Re: What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1164479]LOL...WOW. That is all folks. :doh::doh:



gotta give that a double.[/QUOTE]



Any doh let alone double doh's are reserved for those who believe he is not a cunt. Sorry.

Re: What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1164480]Spicer is in way over his head. Dude needs to find another job quick[/QUOTE]



Yet your boy thinks he is aces?
Oh and here is what your other boy thinks of Trump. Lol.

[IMG]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170202/b545eec932d268a5858d24fb263a9666.png[/IMG]

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=punch it in;1164475]Dude u can put aside all the fake news. There are still literally thousands of real things he has done and said that should be plenty to prove to u that he is a straight cunt.[/quote]

No shit, Buckwheat....
He was supposed to be a cunt.
Thats why he was voted in.
People wanted an anti politician.

What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Alvin Walton;1164483]No shit, Buckwheat....

He was supposed to be a cunt.

Thats why he was voted in.

People wanted an anti politician.[/QUOTE]



There is a big difference between an anti politician and an anti decent human being.
Buckwheat?
Love how you breakdown the two choices for Washington. Cunts or politicians. Lmao. Your words dude. No fake news there.
While we all have been not quite in tune with the government for many years, and have been waiting for "one of us" to kick down the door and do what is right....i do not think it was a "cunt" we were all waiting for. But maybe that is just where we differ?

Re: What would it take?
 

People feel the need to de-bunk the false statements like sending troops to Mexico. So it must mean they think the statement is ludicrous or vicious or just plain wrong. If the fake news reported that Trump said " he loves all Americans equally and wants what is best for us " during a phone call , I doubt there would be any de-bunking.

Yet he has made a ton of other equally moronic, hateful, scary statements and you find a way around it somehow.
At least come out and say "well he DID say that and it is hateful and scary and moronic but I still support him".
If you keep saying it over and over eventually you will realize how mis guided you are. [emoji106]

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=punch it in;1164484]There is a big difference between an anti politician and an anti decent human being.
Buckwheat?
Love how you breakdown the two choices for Washington. Cunts or politicians. Lmao. Your words dude. No fake news there.
While we all have been not quite in tune with the government for many years, and have been waiting for "one of us" to kick down the door and do what is right....i do not think it was a "cunt" we were all waiting for. But maybe that is just where we differ?[/quote]

Not willing to wait that long.
I'll take the cunt now that he's here.
If anything, it has been very entertaining.
And hes just barely scratching the surface, we're only couple weeks in.
Next up, Iran and North Korea....

Re: What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Alvin Walton;1164489]Not willing to wait that long.

I'll take the cunt now that he's here.

If anything, it has been very entertaining.

And hes just barely scratching the surface, we're only couple weeks in.

Next up, Iran and North Korea....[/QUOTE]



Im glad you think it is funny. I am not one of the Trump will make us Nazi Germany folks. However this sort of behavior can probably be a tad bit detrimental. Not funny.
It is embarrassing as hell as an American, and i just pray he does minimal irreversible damage.

Re: What would it take?
 

I said entertaining.
I didnt say funny.
Do you work for CNN?

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=punch it in;1164485]People feel the need to de-bunk the false statements like sending troops to Mexico. So it must mean they think the statement is ludicrous or vicious or just plain wrong. If the fake news reported that Trump said " he loves all Americans equally and wants what is best for us " during a phone call , I doubt there would be any de-bunking.

Yet he has made a ton of other equally moronic, hateful, scary statements and you find a way around it somehow.
At least come out and say "well he DID say that and it is hateful and scary and moronic but I still support him".
If you keep saying it over and over eventually you will realize how mis guided you are. [emoji106][/quote]

Im not debunking, I just feel the need to point out these accusations of the media being biased are certainly true. its a witchhunt. Unfortunately this generation we are raising believes everything its told...Im serious. Its a generation of "if the internet says it and/or if people "like" or gives it "thumbs up" then that's all the validation I need."

So when a major news organization says the President threatens Mexico with Troops...come'on

Re: What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Alvin Walton;1164493]I said entertaining.

I didnt say funny.

Do you work for CNN?[/QUOTE]



Im glad you think it is entertaining. Better? I see no difference. Nothing entertaining about morons racists. Sad. Not entertaining. A football game is entertaining.

Re: What would it take?
 

No no, the entertaining part is watching the bleeding hearts freak out.
Lotsa good you tube stuff.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=punch it in;1164478]I guess they are accurate as far as him doing amazing things. An amazing job. Lol.
The point is that if someone had asked him what he did or if he has ever spoken to him Trump would have had to think about it! Lol. Neither him nor Spicer had any idea - he is being recognized more by who? People who have been on the fence about equal rights for blacks??? "I notice ". Wtf does that mean? I hope you "notice ". Lol. You have had since 1895 to do so!
No excuses whatsoever.[/quote]

It's an obtuse argument. He was recognizing the African-American Museum. GUESS WHAT MUSEUMS HELP PEOPLE DO. Learn more and more about the things/people/history that the museum built to honor.

I feel like we need a 7th grade teacher to help libs diagram sentences or learn listening and reading comprehension. I'll try my best to help:

[quote][U]I am very proud now that we have a museum on the National Mall[/U]
What he is talking about

[I]where people can learn about Reverend King, so many other things.[/I]
why is he proud - so people can learn

[B]Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who’s done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more,[/B]
an example of where the new museum is helping it's visitors learn more about and recognize historical figures amazing accomplishments.

[B] I notice -- Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, and millions more black Americans who made America what it is today.[/B]
more recognition

[I]Big impact.[/I]
Trump emphasis[/quote]

Note that what the person who asked the question did
-- "When President Trump said "Frederick Douglass was being recognized more and more", do you know what he was specifically referring to?"

Now, be honest, if you read the paragraph it's not really hard to know what Pres Trump was referring to, right?

And by taking the 8 words out of that context, it is misleading at best.

and for the grammar police, yes Trump's who's done, would have been better phrased as "who did", not who has done.

Re: What would it take?
 

more to the point, the media took what was a positive statement about the new African American museum made at a breakfast celebrating African Americans, and turned it into Donald Trump sounding ignorant and racist. And does the rest of the media say, no, Donald Trump was praising the museum's impact. No, they do not. They run with the false characterization and repeat it enough so that is the "truth".

Sorta like the missing MLK bust...

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1164500]more to the point, the media took what was a positive statement about the new African American museum made at a breakfast celebrating African Americans, and turned it into Donald Trump sounding ignorant and racist. And does the rest of the media say, no, Donald Trump was praising the museum's impact. No, they do not. They run with the false characterization and repeat it enough so that is the "truth".

Sorta like the missing MLK bust...[/quote]

2017
The Year of fake news.

Yes I edited it.
:doh:

Re: What would it take?
 

2017 lol

Re: What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1164494]Im not debunking, I just feel the need to point out these accusations of the media being biased are certainly true. its a witchhunt. Unfortunately this generation we are raising believes everything its told...Im serious. Its a generation of "if the internet says it and/or if people "like" or gives it "thumbs up" then that's all the validation I need."



So when a major news organization says the President threatens Mexico with Troops...come'on[/QUOTE]



Let's reserve the term "witch hunt" for the innocent who are being attacked for no reason. Like I said forget the bias from fox or cnn or anyone else. There are plenty of things he has done or said that are more than enough to warrant protesting or witch hunts or straight up disdain for the man.
Fake news is just a ploy to deflect anyone who disagrees with him or takes umbrage with something he said.
Those things being deflected happened. He tweeted it. He said it. It is on record, on video. More than enough garbage has legitimately come out of the mans mouth. Who cares if there is made up shit thrown on top? It does not delegitimize the real news.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=punch it in;1164504]Let's reserve the term "witch hunt" for the innocent who are being attacked for no reason. Like I said forget the bias from fox or cnn or anyone else. There are plenty of things he has done or said that are more than enough to warrant protesting or witch hunts or straight up disdain for the man.
Fake news is just a ploy to deflect anyone who disagrees with him or takes umbrage with something he said.
Those things being deflected happened. He tweeted it. He said it. It is on record, on video. More than enough garbage has legitimately come out of the mans mouth. [B]Who cares if there is made up shit thrown on top?[/B] [B] It does not delegitimize the real news[/B].[/quote]

:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:

What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=CRedskinsRule;1164498]It's an obtuse argument. He was recognizing the African-American Museum. GUESS WHAT MUSEUMS HELP PEOPLE DO. Learn more and more about the things/people/history that the museum built to honor.



I feel like we need a 7th grade teacher to help libs diagram sentences or learn listening and reading comprehension. I'll try my best to help:







Note that what the person who asked the question did

-- "When President Trump said "Frederick Douglass was being recognized more and more", do you know what he was specifically referring to?"



Now, be honest, if you read the paragraph it's not really hard to know what Pres Trump was referring to, right?



And by taking the 8 words out of that context, it is misleading at best.



and for the grammar police, yes Trump's who's done, would have been better phrased as "who did", not who has done.[/QUOTE]



Im glad it took a museum in 2017 to make Trump notice Frederick Douglas. Smfh. It is really simple to see how moronic his statement was. You can dissect it all you want CRed.
As for seventh graders isnt that when most Americans "notice" what a great job Frederick Douglass did? Lmao.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=Chico23231;1164505]:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:[/quote]

[img]http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/imgLib/20140821_whatdifferencedoesitmake.jpg[/img]

What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1164505]:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:[/QUOTE]



Chico if you see and hear the man say something vile with your own eyes and ears about women , and than the next day some bogus news source reports that he also said Santa Claus is a bitch does that mean he didn't say what you heard with your own ears? Why is that "doh". Who gives a fuck about Santa (sending troops to Mexico), when he called out women (mexicans are going to pay for the wall, rapists , etc)?

Re: What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Alvin Walton;1164508][img]http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/imgLib/20140821_whatdifferencedoesitmake.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]



Apparently none as long as it is entertaining.

Re: What would it take?
 

You guys would make great politicians. You argue to be right, rather than arguing to solve problems. Just like our congress.

Re: What would it take?
 

We should have a rule. For every point you want to make, you have to pick a point where the other side is right, and acknowledge it.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=punch it in;1164506]Im glad it took a museum in 2017 to make Trump notice Frederick Douglas. Smfh. It is really simple to see how moronic his statement was. You can dissect it all you want CRed.
As for seventh graders isnt that when most Americans "notice" what a great job Frederick Douglass did? Lmao.[/quote]

He was recognizing a NEW museum opened in Sep 2016! I agree with you this world has gone cra-cra when we can't acknowledge that the media got it wrong, not Trump - In This Case.

unbelievable

What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;1164512]We should have a rule. For every point you want to make, you have to pick a point where the other side is right, and acknowledge it.[/QUOTE]



Not possible when the other side is Trump. This is not your normal right vs left. Not even close.
My solution is impeachment.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1164512]We should have a rule. For every point you want to make, you have to pick a point where the other side is right, and acknowledge it.[/quote]

You are right.

Re: What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=CRedskinsRule;1164513]He was recognizing a NEW museum opened in Sep 2016! I agree with you this world has gone cra-cra when we can't acknowledge that the media got it wrong, not Trump - In This Case.



unbelievable[/QUOTE]



Wrong. He was acknowledging that Frederick Douglass did a good job. Lmao. Hey the new museum is a wonderful tribute to the great African Americans from our history. Classy place.
That would be fine.
Do not start giving shout outs to someone you have relatively no knowledge about to try and sway the black vote. That ship sailed. What you wind up with is him and Spicer sounding like idiots. Get used to it.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=punch it in;1164514]Not possible when the other side is Trump. This is not your normal right vs left. Not even close.
My solution is impeachment.[/quote]

Then why waste your hot air debating with people on the interwebs?

Re: What would it take?
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;1164517]Then why waste your hot air debating with people on the interwebs?[/QUOTE]



I figured a thread about Trump was a good place to speak of such things. I keep it out of all other threads, as much as I wanted to pile on Metals trump post and mattys follow up to it in the boob thread.
The eternal hope in me is that one of these Trumpers is going to cave and admit he is terribly out of his league.
You have not exactly been silent in this thread.
What has me going this afternoon is how you can put a positive twist on his comments about Frederick Douglass. Chico thinks Spicer needs to be fired for basically echoing Trumps statement yet Trump is free from criticism?

Re: What would it take?
 

Yeah I like to debate politics as much as the next guy - but I really liked the original tone of this thread, which is basically asking you to consider and identify the things that could possibly win you over. In other words, asking you to be open to considering other views.

I get frustrated when debating people who don't listen or acknowledge the other side, and that is DEFINITELY going on in here right now (sorry NC Skins you're the worst about it). So I bounced.

The whole point of debating is not to be right. That accomplishes absolutely nothing. The point is to listen to the views of the opposing side, and if they're smart and convincing, maybe cause you to see something you didn't before. And if all sides do it, then before you know it there's common ground.

And lo and behold, you could actually govern this way! At least then there's a purpose to it all.

Re: What would it take?
 

I completely agree Schneed. I try never to be rude or make it personal. Just good old fashioned ball busting.
To speak to the original point of this thread there is absolutely nothing to make me feel good about him yet. Every day this guy says or signs or does something that just pushes me further away. I suppose I could just stay out of the thread period in the spirit of honoring its original question, but that would make for an awful one sided thread. I think with Trumps ego that he will go , and is going, out of his way to battle with his doubters instead of trying to appease them. He is actually the poster child for what you do not like about the direction of this thread. Lil ironic. Lol.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=punch it in;1164519]I figured a thread about Trump was a good place to speak of such things. I keep it out of all other threads, as much as I wanted to pile on Metals trump post and mattys follow up to it in the boob thread.
The eternal hope in me is that one of these Trumpers is going to cave and admit he is terribly out of his league.
You have not exactly been silent in this thread.
What has me going this afternoon is how you can put a positive twist on his comments about Frederick Douglass. Chico thinks Spicer needs to be fired for basically echoing Trumps statement yet Trump is free from criticism?[/quote]

No spicer needs to go because he's not good at his job...it's pretty obvious.

I haven't really been arguing as an advocate for trump...

Re: What would it take?
 

Also sticking with the thread...

I voted for Hillary. First time I've voted D in a presidential election in my life. I'm particularly troubled that Steve Bannon is being permitted in the room for National Security Council discussions, and the Joint Chiefs are not. I don't understand that at all and it concerns me greatly. That concern is so great that it overshadows all other concerns by a mile.

That said, sticking with the theme of the thread, I'll hand it to Trump in the following regard:

- Thumbs up on his pick for Supreme Court

- I'm a free trade guy, but I get economic protectionism in an era of increasing automation. Automation is going to continue, and as long as it does we're going to have oodles and oodles of people out of work. My first inclination as a free trader is to say well those folks need to train themselves for other jobs. Not that simple, the automation is going to be too vast. We need something for those people to do. I'm at least ready to keep an open mind that his protectionist strategies might help create better paying jobs for the middle class.

- Putting Iran on notice. Thumbs up.

- Generally carrying himself with a no-nonsense, take no bullshit persona. Didn't like the way he treated Australia, but toughness counts on the international stage when it comes to your enemies. I already like the way that plays better than I did Obama's intellectual, thoughtful posture.

But again, Bannon in the room. It dwarfs everything else. I'm so worried about the advice Trump is getting from that guy. Not sure Flynn is much better. Removing the Joint Chiefs, independent level-headed people, for those two guys is unbelievably concerning. I just hope Mattis can keep everybody's head on straight.

Re: What would it take?
 

Sadly I think the divide in our country is growing or has grown beyond where the original topic is answerable with anything but either punch's reply or my equal and opposite reply that so far there is very little to make me think I am going to turn my support away from DT.

I know a guy, he and his wife are a good to great couple and they can talk about most things as far as I know. He likes trump she hates trump. A quote from him "if two people who know each are considerate of one another know each to be smart sane people - can't talk about trump, what hope is there for the country." Her response. "Probably none". Sadly that resonates through this thread.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Re: What would it take?
 

It's shit like this that bothers me with Trump.

[url]https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/us/politics/trump-johnson-amendment-political-activity-churches.html[/url]


Allowing churches to be political but not taxing them? Fuck that. Fuck that to all hell and back. There is a reason why the founding fathers separated church and state and why that glorious documents mention nothing of God, Jehovah or Allah.

What would it take?
 

Bannon is in the room because Trump wants him there. So who is the bigger idiot? The idiot or the guy who takes advice from the idiot?
And thank God my wife is on the same page. I would hate to have to explain to my daughter that Daddy has to leave. Lol. Joking. Or maybe not? Well like I said thank God she is on my side.
The fact that Trump does not see what we see in Bannon is a bigger concern than Bannon himself. He either agrees with the guy or he is oblivious. Either way it is a dangerous observation about the dude.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1164524]I voted for Hillary. First time I've voted D in a presidential election in my life. I'm particularly troubled that Steve Bannon is being permitted in the room for National Security Council discussions, and the Joint Chiefs are not. I don't understand that at all and it concerns me greatly. That concern is so great that it overshadows all other concerns by a mile.[/quote]


I agree. This is a guy who admires Lenin and quite frankly is pattern his tactics after him.

[url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/22/steve-bannon-trump-s-top-guy-told-me-he-was-a-leninist.html]Steve Bannon, Trump’s Top Guy, Told Me He Was ‘a Leninist’ - The Daily Beast[/url]

When you hear comments like "the media should keep its mouth shut" is when you know the threat is real. People wanted to talk about how Obama was some secret agent muslim terrorist sent to tear down America, but here we actually have a guy on the national security trying to do just that.

[quote=Schneed10;1164524]I'm a free trade guy, but I get economic protectionism in an era of increasing automation. Automation is going to continue, and as long as it does we're going to have oodles and oodles of people out of work. My first inclination as a free trader is to say well those folks need to train themselves for other jobs. Not that simple, the automation is going to be too vast. We need something for those people to do. I'm at least ready to keep an open mind that his protectionist strategies might help create better paying jobs for the middle class.[/quote]

I agree with free trade in principle, but the problem with that is it's going to just further expedite the manufacturing jobs to outside the country. We agree totally with the automation thing, and it's a huge reason why a basic income has being discussed in Congress.

[YT]OX06f3DPXt4[/YT]

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1164525]Sadly I think the divide in our country is growing or has grown beyond where the original topic is answerable with anything but either punch's reply or my equal and opposite reply that so far there is very little to make me think I am going to turn my support away from DT.

I know a guy, he and his wife are a good to great couple and they can talk about most things as far as I know. He likes trump she hates trump. A quote from him "if two people who know each are considerate of one another know each to be smart sane people - can't talk about trump, what hope is there for the country." Her response. "Probably none". Sadly that resonates through this thread.[/quote]

I can easily talk about Trump and I will point out the good things he does when he does them. However, must Trump supporters have their heads buried in the sand and refuse to acknowledge the shitty moves or justify them with bullshit excuses. Take for instance some of his cabinet choices.

[U][B]James Mattis[/B][/U]- Great choice
[B][U]Betsy DeVos[/U][/B]- Insane choice
[B][U]Nikki Haley[/U][/B]- great choice
[B][U]Ben Carson[/U][/B]- good choice but wrong area. Should be health service or surgeon general, not an area he has no experience.
[U][B]Tillerson[/B][/U]- awful choice with too many ties to Russia affairs

This is being unbiased. If you can't see why some of the cabinet choices are bad (or decisions) then there isn't much help. It's why people continue to treat politics like their favorite sports team. No matter how dumb the decisions the team makes, you will continue waving that flag supporting them week after week.

Re: What would it take?
 

Can't disagree. That's as objective as it gets. I couldn't pick a better SecDef myself than Mattis. Haley will be great at the UN. The others, DeVos in particular, make no sense.

Re: What would it take?
 

[quote=Schneed10;1164524]Also sticking with the thread...

...

- I'm a free trade guy, but I get economic protectionism in an era of increasing automation. Automation is going to continue, and as long as it does we're going to have oodles and oodles of people out of work. My first inclination as a free trader is to say well those folks need to train themselves for other jobs. Not that simple, the automation is going to be too vast. We need something for those people to do. I'm at least ready to keep an open mind that his protectionist strategies might help create better paying jobs for the middle class.

...[/quote]

This is way off topic, and not a chance of reality, but with the level of automation coming in the 20 years, and the ease of accumulation of wealth in the top 1%, I really wonder what your thoughts are about the Netherlands living wage.

My normal mindset would be no, BUT, I do think automation is a game changer in economics, and if you have the living wage to all citizens, then you do away with minimum wage to employers, and once again let free market forces act, within the constraints of that. I really don't know any feasibility, but I'm curious about your thoughts Schneed.

Re: What would it take?
 

I guess my concern would be how do you set a living wage at a level that ensures a minimum safety net, yet doesn't completely remove all incentive to perform jobs that barely clear the minimum wage?

Let's say you give your guaranteed living wage of $400 per week (equivalent to $10 per hour at 40 hours). Do you create a moral hazard where bus drivers and EMTs and countless other folks in similar positions say you know what I'd rather sit at home because the couple extra bucks aren't worth it?

And my second concern would be, damn, it would take a very highly graduated tax bracket structure to pay for this. The Netherlands used to have its highest tax bracket set at 72% prior to 1990, but since moved it down to 52%. Not sure how they pay for everything in their system, but I do know that if your top tax bracket is too high you have a way of squelching innovation.

How can we get stats on the number of new products, new life-saving medical advancements and drugs, come from the Netherlands? Because that to me is the crux of the whole thing. Investing in a new idea takes immense guts and risk, both personal and financial, and there needs to be immense reward on the other side of it. Without that reward it's quite obvious that fewer people would take the risk on new ideas.

So I'm not sure, but I'd have concerns about anything that raises the top tax bracket too high. The immense financial reward available in the US is the carrot dangling in front of a lot of scientific and medical advancements.