Page 159 of 171 FirstFirst ... 59109149157158159160161169 ... LastLast
Results 4,741 to 4,770 of 5124

Thread: TRUMP 2016

  1. #4741
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Can't see the video, is the mystery guest one John Barron?
    The worst is quoted. Hannity looks very happy and says it will really piss the libs off. Basically, Lewk.
    Last edited by Loki; 09-06-2018 at 01:18 PM.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  2. #4742
    Calling it now, the coward who claims to be part of a resistance working against Trump is none other than Pence himself.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  3. #4743
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Calling it now, the coward who claims to be part of a resistance working against Trump is none other than Pence himself.
    That site is unavailable in Europe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  4. #4744
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  5. #4745
    Just someone hoping they can rehabilitate their reputation & be welcomed back into the establishment with open arms. Glad to see so many people basically telling this self-serving cretin to fuck off.

    That said... note how basically nobody is expressing disbelief.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  6. #4746
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Just someone hoping they can rehabilitate their reputation & be welcomed back into the establishment with open arms. Glad to see so many people basically telling this self-serving cretin to fuck off.

    That said... note how basically nobody is expressing disbelief.
    I think that Op-Ed in NYT was in large part intended to shore up Republican congressional candidates. The unsaid part is "No need to clobber your friendly neighborhood Republican congressman to help ensure this fucking moron of a president doesn't do truly catastrophic damage; we, the sane people in the administration, are quietly keeping him from doing his worst."

    Fuck you all.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  7. #4747
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Isn't the op-ed basically saying a similar thing to Woodward as I quoted at the end of the last page?

    I think America can be very grateful that there are sane people neutering from the inside some of Trumps worse excesses. If the sane people left leaving the asylum to be solely run by the lunatics I don't think that'd make things better.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  8. #4748
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Isn't the op-ed basically saying a similar thing to Woodward as I quoted at the end of the last page?

    I think America can be very grateful that there are sane people neutering from the inside some of Trumps worse excesses. If the sane people left leaving the asylum to be solely run by the lunatics I don't think that'd make things better.
    Rational people in the Republican Part have had SO many opportunities to keep that fucking moron from being, and continuing to be, president. They choose to sneak around to limit his damage because they LOVE fucking LOVE the tax cuts and regulatory evisceration - for them, the money is worth literally risking everything. Fuck. Them.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  9. #4749
    What opportunities? Realistically?

    He won the primary and the election. Short of a smoking gun that can cause impeachment how are they going to overturn democracy?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  10. #4750
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    What opportunities? Realistically?

    He won the primary and the election. Short of a smoking gun that can cause impeachment how are they going to overturn democracy?
    The Primary elections hold no legal sway, as far as I understand the process. The party leadership could have bumped him during that process at any time or at the convention. That would have guaranteed them an electoral loss, but at the time the party leadership was convinced he couldn't win anyway. They let the process go presumably because they didn't want to upset their base by removing the piece of shit staining the top of their ticket.

    When he was elected, the electoral college could have voted for Hillary or, (I think?), one of the other minor candidates on the ballot. But at that point, since they held both houses of congress, they were all drooling over the Supreme Court and the potential for a Big Tax Payoff.

    With their hold on congress, they could have made honest investigations of that asshole's collaboration with the Russians and various other likely crimes he's committed, and impeached him. They wouldn't have even lost power as a result. And they could have even done that after they got their SCOTUS justice and their fat tax cut, but they didn't because they're all afraid of pissing off the base and losing congress in November.

    There are probably a half dozen other things they could have done to get rid of him that I don't know anything about, like Article 25, for example. But they didn't and won't. And to claim some kind of secret behind-the-scenes heroics in that NYT editorial really is a bunch of cowardly bullshit. Fuck them all.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  11. #4751
    Your first two suggestions of reversing the primary results or the electoral college results are both clearly non-starters. Both would cause an unprecedented constitutional crisis, be a total betrayal of democracy and would potentially lead to mass violence or even a civil war if the democratic winner of the election didn't take over. If you deny people ballots they turn to bullets.

    Mueller is doing an honest investigation of collaboration, which they could have prevented with their control of both Congress and the Justice Department. They didn't prevent it. Mueller's investigation will take time but unless you think he is doing a whitewash the proper constitutional procedures are being followed. They can't impeach him until there's a smoking gun about his malfeasance which requires Mueller's investigation to find it.

    So really you're being completely unreasonable. You definitely can't expect them to overturn democracy. You can't expect them to invoke Amendment 25 without proof. That's how your constitution works. If Mueller's investigation ends with proof that he's guilty of a high crime etc and they don't then take action then at that point certainly more can be said. But sadly its premature now, you're stuck with him and its the voters fault.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  12. #4752
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,883
    Surely they could have taken the congressional investigations seriously. Or stand up against him in public.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  13. #4753
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Your first two suggestions of reversing the primary results or the electoral college results are both clearly non-starters. Both would cause an unprecedented constitutional crisis, be a total betrayal of democracy and would potentially lead to mass violence or even a civil war if the democratic winner of the election didn't take over. If you deny people ballots they turn to bullets.
    Yet they are how the Constitution is designed, with the intent to prevent a shit head like Trump from getting elected. Leaving aside whether the consequences you describe are plausible, I think it would have meant a remaking of the Republican Party from the ground up, if not the splintering or dissolution of the party entirely.

    I do think it was plausible and workable to kick Trump out of the Primaries early in the process, on grounds of "inappropriate, undignified, and/or unpresidential behavior" or some such, with minimal consequences. Of course, at the time, literally nobody thought he could possibly win the nomination, much less the election, so I'll call hindsight on myself for that one.

    Mueller is doing an honest investigation of collaboration, which they could have prevented with their control of both Congress and the Justice Department. They didn't prevent it. Mueller's investigation will take time but unless you think he is doing a whitewash the proper constitutional procedures are being followed. They can't impeach him until there's a smoking gun about his malfeasance which requires Mueller's investigation to find it.
    Fair enough on the part about Mueller being allowed to proceed (so far). However, in terms of respect for the claims in the NYT editorial, this doesn't affect how I feel about that in any way.

    So really you're being completely unreasonable.
    LOL, I am not. That editorial writer really is a self-serving coward, like the rest of his party. Why speak out at all?

    You definitely can't expect them to overturn democracy.
    I don't and have not, at least not beyond the protections that are built into the framework of this country's republic. All it takes to function correctly is a bit of courage and integrity.
    You can't expect them to invoke Amendment 25 without proof.
    There is DEFINITELY proof. The editorial author clearly indicates the widespread knowledge that Trump is incompetent and that's the purpose of Amendment 25, to remove an incompetent president.
    ... you're stuck with him and its the voters fault.
    We disagree.

    The Framers knew that an electorate was vulnerable to self-destruction in the ballot box. That's one reason why this is a Republic (not a Democracy). And that's why the Electoral College exists at all, to essentially veto the voters and prevent the creation of a President Trump. It just didn't work. So don't blame the voters, blame the Framers for their flawed design. Blame the Electors for not doing their duty. Blame the extreme partisanship, or our flat-out unrestricted freedom of speech that created it -- really the Framer's bad design again, I guess.

    I blame the Republican Party leadership for Trump even being on their ticket, the party could and should have nipped him in the bud. And I blame the Democratic Party leadership for Hillary being on their ticket. It's hindsight again, but somebody should have been able to see the extent to which the conservative propaganda machine had damaged her. I honestly believe practically any other candidate could have won that election against Trump.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  14. #4754
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    Yet they are how the Constitution is designed, with the intent to prevent a shit head like Trump from getting elected. Leaving aside whether the consequences you describe are plausible, I think it would have meant a remaking of the Republican Party from the ground up, if not the splintering or dissolution of the party entirely.
    Yes and no. Originally yes the Constitution was designed with the electoral college as an alternative to Direct Democracy. However in reality democracy has evolved so that the electors are elected under a ticket attached to a candidate.
    I do think it was plausible and workable to kick Trump out of the Primaries early in the process, on grounds of "inappropriate, undignified, and/or unpresidential behavior" or some such, with minimal consequences. Of course, at the time, literally nobody thought he could possibly win the nomination, much less the election, so I'll call hindsight on myself for that one.
    Indeed the only way to prevent him was to prevent him from being a candidate. By the point of the election it was too late.
    Fair enough on the part about Mueller being allowed to proceed (so far). However, in terms of respect for the claims in the NYT editorial, this doesn't affect how I feel about that in any way.
    Why?
    LOL, I am not. That editorial writer really is a self-serving coward, like the rest of his party. Why speak out at all?
    Because the country isn't a totalitarian dictatorship. People like the author can act in post as they see fit within reason.
    I don't and have not, at least not beyond the protections that are built into the framework of this country's republic. All it takes to function correctly is a bit of courage and integrity. There is DEFINITELY proof. The editorial author clearly indicates the widespread knowledge that Trump is incompetent and that's the purpose of Amendment 25, to remove an incompetent president.
    The 25th amendment is designed to remove an incapacitated President or one who is incapable of discharging their duties not an incompetent one. Especially where their incompetence was known pre-election.
    The Framers knew that an electorate was vulnerable to self-destruction in the ballot box. That's one reason why this is a Republic (not a Democracy). And that's why the Electoral College exists at all, to essentially veto the voters and prevent the creation of a President Trump. It just didn't work. So don't blame the voters, blame the Framers for their flawed design. Blame the Electors for not doing their duty. Blame the extreme partisanship, or our flat-out unrestricted freedom of speech that created it -- really the Framer's bad design again, I guess.
    Republic is not an alternative to democracy, republic is an alternative to monarchy. You are both a democracy and a republic.
    I blame the Republican Party leadership for Trump even being on their ticket, the party could and should have nipped him in the bud. And I blame the Democratic Party leadership for Hillary being on their ticket. It's hindsight again, but somebody should have been able to see the extent to which the conservative propaganda machine had damaged her. I honestly believe practically any other candidate could have won that election against Trump.
    Ditto. But Hillary shot herself. She was awful at campaigning, dull, uninspiring, took voters for granted and was derogatory to voters ("deplorables"). She lost a blue state that she didn't even visit in the final few weeks FFS.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  15. #4755
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Because the country isn't a totalitarian dictatorship. People like the author can act in post as they see fit within reason.
    Here I'm really speaking to the author's motives and character. What was the point of writing that editorial? Why communicate to the whole world that some like minded people are secretly sabotaging what they consider to be the president's worst decisions? I believe it's an attempt to influence the November election in favor of Republican candidates - that's the only thing I can think of. And I don't respect it at all.

    The 25th amendment is designed to remove an incapacitated President or one who is incapable of discharging their duties not an incompetent one. Especially where their incompetence was known pre-election.
    Well, what constitutes incapable of discharging duties is arguable, though not worth arguing I don't think. I mean, as an example, the president's own lawyer believes he is literally incapable of telling the truth. WTF? That sounds like the description of a mental illness. I think a solid argument can be made that that alone is grounds to remove him.

    Ditto. But Hillary shot herself. She was awful at campaigning, dull, uninspiring, took voters for granted and was derogatory to voters ("deplorables"). She lost a blue state that she didn't even visit in the final few weeks FFS.
    Yep. It wasn't just how damaged she was, she and her team made a lot of mistakes. Idiots.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  16. #4756
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    Here I'm really speaking to the author's motives and character. What was the point of writing that editorial? Why communicate to the whole world that some like minded people are secretly sabotaging what they consider to be the president's worst decisions? I believe it's an attempt to influence the November election in favor of Republican candidates - that's the only thing I can think of. And I don't respect it at all.
    You're a cynic, it could just as easily undermine Republicans.

    5 alternative explanations include honesty, wanting to vent/get things off your chest, encouraging by example others to do the same, in response to Woodward's book, wanting to demonstrate even Trump's own people consider him incapable. That's just off my head.
    Well, what constitutes incapable of discharging duties is arguable, though not worth arguing I don't think. I mean, as an example, the president's own lawyer believes he is literally incapable of telling the truth. WTF? That sounds like the description of a mental illness. I think a solid argument can be made that that alone is grounds to remove him.
    Is that on the record?
    Yep. It wasn't just how damaged she was, she and her team made a lot of mistakes. Idiots.
    Agreed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  17. #4757
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    There is DEFINITELY proof. The editorial author clearly indicates the widespread knowledge that Trump is incompetent and that's the purpose of Amendment 25, to remove an incompetent president.
    No it's not. It's designed to remove someone who is physically not able to fulfill the duties of President, not someone who can't do it with much competence. It's in case the President is ill/disabled, as Wilson was for the last year of his Presidency. And you need a majority of the cabinet officials to agree in writing with the Vice President to do it. Furthermore, all that's necessary to rescind that assumption of authority is for the President to assert he or she is in fact able to fulfill their duties. To overcome that you need the same majority, plus a 2/3 majority in both of Congress to override it (i.e. a greater majority than you'd need to convict of impeachment in the first place)

    The Framers knew that an electorate was vulnerable to self-destruction in the ballot box. That's one reason why this is a Republic (not a Democracy). And that's why the Electoral College exists at all, to essentially veto the voters and prevent the creation of a President Trump. It just didn't work. So don't blame the voters, blame the Framers for their flawed design. Blame the Electors for not doing their duty.
    The electors did their duty. Your issue is that the process of electing the President has become one of direct democracy and not backrooms in the first place. Electors are supposed to vote for who their state directs them to vote for, end of story. The states have moved to have that decision be unfettered direct democracy.

    And I blame the Democratic Party leadership for Hillary being on their ticket. It's hindsight again, but somebody should have been able to see the extent to which the conservative propaganda machine had damaged her. I honestly believe practically any other candidate could have won that election against Trump.
    If Hillary couldn't, then Sanders certainly wasn't going to pull if off either. You are STILL lying to yourself about how and why Trump won.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  18. #4758
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    Rational people in the Republican Part have had SO many opportunities to keep that fucking moron from being, and continuing to be, president. They choose to sneak around to limit his damage because they LOVE fucking LOVE the tax cuts and regulatory evisceration - for them, the money is worth literally risking everything. Fuck. Them.
    Tax cuts and regulatory wins are awesome but that Supreme Court majority is generational baby!

  19. #4759
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Tax cuts and regulatory wins are awesome but that Supreme Court majority is generational baby!
    Except your people have busted so many norms that no one will blink an eyelid when Dems increase the size of the Supreme Court.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  20. #4760
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Except your people have busted so many norms that no one will blink an eyelid when Dems increase the size of the Supreme Court.
    What norms were broken? The Biden demand from the 90s or the Harry Reid rule?

  21. #4761
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  22. #4762
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    The Framers knew that an electorate was vulnerable to self-destruction in the ballot box. That's one reason why this is a Republic (not a Democracy).
    This is an oft-repeated claim, but a constitutional representative republic IS a democracy. Minor point but regardless.

    I blame the Republican Party leadership for Trump even being on their ticket, the party could and should have nipped him in the bud.
    But Choobs, you know that there is nothing worse than the enemy winning. Nothing is worse than that. Period. Exitus acta probat.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  23. #4763
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    You are STILL lying to yourself about how and why Trump won.
    Still lying to myself? I don't recall discussing this before. Have we???
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  24. #4764
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    But Choobs, you know that there is nothing worse than the enemy winning. Nothing is worse than that. Period. Exitus acta probat.
    By nip in the bud, I meant they could have kicked him out of the primaries for bad behavior or some such, before his train really got rolling. At that point nobody believed he could win, so it would have been to the party's benefit since he was humiliating all their more competent candidates like a playground bully.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  25. #4765
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Is that on the record?
    It was quoted in the Woodward book. Not sure if that puts it on the record or not. Probably the lawyer has denied it.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  26. #4766
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,015
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    This is an oft-repeated claim, but a constitutional representative republic IS a democracy. Minor point but regardless.
    It's a failure of US-American education where they somehow seem to teach that only a direct democracy is a real democracy and that a republic isn't simply the opposite of a monarchy.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  27. #4767
    Precisely.

    The UK and the Netherlands are constitutional monarchies.
    The USA and Germany are republics.

    The USA, Germany, UK and the Netherlands are all democracies.

    It's not either/or.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  28. #4768
    I'm going to agree with Choobs, in part at least. There were plenty of opportunities for the GOP to take a stand, but they didn't. Probably because they thought Trump was an unqualified clown who'd never get the nomination (let alone the presidency), but also because they underestimated the anti-establishment sentiment of the voters. They could have joined forces to condemn Trump and basically kick him out of the party (like they did with John Birch), but since they didn't even do that for David Duke or other openly KKK candidates....well, they clearly don't care if racists or bigots run under the Republican ticket.

    Even after Trump was inaugurated and the Russian probe was underway, congressional Republicans could have done honest, open, thorough investigations of their own, and removed Nunes as committee chair when he was caught pimping for Trump. They could have demanded the Cyber Security unit in charge of election integrity be fully staffed and funded. They could also have pushed back against Trump's Tariff & Trade war, since he used bogus "national security" reasons (even for our best friend Canada!) to bypass congressional authorities. And they should have definitely stood up for the DoJ, the FBI, and Fourth Estate when Trump used his bully pulpit to discredit them, and sow mistrust of important institutions. But they didn't do any of that, because they cowardly put power and party first.

    I don't think they really care about executive overreach, expanded presidential powers, or abuse of power. Those are just memes they use when a Democrat sits in the oval office (see their nominee for SCOTUS). And now that the Republican Party has become the Trump Party, none of the traditional "principles" apply. They sold their souls for a corporate tax cut, de-regulations, and federal judges, but it didn't happen overnight, and it didn't start with Trump. This is the culmination of decades spent restricting voting, and gerrymandering which changed the Electoral College....

  29. #4769
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    It's a failure of US-American education where they somehow seem to teach that only a direct democracy is a real democracy and that a republic isn't simply the opposite of a monarchy.
    A republic ISN'T the opposite of a monarchy, anymore than a theocracy is the opposite of a plutocracy. You can't really describe government types as opposites (at least not accurately or legitimately)
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  30. #4770
    If there's one thing I learned about republicanism, it's that there are as many versions as there are people writing about it. On the other hand, the use of democracy to mean direct democracy is a clear flaw that many supporters of "republicanism" succumb to.
    Hope is the denial of reality

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •