The Trump Presidency

Discussion in 'Politics' started by joepistole, Jan 17, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,852
    Because it is a partisan website and not to be trusted.

    Biden has been declared the president-elect by all the reliable news organizations and will take office Jan 20, 20121

    Trump is just throwing a fit like a little boy and is gonna try to break all the toys before Biden gets to play president.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,845
    Possibility: the same thing that happened to the evidence that the 2000 election was rigged for W, and the 2016 election was rigged for Trump. (And the 2012 election was rigged against Obama, btw - no sense in ignoring crimes because the criminals failed in their ambitions).

    It would become common knowledge among liberals and lefties, and be ignored or dismissed as a "bothsides" phenomenon by the respectable media and the political establishment - regrettable, but the country has to move forward and look to the future and not refight the battles of the past and yadda yadda yadda.

    Second guess: because it was rigged in favor of a Democrat, it would become an all consuming scandal and lead to impeachments, trials, etc.

    The more interesting question - the more likely event - is that the evidence of election-rigging favoring Trump we all have in front of us right now is verified, undeniably, in public. Is this going to be the time when we finally do something, as a country, about the behavior of the Republican Party in these elections?
     
    Michael 345 likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 71 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,306
    Thank you for a considered response

    dismissed as a "bothsides" phenomenon by the respectable media and the political establishment - regrettable, but the country has to move forward and look to the future and not refight the battles of the past and yadda yadda yadda.

    My thinking was along the same course, a nod and a wink, nothing to see here solution

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. river

    Messages:
    15,932
    Highlighted

    As a Canadian looking at our neighbor , South of Us , to your last statement , I certainly hope so . And the Democrats .
     
  8. Saint Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,153
    Trump will not concede and won't hand over power.
     
  9. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    LOL. It is the mass media which decides about the winner?
    No, the current show is how the Dems have faked the elections. This effectively destroys one of the most powerful propaganda weapons of the West. That's real fun. There will be much more fun coming.

    Having thought about the question what would be the worst case for the unipolar world order, I think a full win for the Dems will be the optimal result. So, I wish them to win in the court against Trump (of course, after Trump presents openly very good proofs for the fake, so that together with the elections also the court system will be damaged) and also to win the Senate. Why? Because in this case the inner split will increase much more than under a next Trump time, and one can hope for separatism leading to the US splitting into parts.

    How? The Dems will take over the power completely, retaking the Supreme Court by increasing the numbers until they have the majority there, splitting California and giving Washington DC and Puerto Rico separate places in the Senate so that the Dems will rule the Senate forever, giving votes to all the immigrants and increasing immigration to secure their winning elections. After this, it will be certain for the Reps that they will never again (or at least for a long time) win federal elections. So, instead of fighting for winning at the federal level, they will either switch sides and become Dems, or they will concentrate on their states and start to support separatism, in particular by weakening central powers by nullification of federal laws.

    Then, the Dems will try to disarm the population. They will do this seriously, much more seriously than now, in Blue states, but also on the federal level. But there will be resistance, especially because the BLM riots have shown the people that they really need weapons. This will lead to segregation - those who don't want to give up their weapons will emigrate to Red states, and fight there for nullification of federal anti-gun laws.

    On the economic front, the Dems will heavily increase taxation, as on the state, as on the federal level, simply because this is what the Left always wants to do, but also because they have to. If they do it on state level, it will lead to firms migrating to Red states, on the federal level it will force firms to emigrate. Green politics has also a great potential of destroying the US economy as a whole. They will start to tax the rich, as measured in dollar income. All this on the background of a big economic crisis caused by the end of the dollar as the world currency, which will hit the US especially strong. Given that printing money is the "solution", and if the dollar stops to be world currency the US can no longer export them, this will end in hyperinflation, and, given that the heavy tax burden is defined by income in dollars, automatically everybody will be heavily taxed.

    There is, of course, the other side: Dem ruling means more terrorist wars, more color revolutions. But, in fact, the difference may not been that important, given that the deep state has been able to influence most of foreign policy during Trump time anyway. So, I think the long term weakening of US economy by socialist economics and increasing confrontation will be more important.
    The point being? There will be always some crime. Those cases have been real crimes, they will always happen because people will remain sexual beings. This defines no need for a surveillance state. BTW, without persecuting distribution and ownership of porn the police would have much more and easier access to video and picture evidence of such crimes.
    It is no wonder at all. Governments are attractive for control freaks, they like to control whatever they can. Big firms like to make it difficult for competitors, which can be reached with a lot of regulations. But the politicians are even more control freaks, they want to legislate out of personal lust. Of course, they will have to legitimate such things, but this is done for free by the media. Actually in Germany they had make a hysteria out of a few crimes, crimes close to the maximum penalty, to legitimize an increase in the minimum penalty. Thus, they don't even care if there is a relation between the crimes they are hysterical about and the legislation they propose.
    Incorrect question. What people really do is almost irrelevant to legislation. In the past, there may have been some relation. Today, if you want some legislation, tell the mass media to start a hysteria about some cases and everything will go as necessary.
    LOL. That joepistole has said some bad words, without even making a single consistent argument, is something very different from debunking. He is, of course, as most of those here, unable to accept a defeat and will claim victory even if completely demolished.
    LOL. You think I care about being trusted by US propaganda victims?
    Of course, I don't need. As if you would factcheck anything you post.
    Unfortunately, you have been unable to quote any evidence from this report which proves a collusion. There was no need for me to make or defend the claim that there is nothing because the burden of proof is on the side which claims existence of such things. And this has nothing to do with responsibility. It is simply pointing out your primitive failure.
    As if a "verdict" of an established liar would matter. You have lied many times, I have proven this explicitly, with quotes, many times, and repeatedly, so that it is established that you have known that these are lies but nonetheless repeated them, thus, obvious evil intention.
    LOL, you have really a state which is not corrupt? Or simply one possibly less corrupt than the others? Lobbyism (the name for legalized corruption) is illegal in Minnesota?
    Whatever, Biden is obviously corrupt, but became candidate of the Dems. So, corruption is obviously so common that the Americans don't care, the obvious corruption is nothing one bothers about. Not sure who is really more corrupt, it may be as well the Reps, I have no statistics, but the most famous examples like Clinton and now Biden are Dems, bad luck for the Dems. And the choice of a candidate which is worldwide known to be corrupt and even in multiple cases (Ukraine as well as China) and then actively censoring the distribution of the proofs is a quality of corruption which is not widely distributed even in heavily corrupt states.

    Propaganda fantasies about Putin disposed of.
    The collusion remains your fantasy, but of course the Russian diplomats have to face also various states with highly corrupt leadership.

    Just for fun, in Germany there was a long time when firms were not only allowed to bribe in foreign states, but were allowed to declare those bribes as costs in their tax declarations.
     
  10. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,424
    ok
    fixed it for you
     
  11. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,854
    No. There is nothing you can do 'as a country'; you can't even talk to one another across those huge open wounds of divisive politics. Nor can you divide amicably into geographical regions, because so many of the gashes are between a city and its surrounding countryside, an industrial tax-base and its executive work-force....
    It's a census year and 2021 is a gerrymandering year. Republican states will disenfranchise even more minority, poor and potentially progressive voters. Democratic states will be too busy trying to contain the epidemics of illness, need and hate to do anything else.
     
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,852
    No .... don't confuse the issue. It is the actual verified voter count to date that has already determined the winner. The reliable news organizations cite the accurate numbers as reported by the states.

    In spite of overwhelming numbers of "verified" counts (+5,000,000 for Biden) the Republicans refuse to accept reality and are engaging in obstruction of "smooth transition" to the Biden administration.

    Mike Pompeo says there will be a ‘smooth transition to second Trump administration’

    This is the word of the current Secretary of State
    I call that sedition!!!

    Just compare this travesty with the character assassination of Hillary Clinton over a few e-mails of no national security consequence. For shame, for shame.

    p.s. Define "deep state" . What on earth are you talking about. Who or what is is this "deep state" you keep slinging around. I bet you cannot give me a single piece of evidence that even hints at a "deep state".
     
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2020
  13. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,852
    No they report the winner in accordance with the verified vote count as submitted by the states.

    PRESIDENTIAL RESULTS
    Joe Biden will become the 46th US president, CNN projects

    CNN projects that Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes put native son Joe Biden above the 270 needed to become the 46th president of the United States. Born in Scranton, the former vice president and longtime Delaware senator defeated Donald Trump, the first president to lose a reelection bid since George H.W. Bush in 1992.

    270 to Win

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    BIDEN
    Current count; 279 (note; this number cannot be reversed)
    50.8% .... 77,320,403

    TRUMP
    Current count; 217 (note; this number cannot ever exceed 270)
    47.4% .... 72,221,129

    https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/president
     
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2020
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,852
    Just watched Trump lay a wreath at the tomb of the unknown "LOSER" and "SUCKERS" (his words)

    Even the weather was weeping at this travesty.

    Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’
    https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...ho-died-at-war-are-losers-and-suckers/615997/
     
  15. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834
    That's what Republicans believe about this election, not the last election or any other election before this one. Of course, Republicans will always complain about things they will do themselves, such as McConnell, Cruz and Graham all claiming victory in their states while votes were still being counted, all based on what the media reported. They could care less of the hypocrisy they show to the world because that's the kind of scumbags they are. Trump himself, in 2016, came out and claimed victory for the Presidency long before all the votes were counted.

    Conservatives have very short memories.
     
  16. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834
    That's exactly what he and his goons have said and many are very happy about that, because it shows to the world exactly the kind of people they are; no morals, no ethics, no empathy, no compassion, no honor, no integrity, no courage, none of the characteristics and traits befitting anyone who would serve as the leader of a country who lost to another candidate.

    The one thing we all want to see is Trump being led out of the White House by MP's kicking and screaming. It will be a sight to see and we will rejoice. You see, the prayers of many people have been answered; God is removing Satan from the White House. Praise Jesus!
     
  17. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,852
    I agree with your post but I must take exception to the use of the term "conservative". I believe a more appropriate term is "Fascist "
    Fascism - Wikipedia

    Does that term fit Trump and his gang?
     
  18. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834
    Fascist would be a good descriptor for Trump, Sycophants is relevant for his goon squad. His supporters are still Conservatives but the party name no longer describes Republicans.
     
    Write4U likes this.
  19. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,854
    The guy commissioned a great big gilded throne and a giant portrait of himself, installed his progeny as viziers -- and nobody guessed his career plan? The courtiers are going to present him with emperor's robes made of the finest invisible silk.
     
    Write4U likes this.
  20. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,852
    And the Republicans are going; "OOOOHHH and AAAAHHHH, look at the emperor's new clothes."
    "They are such fine quality you cannot even see them. Isn't that marvelous?"
     
  21. Nasor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,228
    I miss our old crop of right-wing kooks. Schmelzer tries, but he's just not up to the old standards. Anyone remember Buffalo Roam? Now THAT guy was good for some entertainment...
     
    synthesizer-patel likes this.
  22. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    Information from many Russian sources. Which includes information about those domains where there corruption is yet common. So exams and graduations in some private "universities", and in medicine where it is common to give presents to the physicians after operations. Which includes polls, with questions about personal experiences with corruption of family or acquaintances, which give average European results. (For comparison, in Yeltsin time there were quite well-known tariffs how much you have to pay police or courts if caught with a crime. Say, you would have to expect three years or so. Then, 10 000 dollar if paid immediately so that you have to pay only the policemen, 30000 dollar if the prosecutor has it already, or something comparable if you have to pay the court.) Cases of corruption on the top level (governors, ministers) and with large amounts of confiscated money in some cases which suggests that there is no safety for corrupt guys even on the top level. And the ability of the Russian military with 1/10 of the US budget to reach even better results.
     
  23. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,153
    On CNN, I see one of their anchors vowing to cover the Biden transition; on Fox I see images of Fidel Castro.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page