society is to start acting like freaking adults and stop trying to scapegoat all of our problems on someone/ something else.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on February 26, 2016, 04:04:59 PM
OMFG Christie just endorsed Trump!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 26, 2016, 04:26:26 PM
Prolly doesn't wanna miss his shot at VP...slim as it may be
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dp on February 26, 2016, 04:45:04 PM
If Trump wins with Christie I'm moving to Canada, plus the ice climbing.better!!!  dp
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on February 26, 2016, 05:53:55 PM
An aside---how many of you would vote for Obama again if you could ?  I know I would,,,,maybe even Biden if he ran

Really? A "Constitutional Lawyer" who thinks it is just dandy to assassinate US citizens (including a minor) by predator drone because a secret panel said they were bad guys?  Funny I don't remember that part of the Constitution....

He is also for the Pacific  "free" trade pact, which shows that he answers to the same masters as the Republicans.
Ward, I have absolutely no problem with Obama ordering drone strikes on so called US citizens who as far as I am concerned

Herman Goering, infamous Nazi, would have agreed with you:

"But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on February 26, 2016, 07:18:46 PM
Just because you are an evil psychopathic NAZI doesn't mean all your ideas are bad. They built some pretty nice roads and had those nifty leather greatcoats
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nick Grant on February 26, 2016, 09:09:27 PM
Ward, your Goering quote is a classic.  The scary thing is that most governments operate by those rules, more or less.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on February 26, 2016, 11:47:12 PM
I was only discussing the constitutionality of killing terrorists who actively attacked or encouraged others to wage war on Americans. To my mind somebody like Anwar al-Awlaki effectively renounced their citizenship, so therefor, while outside of U.S. territory, is no longer under protection of the U. S. Constitution. That is somewhat hazy though and can lead to arguments of slippery slope etc. that can get pushed to the point of ridiculousness. I think you have to be reasonable though. For instance, is there any evidence of the U. S. Government intentionally targeting Hellfire missiles against people within our territory or against citizens outside who are not engaged in armed conflict against us? However, citizenship renunciation is really secondary to the principal that it is lawful to kill while defending militarily against persons engaged in armed conflict with the United States. You don't hold a hearing every time one shoots an enemy soldier in combat (though it sounds like they confer with lawyers before they drop a bomb these days)

To be reasonable, you also have to keep in mind the President's most basic duty to defend the united states. In balance, smoking a very active enemy such as Al-Awlaki and brushing up against a hazy overreach of his "rights" is well worth it to protect others.

I 100 percent think there should be strong oversight of the government and I really don't like the idea of secret courts, overly broad surveillance and such and hope that gets rolled back. The Patriot Act needs to be revoked.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on February 27, 2016, 12:39:13 AM
That is an excellent post^^^^^^
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on February 27, 2016, 07:21:15 AM
Look at that Gov. Lepage now endorses Trump.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 27, 2016, 08:11:26 AM
The bandwagon's gonna get pretty full the morning after Super Tuesday.  Steve Schmidt was quoted, "it's creating a permissive environment for other to jump across the room".
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on February 27, 2016, 12:14:53 PM
I was only discussing the constitutionality of killing terrorists who actively attacked or encouraged others to wage war on Americans. To my mind somebody like Anwar al-Awlaki effectively renounced their citizenship, so therefor, while outside of U.S. territory, is no longer under protection of the U. S. Constitution. That is somewhat hazy though and can lead to arguments of slippery slope etc. that can get pushed to the point of ridiculousness. I think you have to be reasonable though. For instance, is there any evidence of the U. S. Government intentionally targeting Hellfire missiles against people within our territory or against citizens outside who are not engaged in armed conflict against us? However, citizenship renunciation is really secondary to the principal that it is lawful to kill while defending militarily against persons engaged in armed conflict with the United States. You don't hold a hearing every time one shoots an enemy soldier in combat (though it sounds like they confer with lawyers before they drop a bomb these days)

To be reasonable, you also have to keep in mind the President's most basic duty to defend the united states. In balance, smoking a very active enemy such as Al-Awlaki and brushing up against a hazy overreach of his "rights" is well worth it to protect others.

I 100 percent think there should be strong oversight of the government and I really don't like the idea of secret courts, overly broad surveillance and such and hope that gets rolled back. The Patriot Act needs to be revoked.

Maybe Anwar had it coming,  but the government was still allowed to establish a very dangerous and destructive precedent.  It always comes in small increments.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/singham/2013/05/14/the-bill-of-rights-applies-to-us-citizens-abroad-2/
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: steve weitzler on February 27, 2016, 04:25:36 PM
Just my thoughts (for what it is worth)......and I will preface this post by stating that I consider myself a fairly liberal democrat. All the talk about what our government can or shouldn't do is pretty non-sensical. This country has a long and rich history of prejudicial practices towards many people starting with the native Americans and blacks. We in the US think of ourselves as having such high standards and being so morally correct. Not that it was a bad choice but we are the only country to ever use nuclear weapons to destroy many innocent people (once again I am not saying we should not have). We also imprisoned many Japanese-American citizens during World War II. Killing a few collateral damage people with drones in the middle east to take out the bad guys are the damages and realities of war. We also did a good job at Abu Grabh when many POWs were tortured for information. We think we are but in the end our government is no better than many of the people we criticize.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on February 27, 2016, 09:11:37 PM
Steve- what about the HUGE amounts of foreign we give away? Seems there's loads of countries that would be even bigger shitholes  without it. What other country does that?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: steve weitzler on February 27, 2016, 09:40:15 PM
I agree Ken. We give HUGE amounts of money away to foreign countries. Often times that money does not get used in those countries for the purposes we intend it to be. Sometimes it does. Personally I would rather we use some of the money here in our own country to improve the lives of Americans.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on February 29, 2016, 08:27:06 PM
http://www.motherjones.com/mixed-media/2016/02/john-oliver-donald-trump (http://www.motherjones.com/mixed-media/2016/02/john-oliver-donald-trump)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: xcrag_corex on February 29, 2016, 09:21:58 PM
So glad you posted this mark!!!! Beat me to it #makedonalddrumpfagain
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on March 01, 2016, 09:57:36 AM
Trump is reminding me more and more of Hitler and Mussolini each day.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on March 01, 2016, 10:04:47 AM
Trump is reminding me more and more of Hitler and Mussolini each day.

Y E S!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: David_G48 on March 01, 2016, 10:22:10 AM
Trump is reminding me more and more of Hitler and Mussolini each day.

Y E S!

If you truly believe this you should support 100% the Republicans efforts to thwart the power of executive action now because we will have to depend on the other branches to keep the president in line in case it is Trump. Too much power in one persons hand is detrimental to us.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on March 01, 2016, 11:12:04 AM
If Congress would do their job instead of just obstructing everything, unilateral executive action  wouldn't have had to be taken in order to move anything along. I really wish McConnell and his ilk would join Justice Scalia and be right quick about it.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on March 01, 2016, 12:19:45 PM
If Congress would do their job instead of just obstructing everything, unilateral executive action  wouldn't have had to be taken in order to move anything along. I really wish McConnell and his ilk would join Justice Scalia and be right quick about it.


Funny, where was the "obstruction" when we started two dumb-ass wars (still ongoing, in case you haven't noticed), passed several dumb ass "free" trade agreements that shipped our good jobs overseas, and approved the so called "patriot" Act that made it OK for the NSA to record all our phone calls and emails without a warrant?  These were wonderful examples of "Bipartisan Cooperation." 

The Constitution was set up to promote obstruction.  Just because the President doesn't like it is no reason to ignore what is supposed to be the "Supreme Law of the Land."  Especially if you claim to be a "Constitutional Scholar" (cough...cough..).

Just cast my first ever vote for a Socialist.  If the government is going to give free shit to the ultra rich and corporations, I might as well vote for someone who wants to give free shit to the middle class.....
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on March 01, 2016, 12:51:14 PM
True, Ward. Maybe I should have qualified that with "obstructing everything that would actually be beneficial for us"
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on March 01, 2016, 02:16:04 PM
If Congress would do their job instead of just obstructing everything, unilateral executive action  wouldn't have had to be taken in order to move anything along. I really wish McConnell and his ilk would join Justice Scalia and be right quick about it.

well spoken
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: David_G48 on March 01, 2016, 03:01:48 PM
If Congress would do their job instead of just obstructing everything, unilateral executive action  wouldn't have had to be taken in order to move anything along. I really wish McConnell and his ilk would join Justice Scalia and be right quick about it.

well spoken

Whether or not this is well spoken or correct it has no bearing on restricting someone you believe may be Hitler like in his leadership style. The issue is not whether or not Obama did good or bad with the executive actions but rather a precedent has been set for someone like Donald who I assume you do not trust based on your comments to do things you may not like. I for one do not think either party will have a candidate worthy of our trust but that is just my opinion.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on March 01, 2016, 05:21:23 PM
I have been silent for a while now,,,,but david..you gotta be fuckin' , shittin' me ?  The congress does NOTHING except vote to repeal Obama care     get the fuck over it..it's a done deal 14 million covered

Every pres uses executive action..  make the decision and face the truth..fuck Syria, fuck Iraq.  fuck the republicans   



Trump is Htiler-- they share an obsession with real estate and building..I'm serious..read Speer some time and sub trump for hitler  it's frightening.

Hillary for the win !
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 01, 2016, 05:36:06 PM
Trump and Hillary are both steaming piles of shit. 

Trump's a bigot who will put us in World War 3.

Hillary's a liar and a shill for Wall Street

Either way, expect to get fucked for 8 more years
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on March 01, 2016, 05:50:52 PM
Prolly  true.....But with Trump you are pretty much assured of global conflict,,,fucked health care and  massive international hatred


With hillary,,,you know what your getting  bad or not.  I NEED obamacare to continue....I NEED us not to go into Syria...


easy choice for me
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: David_G48 on March 01, 2016, 05:54:45 PM
Hey John
I think that saying things with a lot of vulgarity isn't the best way to convince anyone that you are right. It is people with clouded judgements about Trump that let him get as far as he has. Trump hits some valid points with the voters that seems to have them not look at his major faults. I am afraid because he does have a chance to win which is very concerning. I am not sure about what your comment about The Affordable Care Act has to do with anything. It wasn't an executive order it is the law passed by congress etc., you need to stay on topic. This was about the expansion of use about executive orders and a fear of how someone like Trump might abuse it. I tend to agree with Nemesis but again I digress and was just concerned about someone with poor judgement having the ability to exercise it unbridled. Do you not have any concerns about that???


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjLl9DF7KDLAhUKXB4KHYpzBfEQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fstory%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2F2014%2F12%2F16%2Fobama-presidential-memoranda-executive-orders%2F20191805%2F&usg=AFQjCNHdUYTzAYCw4PiIlO4yQu1CgTT4KQ
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on March 01, 2016, 08:03:06 PM
Number of executive orders by president: Total, Av/Yr and Yrs in office
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 01, 2016, 08:36:33 PM
^^^^well played Sir!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: danf on March 01, 2016, 10:23:02 PM
If Congress would do their job instead of just obstructing everything, unilateral executive action  wouldn't have had to be taken in order to move anything along. I really wish McConnell and his ilk would join Justice Scalia and be right quick about it.

well spoken
How is wishing people would die considered "well spoken"???
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on March 01, 2016, 10:25:56 PM
David - Looks like your boyz Ronnie and W hold some records in that category.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 02, 2016, 08:18:42 AM
It was wild to hear GOP heavy hitters say things like "I hope I don't have to support him" in interviews conducted on Super Tuesday.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on March 02, 2016, 09:37:14 AM
If Congress would do their job instead of just obstructing everything, unilateral executive action  wouldn't have had to be taken in order to move anything along. I really wish McConnell and his ilk would join Justice Scalia and be right quick about it.

well spoken
How is wishing people would die considered "well spoken"???

Well, I didn't exactly say I wish they would die. I used a more subtle allusion.  ;)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: steve weitzler on March 02, 2016, 05:43:44 PM
Ah hell,,,,I am just going to vote for Richard Nixon. Who cares that he is already dead!!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: markvnh on March 02, 2016, 07:59:18 PM
The GOP heavy hitters are in denial. They no longer represent the majority of those that call themselves republicans. Same for the democrats but with super delegates and momentum Hillary still wins the dems nod...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 03, 2016, 06:32:20 PM
THIS is "well spoken"!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2iefXdC794I
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 04, 2016, 06:35:17 AM
http://m.wmur.com/thousands-grow-serious-about-canada-trump-refuge/38303826
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dp on March 04, 2016, 11:00:19 AM
After that incredibly intelligent speech do you really think Mitt isn't going to throw his hat into the ring? dp
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 04, 2016, 11:51:12 AM
I think he's in, but I'm wondering how they're going to get it done.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: dp on March 04, 2016, 02:43:52 PM
I do not believe there will be any of the existing candidates who will have enough delegates when the convention comes and even if someone does(Trump)  they can always change the rules because of rule 40 or is it 40B and then it will either be a brokered convention, which means the delagates would have gotten together behind closed doors and settled on someone before hand, or an open convention, last nights debate was so ridiculous that it reminded me of a bunch of kindergarten kids.  If Trump is not given the right as the republican candidate I'm sure he will run as an independent even though he said he would never do that, yeh right Donald!! But it is still the delegates who elect the candidate not the popular vote. I don't believe they will allow Trump to run. dp
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on March 04, 2016, 03:08:22 PM
Hillary staffer offered immunity, hope he isn't "suicided" a la Vince Foster.

http://nypost.com/2016/03/03/hillary-staffer-granted-immunity-in-email-probe-report/

Trump versus Hilary..... I can't vote for either of them.   
Title: Trump
Post by: markvnh on March 04, 2016, 06:23:16 PM
Scuttlebutt I heard - brokered convention with Romney being thrown into the mix!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nick Grant on March 04, 2016, 09:29:49 PM
C'mon Ward, you've got to be kidding me.  Trump and Hillary are equal in the unable-to-vote-for department?  Really?  On the environment?  In getting militarily involved in ugly places (Yemen, Iran, North Korea)?  In facing up to the gross inequities (income, race, gender) in this country?

Hillary isn't perfect—everybody knows that—but I am not perfect and neither are you.  (The Strandman might be perfect.)

You don't need anybody to tell you that the world is an ugly place full of lying, backstabbing, one-upmanship, graft, corruption, and all the rest.  Hillary isn't St. Bernie (Rabbi Bernie?) or Mother Theresa, but the world isn't a place for saints.  Hillary practices good ol' realpolitik.

And whether you like Hillary or not, wouldn't having a female President (finally) be a good thing for your daughter (and my daughter)?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on March 05, 2016, 08:04:29 AM
C'mon Ward, you've got to be kidding me.  Trump and Hillary are equal in the unable-to-vote-for department?  Really?  On the environment?  In getting militarily involved in ugly places (Yemen, Iran, North Korea)?  In facing up to the gross inequities (income, race, gender) in this country?

Hillary isn't perfect—everybody knows that—but I am not perfect and neither are you.  (The Strandman might be perfect.)

You don't need anybody to tell you that the world is an ugly place full of lying, backstabbing, one-upmanship, graft, corruption, and all the rest.  Hillary isn't St. Bernie (Rabbi Bernie?) or Mother Theresa, but the world isn't a place for saints.  Hillary practices good ol' realpolitik.

And whether you like Hillary or not, wouldn't having a female President (finally) be a good thing for your daughter (and my daughter)?

Sorry Nick- this line of thinking is utter bullshit. It's the same thinking that put the first "black" man in the WH. A total failure IMO.

Hillary is a wannabee that rode Slick Willey's coattails to where she is today. She has NO accomplishments in all that and is a habitual liar.

I don't know about you but my daughters were raised to be honest, compassionate, contributing members of society. Shrillary is just another sleazy self serving politician- she distinguishes herself in that group by being at the bottom of the cesspool.

Am I still hopeful that someone other than Trump will challenge her? ABSOLUTELY. However, if it comes down to Trump vs. Clinton, I know what I'm gonna have to do. I'll just pinch my nose tighter than I ever have.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on March 05, 2016, 10:50:54 AM
Ken, I'm not sure how you can say Obama is a total failure, unemployment is down, economy is up, gas prices down, renewable fuels up, and much more all while being blocked at every road by a do nothing congress. Sure he hasn't lived up to all of his campaign promises, but what president in the history of the U.S. Met or exceeded all of their campaign promises.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on March 05, 2016, 04:11:00 PM
It is a moot pont because here in Massachusetts, if frigging Trump was the Democratic candidate he would win the State (of course he would modify his rhetoric beforehand).

I'm old enough to remember McGovern losing 49 states, including his home state, but winning...wait for it...Massachusetts!

It's a free vote here, but still no way I'm voting for her.  Google her talking about Libya and Ghaddafi: "We came, we saw, he died- hahahahahhahhah"   Funny the MSM doesn't ever play that clip.  And things are going GREAT in Libya now!.

Bush and Obama (with Hillary's help) have managed to completely fuck the Middle Easy up, all part of the plan.

But it has surprisingly good for the "defense" industry.   

You might not have noticed that the evil Republicans and saint Obama agreed to frigging INCREASE the "defense" budget.  They are on the same team, and we a'int on it.   

We have military bases and troops in more than 100 frigging countries, and Obama hasn't eliminated a single one of them.  If this is "defense" then I'd like to see what "offense" looks like...
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on March 05, 2016, 09:17:16 PM
Ken, I'm not sure how you can say Obama is a total failure, unemployment is down, economy is up, gas prices down, renewable fuels up, and much more all while being blocked at every road by a do nothing congress. Sure he hasn't lived up to all of his campaign promises, but what president in the history of the U.S. Met or exceeded all of their campaign promises.

1. Employment is down. I disagree. Unemployment has no way of tracking those not drawing "benefits"
2. Economy is up. I disagree. Latest word is a recession looms.
3. Gas prices down. The president hasn't got squat to do with gas prices at the pump. Unless he imposes yet another tax on the purchase of gas. BTW-Obama is pushing for that right now.
4. Not sure what you mean "renewable fuels up"?

The most important campaign promise Obama made was to be the most transparent administration in history. He has been everything but that.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on March 05, 2016, 09:30:49 PM
It is a moot pont because here in Massachusetts, if frigging Trump was the Democratic candidate he would win the State (of course he would modify his rhetoric beforehand).

I'm old enough to remember McGovern losing 49 states, including his home state, but winning...wait for it...Massachusetts!

It's a free vote here, but still no way I'm voting for her.  Google her talking about Libya and Ghaddafi: "We came, we saw, he died- hahahahahhahhah"   Funny the MSM doesn't ever play that clip.  And things are going GREAT in Libya now!.

Bush and Obama (with Hillary's help) have managed to completely fuck the Middle Easy up, all part of the plan.

But it has surprisingly good for the "defense" industry.   

You might not have noticed that the evil Republicans and saint Obama agreed to frigging INCREASE the "defense" budget.  They are on the same team, and we a'int on it.   

We have military bases and troops in more than 100 frigging countries, and Obama hasn't eliminated a single one of them.  If this is "defense" then I'd like to see what "offense" looks like...


How do you fix this? What candidate has the solution?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on March 05, 2016, 10:45:49 PM
Ken, I'm not sure how you can say Obama is a total failure, unemployment is down, economy is up, gas prices down, renewable fuels up, and much more all while being blocked at every road by a do nothing congress. Sure he hasn't lived up to all of his campaign promises, but what president in the history of the U.S. Met or exceeded all of their campaign promises.

1. Employment is down. I disagree. Unemployment has no way of tracking those not drawing "benefits"
2. Economy is up. I disagree. Latest word is a recession looms.
3. Gas prices down. The president hasn't got squat to do with gas prices at the pump. Unless he imposes yet another tax on the purchase of gas. BTW-Obama is pushing for that right now.
4. Not sure what you mean "renewable fuels up"?

The most important campaign promise Obama made was to be the most transparent administration in history. He has been everything but that.

1) unemployment agencies do track those not drawing "benefits," they also track underemployed, and they even have a grading system used to track the 6 (if I remember correctly) unemployment categories which ranges from recently unemployed to jaded lost soles. In every metric employment is up and unemployed is down. What's the current rate 4.9%, that is statistically zero, if you were a presidential candidate and had 4.9% you'd be on the JV debate team. As for underemployed it's still below 10% much less than the 25% when Bush Jr was creating jobs.

2) chicken little, find me a time in history when a bubble wasn't about to burst or a recession wasn't on the verge. what is meaningful is creating and catering to industries that are recession proof.

3) I'm well aware presidents and politicians have very little to do with petroleum commodities, but when gas increases the first scapegoat is always the president and or their administration. Yet, no one credits a president when prices drop. 

4) renewable fuels i.e. Biomass, solar, wind are on target to surpass employment rates than petroleum industries. Ergo, they are up because they benefit our lives in clean energy, economy, and employment.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 06, 2016, 06:19:18 AM
I'm calling BS on the recession in 2016

New housing starts up 1.5%
Durable good orders up .4%
Economy added 242,000 jobs in January
Oil at it lowest price in 20 years
My company is booked into 2017 already(not a real statistic, I know)

I think the correction was just that, a long overdue correction of over valued stocks.  I wouldn't batten down the hatches yet.  A fed pullback on rates, this month, would certainly get the hair on the back of my neck standing at attention though.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: SA on March 06, 2016, 07:40:37 AM
I keep hearing about clean energy, wind, solar etc, but I never hear squat about FUEL CELLS, and I don't mean batteries.
I'm talking about stationary fuel cells, which can power a small town, or a large manufacturing facility, with clean electric power, and 0 pollutants. Very soon, the largest fuel cell plant in the world is going to be built in Conn.

The news has been quite entertaining this Winter, watching the Republican party self-destruct, led by TRUMP.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on March 06, 2016, 07:47:01 AM
Make America Great Again basically means two things:

1) Make America White Again (or at least less brown)
2) Bring back my job for life


I find it ironic that all those white folks jibber-jabbering about "Boot Straps" can't or are too lazy to compete in the new global workforce.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 06, 2016, 08:49:37 AM
Make America Great Again basically means two things:

1) Make America White Again (or at least less brown)
2) Bring back my job for life


I find it ironic that all those white folks jibber-jabbering about "Boot Straps" can't or are too lazy to compete in the new global workforce.

A+++

Although I find it a little unfair that a taxpaying construction worker with a family should have to compete with an illegal that will fill out a w4 claiming 9 dependents, living 9 men deep in a two bedroom slum, and sending 75 percent of his income back to Mexico.  That's a real beef, in spite of the liberal fantasy that they come here to contribute.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: David_G48 on March 06, 2016, 09:05:49 AM
I'm calling BS on the recession in 2016


My company is booked into 2017 already(not a real statistic, I know)



Although not a stat on a National level it is the one stat that you know is true and not contrived to fit a political agenda. Congrats on being so busy. Unfortunately (maybe not  so unfortunate) in these days there seems to be 2 kinds of people overworked and out of work. Happy to see your company is overworked thus securing your financial needs and those who work with you.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on March 06, 2016, 09:40:31 AM
Make America Great Again basically means two things:

1) Make America White Again (or at least less brown)
2) Bring back my job for life


I find it ironic that all those white folks jibber-jabbering about "Boot Straps" can't or are too lazy to compete in the new global workforce.

A+++

Although I find it a little unfair that a taxpaying construction worker with a family should have to compete with an illegal that will fill out a w4 claiming 9 dependents, living 9 men deep in a two bedroom slum, and sending 75 percent of his income back to Mexico.  That's a real beef, in spite of the liberal fantasy that they come here to contribute.

Ask Georgia and Alabama farm owners if it's a liberal fantasy whether or not immigrants contribute and/or do jobs American's are too lazy to do.

And the construction worker with a family might need to get a little bootstrappy and find a better job? What's the difference between welfare and govt intervention to artificially inflate pay? (If the problem is that the immigrants are illegal, we can fix that pretty quick.) 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 06, 2016, 09:50:21 AM
Make America Great Again basically means two things:

1) Make America White Again (or at least less brown)
2) Bring back my job for life


I find it ironic that all those white folks jibber-jabbering about "Boot Straps" can't or are too lazy to compete in the new global workforce.

A+++

Although I find it a little unfair that a taxpaying construction worker with a family should have to compete with an illegal that will fill out a w4 claiming 9 dependents, living 9 men deep in a two bedroom slum, and sending 75 percent of his income back to Mexico.  That's a real beef, in spite of the liberal fantasy that they come here to contribute.

Ask Georgia and Alabama farm owners if it's a liberal fantasy whether or not immigrants contribute and/or do jobs American's are too lazy to do.

And the construction worker with a family might need to get a little bootstrappy and find a better job? What's the difference between welfare and govt intervention to artificially inflate pay? (If the problem is that the immigrants are illegal, we can fix that pretty quick.)

Too lazy to do?  Bullshit! Too lazy to do for slave wages.

Slave wages made possible by a government that refuses to secure the border, but will make me take off my shoes to board a plane. 

When I say "contribute", what I meant was pay taxes and build communities,  not lines the pockets of shrareholders in Agri-businesses.  That isn't what's going on.  Illegals are dodging taxes and living ten people to slum apartments.  It's a fact that all the money is going back to Mexico.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on March 06, 2016, 09:53:57 AM
Well maybe all those angry morons shouldn't have been voting for the party that espouses "free market" principles and consistently blocks minimum wage increases.

Maybe they should look in the mirror instead of blaming brown people for all their problems.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on March 06, 2016, 09:57:36 AM
Build communities? Ha ha ha... You know what else builds communities? Taking care of your sick, poor, and less fortunate. Something lazy white angry people who vote Republican consistently refuse to do.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 06, 2016, 10:05:38 AM
Well maybe all those angry morons shouldn't have been voting for the party that espouses "free market" principles and consistently blocks minimum wage increases.

Maybe they should look in the mirror instead of blaming brown people for all their problems.

Who's blaming the brown people? By your logic the angry white people should "get a little boot-strappy" and start selling drugs to supplement their income, because after all the illegal thing is a simple fix.   
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on March 06, 2016, 10:20:30 AM
When I say "contribute", what I meant was pay taxes and build communities,  not lines the pockets of shrareholders in Agri-businesses.  That isn't what's going on.  Illegals are dodging taxes and living ten people to slum apartments.  It's a fact that all the money is going back to Mexico.

70% to 80% of illegal immigrants pay taxes and they pay $7 billion per year into social security -- money they will never get back. But yeah it's the angry white guy that's getting fucked!

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 06, 2016, 10:39:47 AM
Horseshit statistic!! That same tax revenue would come from legal citizens if the government would enforce the law. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on March 06, 2016, 10:44:14 AM
Horseshit statistic!! That same tax revenue would come from legal citizens if the government would enforce the law.

Horseshit was your contention that they don't pay taxes. That statistic comes from a non-partisan congressional committee.

And I've known a ton of white guys in industries like construction that get paid under the table. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nick Grant on March 06, 2016, 03:35:10 PM
JBro, you were right on the money with your comment about the real meaning of "Make America great again."

Likewise, think of the slogan, "Take America back!"   Back from whom?  Brown people?  Black people?  Asian people?  Gay people?  Women people?

And Ward, who do you think is more progressive in regard to all of the have-nots in America?  Trump or Hillary?  If you voted for Obama (and I assume that you did), well, Hillary is more of the same.  Sure, she loves power.  Yes, she's tight with some of the most powerful institutions in the USA.  But she has also lived a life of service from even before she graduated from Wellesley College.  In the first Clinton administration (as you know), she was the main impetus behind the extension of health care in this country. 

Ease off on the cynicism and consider the alternative to Hillary.  It's not a Hobson's choice.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: steve weitzler on March 06, 2016, 04:56:04 PM
Speaking of paying taxes.....I seem to remember hearing about a number of companies (Halliburton comes to mind) that set up off-shore (Cayman Islands comes to mind) "home offices" to avoid paying taxes. General electric is in the process of moving its home headquarters from Conn. to Mass. The reason it is moving is the company got a sweet "tax break" to relocate to Mass. So don't go telling me about how illegals don't pay taxes. The rich got all kinds of tax breaks (its not income its capital gains the rich say) that the average Americans will never see.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 06, 2016, 04:56:56 PM
Horseshit statistic!! That same tax revenue would come from legal citizens if the government would enforce the law.

And I've known a ton of white guys in industries like construction that get paid under the table.

It's not an issue of race, it's an issue of right and wrong.  So because an illegal alien kicks in $583.  A year to social security it's ok to remain in violation of the law?

Lazy? No goddam way.  Morons?  Some of us.  Angry?  You bet!!  What's in the open borders deal for us?  I'll tell you... Depressed wages, a heroin epidemic, and the threat of a jihadist carrying a bomb into the states over the southern border
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on March 06, 2016, 07:34:08 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1hEyiE2q-w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1hEyiE2q-w)

To lighten things up a little bit
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on March 06, 2016, 11:03:11 PM
Horseshit statistic!! That same tax revenue would come from legal citizens if the government would enforce the law.

And I've known a ton of white guys in industries like construction that get paid under the table.

It's not an issue of race, it's an issue of right and wrong.  So because an illegal alien kicks in $583.  A year to social security it's ok to remain in violation of the law?

Lazy? No goddam way.  Morons?  Some of us.  Angry?  You bet!!  What's in the open borders deal for us?  I'll tell you... Depressed wages, a heroin epidemic, and the threat of a jihadist carrying a bomb into the states over the southern border

There are no supporting facts that a stronger border will stop any of the above. Imo, depressed wages stem not from an influx of illegals but because consumers want cheap, cheap, cheap  products.

The heroin epidemic is only in the fore front because it's now hitting white wealthy neighborhoods, where was the outcry in the 70's when it was crippling black neighborhoods? in terms of the epidemic, it's not because of loose southern borders it's cause is directly linked to liberal prescriptions of heavy narcotics by doctors, no wall is going to stop this until pain management is overhauled.

"Jihadist" name one instance in which a terror suspect that killed one person in the US entered our country illegally. You can't, All terrorists both home grown and foreign entered and lived in the US legally. It is far easier, less time consuming, cheaper, and more secure if a person hell bent on terror enters through proper channels like student visas or tourist visas. 

As for walls, the Berlin Wall failed, the Great Wall of China failed to keep the Mongolians out, but go ahead build a 100 billion dollar wall so that some Mexican can build a 100 dollar tunnel underneath it.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 07, 2016, 07:30:35 AM
Yeah,  because guys that would work longer hours for half the money ignoring nearly all OSHA regulations with no family to support definitely have zero effect on labor costs.  Paleeze!!!

Really?  The heroin is coming over the southern border is it not? Yes or no

Good strategy, wait for the mushroom cloud.

I guess I'm alone in the wilderness on this one. Oh well.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on March 07, 2016, 08:49:04 AM

And Ward, who do you think is more progressive in regard to all of the have-nots in America?  Trump or Hillary?  If you voted for Obama (and I assume that you did), well, Hillary is more of the same.  Sure, she loves power.  Yes, she's tight with some of the most powerful institutions in the USA.  But she has also lived a life of service from even before she graduated from Wellesley College.  In the first Clinton administration (as you know), she was the main impetus behind the extension of health care in this country. 

Ease off on the cynicism and consider the alternative to Hillary.  It's not a Hobson's choice.

I didn't vote for Obama, I voted for Chuck Baldwin.

 I don't think either Hillary or Trump is "progressive," I think they are both corporate ass-ponies.

You can vote for the better of two ass-ponies if you want.  Not me.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on March 07, 2016, 09:55:09 AM
Immigration myths http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Myths_and_facts_about_immigration_to_the_United_States (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Myths_and_facts_about_immigration_to_the_United_States)
Don't like wiki, Google immigration myths and get the actual report in long form from the Center for Immigration Policy.

Heroin, sure the majority of it is flowing through the southern border, but as long as there's a desire for it it's going to enter the U.S.

Proof is in the pudding, terrorists are not using the southern border to illegally access the U.S. This is a myth that has been debunked time and time again, there is just no factual information that supports this claim. https://www.start.umd.edu/sites/default/files/files/publications/START_BorderCrossingsTerroristAttacks.pdf (https://www.start.umd.edu/sites/default/files/files/publications/START_BorderCrossingsTerroristAttacks.pdf) a quick exert: "among those attempts to enter the United States, the most frequent origin for these crossing efforts was Canada." And "almost half (48%) were US citizens and another 18% were Canadian citizens."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on March 07, 2016, 10:30:25 AM
Many of the passages in that make my case for me.  But just to qualify I'll tell you that I've been in the industry for going on 24 years.  I've been a grunt, I've served as management for large commercial firms(employing hundreds of men), and I've owned and operated a contracting business for more than 15 years.  I make it my business to know exactly what's going on in this industry,  if I didn't my business would fail. 

Pull all the online passages and twaddle you wish(half of which made my case for me).   I've seen the fake documents.  I know which outfits have set up shell companies to employ illegals.  I know who's paying cash and who isn't.  I know who's skating by avoiding OSHA and how they're doing it.  I know some of the dirtbag employers of illegals have taken to adding rentals to their portfolio as a means of "paying the help".  I've witnessed the profound shift in the demographics of applicants.

None of it matters though.  You know what matters?  Illegal immigrants are breaking the law.  Period

I don't ask for shit from Uncle Sam!  I take care of my own and then some.  Uncle Sam could do is lunch pail guys a solid on this one and ACT.  That's all we want
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slacker on March 07, 2016, 11:28:01 AM
It is a joke to say that the cheap labor is sneaking across our borders. Though this is true to some small extent, it is being imported at a much larger scale through corporations. An example that hits close to home are the major ski areas right here in the Mount Washington valley.  Every winter and summer season they import "international students." They are from third world countries and work for the VERY LOW minimum wage. The effect that this has on any of the local ski jobs is obvious! If you won't work for $8.25 then we will bring in labor!

You can not afford to live in the MT Washington valley for 8.25 an hour.

Matt
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: steve weitzler on March 07, 2016, 05:46:16 PM
Hey Ward, who is Chuck Baldwin?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on March 07, 2016, 06:27:17 PM
Hey Ward, who is Chuck Baldwin?
Jesus, Ward

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Baldwin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Baldwin)  ::)

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/chuck-baldwin (https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/chuck-baldwin)

From the above site:

Background
The far right firebrand says he actually was a Democrat until his late 20s.  Born in a small town in Indiana, Baldwin was raised by religious parents. His father was a welder and a lay preacher in jails. Baldwin says he grew up expecting to pursue a career in law enforcement. But at the age of 17, he felt called by God to enter the ministry. He became an evangelical minister, forming the Crossroad Baptist Church in Pensacola, Fla., in 1975.  He preached an anti-abortion, anti-gay, fundamentalist gospel, and the church grew rapidly. It became a Christian evangelical Mecca, complete with a mock graveyard that honored aborted fetuses.   

After registering as a Republican in 1980, Baldwin became active in the Moral Majority. He rose to become chairman of the Florida chapter even as he increasingly linked Christianity to political activism against gays and abortion rights. Over the years, Baldwin also evolved into a prolific propagandist, hosting his own call-in radio show, “Chuck Baldwin Live,” appearing as a frequent spokesman for political and religious conservatism on media outlets such as MSNBC and CNN, and posting frequent columns to online sites. He also has appeared on “The Political Cesspool,” a white nationalist radio program whose guests have also included former Klan leader David Duke and a variety of other professional racists. And Baldwin’s columns are archived on VDARE.com, an immigrant-bashing hate website.

Moving even further to the right, Baldwin gave up on the Republican Party in 2000 because he considered the Bush-Cheney ticket too liberal. Instead, he allied himself with the Constitution Party, a virulently antigovernment, anti-gay and anti-immigration group. In 2004, Michael Peroutka, the Constitution Party’s presidential candidate, tapped Baldwin as his running mate. In his acceptance speech, Baldwin confided that, when Peroutka asked him to join the ticket, “I thought it was a joke.” But after realizing Peroutka was serious, Baldwin seized the opportunity. In 2008, Baldwin himself became the party’s presidential candidate.

Unleashing a flood of extremist rhetoric, he campaigned as the best alternative for patriotic Americans fed up with both major political parties. He claimed that the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks might have been a conspiracy, an “inside job,” ... etc.

He actually expresses some things here that I would agree with http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/Articles/tabid/109/ID/2281/My-Thoughts-On-The-Movie-American-Sniper.aspx (http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/Articles/tabid/109/ID/2281/My-Thoughts-On-The-Movie-American-Sniper.aspx) . Hopefully that is what attracted Ward, but if you look at his other rants he is self righteous, guns and God, conspiracy theorist loon.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on March 07, 2016, 06:40:05 PM
Newt Gingrich's response to Bill O'Reiley almost makes me want to vote for Trump.

When asked why Trump panics the establishment he answers: "He's not part of the club, he hasn't been through the rituals, he's not a member of a secret society."

ttps://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video;_ylt=AwrBT9b0D95WGjYApNFXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByMjB0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--?p=Newt+Gingrich%2C+Trump%2C+Secrret+Society&fr=aaplw#id=1&vid=2a103b447a4624a713eaab5ab073bf08&action=viewnin

Wouldn't surprise me if Newt has an "accident" in the near future.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: steve weitzler on March 08, 2016, 08:06:10 PM
Thanks Mark for informing me. Chuck Baldwin makes Ted Cruz sound liberal.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on March 08, 2016, 08:31:42 PM
Shocking, another fed up American who just happens to be a racist douchebag.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on March 09, 2016, 03:44:47 PM
#1  Last night my wife got so worked up about Trump she spilled half a beer !  So, fuck you DT..it's personal now !

#2  Anyone here get health care through the ACA ?  I do and I'm literally alive because of it  = Hillary

#3  Wanna get in on the ground in Syria ?  Iran ?  Korea "?      didn't think so

Is Hillary a liar ? probably, she's an attorney, politician,,etc..everyone lies. Will the country be better off with her ? I think so,,certainly more so than DT
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: strandman on April 24, 2016, 07:49:25 PM
I had a lunch today with a big variety of people..puerto rican,,hispanic, hard cores,,gay..etc

NO WAY Trump wins..it just won't be.  A lot of these folks support Bernie, but realize it's a no contest,,he can't win and more importantly he can't defeat Trump.

First time since  Ray Gun that i vote to oppose someone rather than for some one
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on October 28, 2016, 03:12:26 PM
Apologies for resurrecting this thread...it didn't end well last time.  I've never been so nerved up about an election.  I can't wait for this one to be behind us. 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: xcrag_corex on October 28, 2016, 03:18:56 PM
Vermin Supreme or bust!!!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on October 28, 2016, 06:34:12 PM
Vermin Supreme or bust!!!

YES
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on November 04, 2016, 05:32:39 PM
Robert Reich: A Donald Trump supporter learns his candidate is a con man
http://www.salon.com/2016/09/21/robert-reich-a-donald-trump-supporter-learns-his-candidate-is-a-con-man/ (http://www.salon.com/2016/09/21/robert-reich-a-donald-trump-supporter-learns-his-candidate-is-a-con-man/)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on November 08, 2016, 11:32:36 PM
This is beyond depressing
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on November 09, 2016, 05:03:43 AM
Past due to get my passport renewed. My best hope is the destruction is not too permanent and this election puts a fire under some real, quality leaders to step up and not leave it to the dregs like we had to choose from. Come on: Carson, Christie, Clinton, Rubio, Cruz, Trump! Johnson?? Even Sanders was a weak prospect in many ways, though I sure wish he had beaten Clinton
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: grubbers on November 09, 2016, 10:49:20 AM
I'm really worried as to what the future might hold. We could see decades of progress in environmental and social policies undone in just a few years.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DaveR on November 09, 2016, 01:12:49 PM
    OMG!! As of 1pm the markets are all up and the world has not ended.  :o
    S&P 500
    2,159.42
    19.86 (0.93%)

     Dow 30
    18,518.53
    185.79 (1.01%)

    Nasdaq
    5,234.16
    40.67 (0.78%)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on November 09, 2016, 06:02:41 PM
well... this is going to be interesting!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DaveR on November 10, 2016, 07:28:08 AM
    OMG!! As of 1pm the markets are all up and the world has not ended.  :o
    S&P 500
    2,159.42
    19.86 (0.93%)

     Dow 30
    18,518.53
    185.79 (1.01%)

    Nasdaq
    5,234.16
    40.67 (0.78%)

A little bit like swaggering around the flight deck under the "Mission Accomplished" banner don't you think?   He'll have his chance.

Just Laughing at the "experts" that were predicting a 1000pt drop Tuesday night. Looks like the market is set for another good day today.


Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on November 10, 2016, 08:45:25 AM
It actually did drop. The DOW futures were down over 800 points at one point when I saw them around midnight. Then Carl Icahn bought over a billion dollars worth, along with other Trump billionaire supporters which likely caused a short squeeze to shoot it back up. Many traders jumped in on the momentum. We'll have to see, but I suspect the rally is not going to be long for this world once reality sets in.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on November 12, 2016, 10:29:43 PM
I read an article written by Matthew Dowd(Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa) this morning that sort captured some of my own sentiments regarding the election.  The gist being that the left had really blown it with the closed minded judgmental approach to Trump supporters.  I'm willing to give this guy a chance.  Ultimately, we all want the best for our country. 

Is anyone willing to share their thoughts on volunteering opportunities? Rather than sulking,  I'd prefer to get involved and at least give this "Make America Great Again" thing a shot.  It's just too important to sit on the sidelines and bitch about Trump.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Attention all whimpering weeping butthurts ^^^^^ PAY ATTENTION TO THIS !!!

You are a good man nemesis. And a damn fine proud American.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: perswig on November 13, 2016, 06:22:20 AM
Nice demonstration of two ways to encourage dialogue going forward. ^^

World's (probably) not going to end, and ideally checks-and-balances will continue to work as designed at least for a bit longer, but I'd anticipate some pretty wild pendulum swings on both foreign and domestic policy over the next 4, and at least initially some generalized emboldened fringe jackassery. 
Lots of pent-up emotion on all sides; maybe legalizing pot IS the way to go.

First rule:  be good.  Second rule:  if you can't be good, be safe.
Dale
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on November 13, 2016, 10:19:14 AM
I love these folks justifying their racism and bigotry and ignorance because those meanie librulz typed mean things on the internet. As if the right has been so civil.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: DaveR on November 13, 2016, 12:44:51 PM
I love these folks justifying their racism and bigotry and ignorance because those meanie librulz typed mean things on the internet. As if the right has been so civil.

Watch this, listen carefully to what he has to say and learn something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_y1TC5w--w
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on November 14, 2016, 07:57:30 AM
OH he's doing a great job draining the swamp, Priebus, head of the RNC, Christie, Gulliani, Bannon, looks more like he's bringing the swamp into the White House and filling all the rooms with snakes and rats.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: markvnh on November 14, 2016, 09:28:15 PM
...a bearish bond market has been long overdue. They've been calling it for awhile but with the fed basically holding rates steady and with the impending rate raise I'm not surprised. Coulda been anyone elected and I think we'd start seeing this.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on November 15, 2016, 08:29:26 PM
OH he's doing a great job draining the swamp, Priebus, head of the RNC, Christie, Gulliani, Bannon, looks more like he's bringing the swamp into the White House and filling all the rooms with snakes and rats.

++++
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on November 16, 2016, 03:44:52 PM
I don't have much hope for Trump, but had even less for Hillary.  She is a "good old boy" with a vagina.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Nemesis on November 16, 2016, 04:18:35 PM
Oof. There's a pretty picture
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on November 16, 2016, 04:26:57 PM
Eybolter, the fact that you felt it necessary to tell us all she has a vagina screams to me you are part of the problem plaguing America. Yes Hillary is an insider, and yes she is a female, but the fact you needed to relate both in one sentence leaves it hanging as to whether Hillary was just bad because she was one or worse because she was both. Comments like these while perhaps benign by the poster can be misconstrued by the reader and thus propagate sexist stereotypes. Call me the PC police or whatever, but if someone ever mentioned that my wife or daughter was a "good old boy with a vagina" it would be the last time I'd invite them over for supper.

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: wiggins on November 16, 2016, 08:07:51 PM
now u tell me... wish i knew hillary had a vagina, i wasted my vote on that other dick.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on November 17, 2016, 01:51:49 PM
Eybolter, the fact that you felt it necessary to tell us all she has a vagina screams to me you are part of the problem plaguing America. Yes Hillary is an insider, and yes she is a female, but the fact you needed to relate both in one sentence leaves it hanging as to whether Hillary was just bad because she was one or worse because she was both. Comments like these while perhaps benign by the poster can be misconstrued by the reader and thus propagate sexist stereotypes. Call me the PC police or whatever, but if someone ever mentioned that my wife or daughter was a "good old boy with a vagina" it would be the last time I'd invite them over for supper.

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend, I like vaginas. 

My point was that she was the same old crap repackaged in a woman's body.  Her two big selling points as far as I can see is that she wasn't Tump and she was a woman.  .




Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Jeff on November 17, 2016, 01:54:57 PM
Apparently, 52 % of women voters voted against her; How is that not stupid?
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on November 17, 2016, 03:08:15 PM
Eybolter, the fact that you felt it necessary to tell us all she has a vagina screams to me you are part of the problem plaguing America. Yes Hillary is an insider, and yes she is a female, but the fact you needed to relate both in one sentence leaves it hanging as to whether Hillary was just bad because she was one or worse because she was both. Comments like these while perhaps benign by the poster can be misconstrued by the reader and thus propagate sexist stereotypes. Call me the PC police or whatever, but if someone ever mentioned that my wife or daughter was a "good old boy with a vagina" it would be the last time I'd invite them over for supper.

Part of the problem? NOT

eyebolter's post pointed to the fact that Hillbag got many votes simple BECAUSE she has a vagina. Not because she was in any way a "good" candidate.

Kinda along the same reason Barry got elected- "it's TIME for the 1st black man as the POTUS". The fact that he was woefully inexperienced did not matter.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on November 17, 2016, 06:06:50 PM
I bet less than 60,000 of the 60 million votes she got were because she was a woman...but then again I thought no way in hell Trump was going to win.  Even he looks surprised.

My guess, the votes she received because she's a she were vastly outnumbered by the votes against her because she is a she.


Part of the problem? NOT

eyebolter's post pointed to the fact that Hillbag got many votes simple BECAUSE she has a vagina. Not because she was in any way a "good" candidate.

Kinda along the same reason Barry got elected- "it's TIME for the 1st black man as the POTUS". The fact that he was woefully inexperienced did not matter.

Obama was not elected simply because it was time for a black president, he resonated with much of America, and I'm not aware of anyone in my political sphere that voted for him due to his skin color. He is and was a good president, perhaps not great but good and to say he was woefully inexperienced in light of the current president elect is comical. Obama is also leaving the presidency with one of the highest approval ratings by the American populace in the last twenty years.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on November 21, 2016, 10:43:00 AM
I bet less than 60,000 of the 60 million votes she got were because she was a woman...but then again I thought no way in hell Trump was going to win.  Even he looks surprised.

My guess, the votes she received because she's a she were vastly outnumbered by the votes against her because she is a she.


Part of the problem? NOT

eyebolter's post pointed to the fact that Hillbag got many votes simple BECAUSE she has a vagina. Not because she was in any way a "good" candidate.

Kinda along the same reason Barry got elected- "it's TIME for the 1st black man as the POTUS". The fact that he was woefully inexperienced did not matter.

Obama was not elected simply because it was time for a black president, he resonated with much of America, and I'm not aware of anyone in my political sphere that voted for him due to his skin color. He is and was a good president, perhaps not great but good and to say he was woefully inexperienced in light of the current president elect is comical. Obama is also leaving the presidency with one of the highest approval ratings by the American populace in the last twenty years.

Please post your source(s) for this little humdinger.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: alwoodsmithy on November 21, 2016, 12:04:52 PM
1980 Dec. 5-8  Jimmy Carter  34% approval
1988 Dec. 27-29 Ronald Reagan  63% approval
1993 Jan. 8-11 George Bush 56% approval
2001 Jan. 10-14  William J. Clinton  66% approval 
2009 Jan. 9-11  George W. Bush  34% approval

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/final_approval.php

Guess it matters how you define "one of the highest..."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: alwoodsmithy on November 21, 2016, 12:05:55 PM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

Obama hovering between 50-55% approval rating currently.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on November 21, 2016, 02:26:25 PM
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/obama-approval-229224 (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/obama-approval-229224)

From Oct, 7 consecutive months at or above 50%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx (http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx)

Gallup poll numbers from early Nov.

Oh and here's another one that compares Obama to Trump

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/donald-trump-popular-poll-231694 (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/donald-trump-popular-poll-231694)

In case you don't feel it necessary to actually read this, Trump 46% v Obama 56%.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on November 22, 2016, 03:46:00 PM


Drain the swamp and bring foreign interests, rats, snakes, and con men into the Oval Office. Looks like the make America great again slogan  meant when it was a colony. It's going to be so dirty and rotten under his regime he's making Melania stay in NY because lord knows he doesn't want his third wife to step in any shit.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on November 22, 2016, 07:14:21 PM
Yes very cool.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on November 23, 2016, 06:02:17 AM
Trump said that the election was rigged.  What if he was right?   

I think that a huge stock market meltdown and recession are on the way, regardless of who won, and it will all be blamed on Trump and his ant-trade policies.  Remember you heard it here first!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: darthgator on November 23, 2016, 09:11:25 AM


Nice article Nemesis, but I think it falls short in explaining beyond the numbers.

Have you read this:
https://hbr.org/2016/11/what-so-many-people-dont-get-about-the-u-s-working-class (https://hbr.org/2016/11/what-so-many-people-dont-get-about-the-u-s-working-class)
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: slink on November 23, 2016, 11:57:16 AM
Election is over we have four years to see if he can "make America great again". It's politics and the middle class takes the brunt of society on their shoulders. Sure we have a great country already, it was built by immigrants. Some things to think about next election.
1: get your friends to vote , voter turnout was horrible this election. I think voter apathy killed Hillary, a lot of Bernie or bust people
 2: people need to fact check the news so many fake stories being published and the sheeple believe
3: Next senate elections will not have a big impact so it's four years of hoping for the best.
 
I still prefer Trump over Pence. Stay true to democracy ,climb safe, and have a happy commercialized thanksgiving
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on November 23, 2016, 01:20:31 PM
I love all you whiners predicting what Trump is/isn't gonna do.

He hasn't even started yet.

Funny it's the same people who predicted Hilldouche's landslide coronation. You got suckered by the Lame Stream Media.

And you lost. Suck it up buttercup(s).

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on November 23, 2016, 05:50:14 PM
Trump said that the election was rigged.  What if he was right?   

I think that a huge stock market meltdown and recession are on the way, regardless of who won, and it will all be blamed on Trump and his ant-trade policies.  Remember you heard it here first!

If Trump tears up the trade deals those tv's and computers everyone's getting for $300. will go to $600(maybe more) overnight, and yeah a major recession would rightfully be blamed on Drumpf

You've been predicting a market crash and recession since the last one. It's inevitable that eventually you will be correct! Like that guy in the office movie that kept predicting layoffs!

Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on November 23, 2016, 07:33:28 PM
i agree, markets go in cycles, so why does everyone think that Obama did a great job when this tepid, whimpy "recovery" it is 100% due to the Fed putting interest rates at all time lows?  Screwing granny"s savings so Wall Street can mop up.

I'm telling you that the Fed is going to pull the rug out from under Trump. It will have nothing to do with him, but will all be blamed on him.  That is why the markets went from 800 points down on election night to up 200, all manipulation, they want Obama to go out looking like a hero.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: JBro on November 23, 2016, 08:34:36 PM
The fed has been signalling a rate hike for a year or two. Not sure why you think upcoming hikes have anything to do with Trump or why you think the fed wants to make Obama look like a hero.

They say 2008 was the worse since the great depression. That took what, 25 years to climb out of? Seems to me all time market highs and fairly low unemployment (with a strengthening economy as we speak) only 8 years out from 08 might be characterized as a bit better than a tepid recovery.

 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on November 24, 2016, 11:12:15 AM
i agree, markets go in cycles, so why does everyone think that Obama did a great job when this tepid, whimpy "recovery" it is 100% due to the Fed putting interest rates at all time lows?  Screwing granny"s savings so Wall Street can mop up.

I'm telling you that the Fed is going to pull the rug out from under Trump. It will have nothing to do with him, but will all be blamed on him.  That is why the markets went from 800 points down on election night to up 200, all manipulation, they want Obama to go out looking like a hero.

the market has been steadily going up for the past 8 years. I doubt this latest increase has anything to do with Obama. I'm not saying it's not going to go down, but unless Trump does something totally stupid, which he certainly might, I think things are going to remain "fairly" stable for the next 4 years.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: kenreville on November 26, 2016, 09:28:28 PM
Agree Al. Time to see what Trump's got. Good or bad, it won't change that much.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on November 28, 2016, 05:45:05 PM
The fed has been signalling a rate hike for a year or two. Not sure why you think upcoming hikes have anything to do with Trump or why you think the fed wants to make Obama look like a hero.

They say 2008 was the worse since the great depression. That took what, 25 years to climb out of? Seems to me all time market highs and fairly low unemployment (with a strengthening economy as we speak) only 8 years out from 08 might be characterized as a bit better than a tepid recovery.

 

The fed has been bluffing about a rate hike for years, not "a year or two." 
All time market highs are directly a result of zero percent interest rates.  When interest rates go up, the market will go down, a lot if that is what they want.

Look at the "labor participation rate" if you think unemployment is low.  The rigged government unemployment rate is low, but the actual percentage of people employed full time is really low.  There are no soup lines.  Instead, people are getting government checks in the mail.
 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on November 29, 2016, 06:42:02 PM
The swamp drainer is showing the true colors of Republicans.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_583dc491e4b06539a78a984d (http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_583dc491e4b06539a78a984d)

For those unwilling to read, Republican leaders are requesting we give the not yet president some time before the US investigates financial gain from his businesses when interacting with foreign leaders. To me this sets a dangerous precedent allowing Trump to do his thing and give handsome leverage to foreign leaders while allowing him a backdoor of "well I wasn't President at the time."

To date a least of grievances:
Inclusion of white nationalist in his close quarters
Complete lack of transparency, i.e. No taxes, no press
Disregard for the Constitution, i.e. Banning Muslim's, freedom of press, flag burning
Inciting violence
Blatant lies i.e. rigged election, millions of fraudulent votes, etc
Twitter usage
Small hands
Bad tan
Horrible hair
The assault on healthcare
The idea that Sarah Palin might a part of his cabinet
Wants to re-rename Denali
Probably thinks LePage is a good guy.
Is thinking about petreaus.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on December 03, 2016, 07:57:43 AM
https://trumpgrets.tumblr.com/ (https://trumpgrets.tumblr.com/)

Saw this the other day.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on December 06, 2016, 03:18:12 PM

Nepotism? Stupidity? Blind hubris?

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-children-diplomacy-state-department-232191 (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-children-diplomacy-state-department-232191)

Perhaps the most poignant quote
"Trump is not known to have taken any briefings from the State Department yet, despite having conversations with several foreign leaders,according to a source at State. Trump has made moves that run directly counter to U.S. foreign policy, such as speaking with Taiwan's president — a talk that upset China and suggested to U.S. diplomats that he doesn't care what they think. Trump also has yet to select a secretary of state, a delay that could be due to his awareness of the importance of that role but which is nonetheless deepening anxiety within the Foreign Service."
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on January 20, 2017, 05:03:06 PM
Petition Trump to release his taxes divest (and let farmers grow hemp) Please signe. Make sure you uncheck the little box so Trump wont spam you
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/#signapetition
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on January 20, 2017, 07:44:38 PM
I agree that Trump should release his taxes, but I'm still waiting for Obama to release his college transcripts.  As Obama said, "The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide."

But then I'm still waiting for that middle class tax cut that Bill Clinton promised....

I won't hold my breath.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: M_Sprague on January 20, 2017, 08:01:31 PM
Well, if Obama failed a course (unlikely) or took a basket weaving class it would just be embarrassing, whereas the tax returns could really reveal illegal and impeachable activity. I share your skepticism that Trump will ever voluntarily  show his tax returns, but at least if there is a huge number of petitioners it blows a hole in his assertion that nobody cares.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: eyebolter on January 21, 2017, 08:20:41 AM
Well, if Obama failed a course (unlikely) or took a basket weaving class it would just be embarrassing, whereas the tax returns could really reveal illegal and impeachable activity. I share your skepticism that Trump will ever voluntarily  show his tax returns, but at least if there is a huge number of petitioners it blows a hole in his assertion that nobody cares.

The speculation is that he applied to college as a foreign citizen (Indonesian).   But since he won't release them we will never know.
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: neiceclimber on January 22, 2017, 08:54:45 AM
I don't seem to remember College transcripts showing your incoming admission status (i.e. International), but I may be incorrect it's been a few since I left my job evaluating transcripts. Transcripts show grades, classes, standing as in grade level, enrollment status, and previous education. But let's say it does show app status of international, from that time forward all other schooling would also enroll him as international until he became a US Citizen at which point there would be a fairly lengthy paper trail both within the government and within school.

 Since Obama received Federal Student Aid it would have been impossible for him to be an international student.  Now what often happens is a student will make a mistake and file an international admission application, usually the admission team catches this and it's fixed pretty quickly. In the case of Obama with his educational background it could have been missed and then fixed when admissions and the international students office requested visa applications  and financial solvency or financial aid would pick it up when applying for aid. If financial aid picks it up, in order for them to change anything and disperse funding the student has to provide proof of citizenship. On occasion an admissions team will see someone graduated from a foreign high school (a child of a us diplomat) and assume the student is international and request a new app or proof of citizen.  I've also seen financial aid incorrectly label a student international based on their address at time of filing and again this usually requires proof of citizenship.
 
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Jeff on January 22, 2017, 10:09:01 AM


The speculation is that he applied to college as a foreign citizen (Indonesian).   But since he won't release them we will never know.

At this point, Jan 20, all "speculation" about Obama is just that:speculation, and since he is no longer in office, falls into the childish "Oh yeah? Nyaa, Nyaa, you lost! " retort category. What is pertinent going forward, is the fact that the current President can not speak without lying, is an arrogant, narcissistic,  petulant man-child and his ignorance and unwillingness to take advice from the intelligence professionals make him a danger to this nation and to the entire world. If examined, "it is speculated" that his tax returns may show him to have criminally defrauded the government of our country ( and therefore all of its tax-paying citizens)! That IS important information, and evidence  (and his own statements) suggest that said speculation is in fact true. His praise for the dictatorial leader of our principal adversary and encouragement of espionage against his political rival ( Hacking IS espionage!) approaches treason, and should be investigated as such. His attacks on the Press, and the Intelligence community, as well as the Nation's military leaders ( Remember " I know more than all the Generals about ISIS?") show how deeply we are mired in bull shit! I for one will resist this President, elected by a minority of my fellow citizens, due to an archaic system which was originally intended to forestall exactly this sort of potential inept tyrant!
Title: Re: Trump
Post by: Admin Al on February 01, 2017, 08:45:15 PM
What is pertinent going forward, is the fact that the current President can not speak without lying, is an arrogant, narcissistic,  petulant man-child and his ignorance and unwillingness to take advice from the intelligence professionals make him a danger to this nation and to the entire world. If examined, "it is speculated" that his tax returns may show him to have criminally defrauded the government of our country ( and therefore all of its tax-paying citizens)! That IS important information, and evidence  (and his own statements) suggest that said speculation is in fact true. His praise for the dictatorial leader of our principal adversary and encouragement of espionage against his political rival ( Hacking IS espionage!) approaches treason, and should be investigated as such. His attacks on the Press, and the Intelligence community, as well as the Nation's military leaders ( Remember " I know more than all the Generals about ISIS?") show how deeply we are mired in bull shit! I for one will resist this President, elected by a minority of my fellow citizens, due to an archaic system which was originally intended to forestall exactly this sort of potential inept tyrant!

^^ what he said!!!