Recount Opinions

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

They already have. They're called tunnels, and they are one of the main avenues of bringing drugs/guns/human trafficking into the country. Quick, let's build an underground wall too!

As you build the wall I would expect them to include underground sensors. Its not like we don't know how to incorporate eavesdropping tech into government projects.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Yes it does. I'm SO happy to be paying for that too. Mexico will give us a giant ass middle finger when he says to pay for it. The part that pisses me off the most is that he actually thinks that will work. Maybe you said it, but use TECHNOLOGY if you're going to do anything at all. The idea of a fucking wall is the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard. His supporters are literally jizzing in their pants over it. Hope they're fine with their tax dollars covering it because Mexico sure as shit will never pay a dime on it. He'll eventually say, "Oh, well we taxed Mexico enough to pay for it." My ass.

You're right, a wall is ridiculous ... A fence is much more practical.

And for Obama, who voted for the border-fence bill back in 2006, the barrier may be best described as a big potential headache. Opponents are already appealing to him to halt construction and re-evaluate the project. But so far, the new Administration has given no indication that it is seriously considering doing so. While it has said it will make comprehensive immigration reform a priority, a spokesperson told TIME that Obama supports the fence "as long as it is one part of a larger strategy on border security that includes more boots on the ground and increased use of technology."

Opponents of the Texas-Mexico Border Fence Look to Obama - TIME

Oh .... and just so you don't think Mr. Obama was the lone Democrat on this:

Taking her hardest line yet against illegal immigrants, Sen. Hillary Clinton told the Daily News she wants U.S. borders secured with a wall or fence, possibly surveillance drones and infrared cameras.

Clinton's proposal - which came just weeks after she blasted Republican crackdowns on illegal immigrants as un-Christian - raised the ire of activists.

But she tempered her remarks by saying that, while she supports a barrier to stem new illegal immigrants, she favors a legalization process for the 11 million undocumented aliens already here.

Hillary Clinton: Border needs wall
(citing to a no longer available NY Daily News article).

But, hey, these articles are from 2009, and 2006 respectively. Clearly, we shouldn't judge folks by their actions eight or ten years ago ... that's ancient history, right?

[mooby]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

You're right, a wall is ridiculous ... A fence is much more practical.



Opponents of the Texas-Mexico Border Fence Look to Obama - TIME

Oh .... and just so you don't think Mr. Obama was the lone Democrat on this:



Hillary Clinton: Border needs wall
(citing to a no longer available NY Daily News article).

But, hey, these articles are from 2009, and 2006 respectively. Clearly, we shouldn't judge folks by their actions eight or ten years ago ... that's ancient history, right?

Those ideas are terrible, they came from Dems so they are quite useless! Trump's wall is gold plated and comes with imported marble from the Franciscan Church and Monastery. All he needs is a small loan of 50 billion dollars from the American people, but wait he's totally gonna pay it back and then some!

[punch it in]

I generally do not like politicians at all. I think Presidents are the most powerful puppets in the World. Puppets none the less.
Anyway Obama and his family had class. I appreciate them. I respect them as people. That is worth something to me.
I simply cannot respect Trump. Someone mentioned something today that I really have been thinking about. She said "I don't trust someone who cannot laugh". She was talking about Trump and it dawned on me that I have never seen the man laugh. Not even a little giggle? Wtf is that? Gotta be something wrong with his head man. The only time he laughed was when he got roasted by Hillary, and it was so forced and fake because he was on TV and he knew he had too.
Even when the guy smiles it is just a fake afterthought.
I know i know "who cares if he laughs he is gonna make America great again".
It sounds like a little silly thing, but the more I think about it the more disturbing it becomes.

[CRedskinsRule]

You can add Huffingpost, MSNBC (Rachel Maddow for example), and other liberal outputs to that list.

Sorry, The toxic media and political spin was just as bad this whole century, the only reason it seems worse is because it's one big effed up cesspool that is growing out of control.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

You can add Huffingpost, MSNBC (Rachel Maddow for example), and other liberal outputs to that list.

Sorry, The toxic media and political spin was just as bad this whole century, the only reason it seems worse is because it's one big effed up cesspool that is growing out of control.

It's useless man, bailout. I had to quite reading. It doesn't matter, message was sent by the people of the country...the presidency, congress, senate, and governorships. Boom.

Backlash against the media and direction of country. They can rationalize it anyway they want...russia, Isis, terrorists, hacking our government, a culture of blame everyone for your problems except yourself, the biggest fucking national debt/budget hole of all time.......these problems flourish under the Obama administration, these aren't new issues, just the media looked the other way and wouldn't report on it. Welp, American people took notice

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

It's useless man, bailout. I had to quite reading. It doesn't matter, message was sent by the people of the country...the presidency, congress, senate, and governorships. Boom.

Clinton got 3 million more votes than Trump did so exactly what message was sent by the American people? It tells me is they don't want Trump.

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Backlash against the media and direction of country. They can rationalize it anyway they want...russia, Isis, terrorists, hacking our government, a culture of blame everyone for your problems except yourself, the biggest fucking national debt/budget hole of all time.......these problems flourish under the Obama administration, these aren't new issues, just the media looked the other way and wouldn't report on it. Welp, American people took notice

I've highlighted the biggest and most hypocritical statement in about 8 years. Isn't this exactly what the GOP has been doing the past 8 years? Absolutely right they have. Bush wasn't treated the way Obama was. The majority of America and Congress stood behind Bush, the same can't be said about Obama.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Clinton got 3 million more votes than Trump did so exactly what message was sent by the American people? It tells me is they don't want Trump.






I've highlighted the biggest and most hypocritical statement in about 8 years. Isn't this exactly what the GOP has been doing the past 8 years? Absolutely right they have. Bush wasn't treated the way Obama was. The majority of America and Congress stood behind Bush, the same can't be said about Obama.

Id say during the first 4 years of Bush, yes this is true and that's how he got a second term...a direct result of the handling of the 9/11 response. But the second term Bush was terrible and he didn't have the American people behind him. Certainly the media turned as well.

The major difference is the media rarely took a negative position against President Obama . National media never was critical, asked tough questions and was actually complicit with the administration. In the face of all these problems...that now people are mad about ( I wonder why? hmmm oh they loss)

its been night and day with the media with Bush vs Obama and it not close son. The American people may not have been behind the President, but the We never knew it, because the media never acknowledge or gave a voice to the silent majority. Zilch...That's why Trump is President, Congress and the Senate is Republican and the Republican own the Governorships. Why was everybody surprised?


But its funny, you don't acknowledge the national debt, Russia kicking Obama's Pussy around the world on multiple fronts, Genocide in Syria and Iraq, Major cybersecurity concerns against this country.....what about immigration policy failure, student debt reform, business tax reform, etc....

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

The major difference is the media rarely took a negative position against President Obama . National media never was critical, asked tough questions and was actually complicit with the administration. In the face of all these problems...that now people are mad about ( I wonder why? hmmm oh they loss)

No arguments there. I agree with this.

Originally Posted by Chico23231

its been night and day with the media with Bush vs Obama and it not close son. The American people may not have been behind the President, but the We never knew it, because the media never acknowledge or gave a voice to the silent majority. Zilch...That's why Trump is President, Congress and the Senate is Republican and the Republican own the Governorships. Why was everybody surprised?

Well, FOX wasn't critical of Bush either so there's that. They were probably night and day with Bush/Obama because Congress was night and day with how they treated the President. The Republicans set out to make Obama a 1 term President from day 1, and they obstructed at ALL costs. (even to point of shutting government down) So, yeah, while the media may have been more critical of Bush, Obama got the worst of it with Congress by a large margin. Republicans simply didn't want him succeeding in anything.

Originally Posted by Chico23231

But its funny, you don't acknowledge the national debt, Russia kicking Obama's Pussy around the world on multiple fronts, Genocide in Syria and Iraq, Major cybersecurity concerns against this country.....what about immigration policy failure, student debt reform, business tax reform, etc....

How exactly has Russia kicked Obama's pussy around the world? What would you have Obama do with Russia that he already isn't doing? You going to attack Russian troops?

I've acknowledged quite a bit of Obama's failures and why I didn't vote for him. I have no issues with the immigration policy, and there are actually less immigrants now than when Bush was in office.

I found this interesting. You get to guess what got worse/better under Obama. It even includes number of Mexicans living illegally in US. See how you do on this.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...imes&smtyp=cur

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Clinton got 3 million more votes than Trump did so exactly what message was sent by the American people? It tells me is they don't want Trump.

...

66million to 63million. The message sent is that this country is historically divided.

The fact that neither candidate got close to 50% says that as a whole the country didn't want either major party candidate.

The fact that Trump won the electoral college says he gets to sit in the White House and be president.

The fact that Trump gets to be President, and the fact that the house and senate are both controlled by republicans says that the laws that are passed by both houses and sent to him will likely be signed into law.

That's the facts of how this country works. It's the same when the Democrats held both legislative houses and the presidency which last happened when Pres Obama took office.

[punch it in]

Well a minority of the American people did. Thank God for the bible belt bumbleheads who still made sure that the new messiah was cast down from heaven to save us all from the horrible terrorist email killer libs and their psycho fake news pussy bullshit obama crap! Yee haw!!!

[CRedskinsRule]

I will say again. No candidate - not Trump, not Clinton - won a simple majority.of the popular vote. Trump did win a super majority of counties and a majority of congressional districts. Clinton won 2 whacko states with large populations and all the urban cities like Chicago Baltimore and DC where citizens are comfortable electing criminals (Barry and Sheila for example).

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[CRedskinsRule]

two map views from Business Insider that show the skew of the election:
by county results:

and the by county results proportionalizing the counties by population.



Take it for what it's worth, around the country people not living in hyper condense areas of population are far more likely to vote against the democrats while high population areas are far more likely to vote for them.

Personally, I don't think it's an education thing as some like to say, as much as life conditions. The more sparsely populated an area, the more likely people tend to look to themselves first for answers and don't want outside interference, the more densely populated the more likely you are to look at an outside force (the politicals) to maintain a balance among clashes of people.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

two map views from Business Insider that show the skew of the election:
by county results:

and the by county results proportionalizing the counties by population.



Take it for what it's worth, around the country people not living in hyper condense areas of population are far more likely to vote against the democrats while high population areas are far more likely to vote for them.

Personally, I don't think it's an education thing as some like to say, as much as life conditions. The more sparsely populated an area, the more likely people tend to look to themselves first for answers and don't want outside interference, the more densely populated the more likely you are to look at an outside force (the politicals) to maintain a balance among clashes of people.

interesting Long Island went for Trump...that must be the pu$$y grabbing-eff you-New Yorkaas live

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Personally, I don't think it's an education thing as some like to say, as much as life conditions. The more sparsely populated an area, the more likely people tend to look to themselves first for answers and don't want outside interference, the more densely populated the more likely you are to look at an outside force (the politicals) to maintain a balance among clashes of people.

It's both. People in rural areas are going to be less educated because they don't have access to better education. The less educated you are, the more likely you will make bad decisions of issues. Most of these people live their lives based off of faith and religion. Sure life conditions play a part (note coal mining areas)

Representation should only matter in the people, not land mass. Who gives a shit if 6/8 of the country's land mass is "red", when the number of people in those areas don't even remotely touch the number of people in the denser populated areas. Should Wyoming (582k) have more say because it has more land mass or should New York (10million) large population. It's about the populace, and it always has been. SO showing charts with all red means little to nothing in the grand scheme of things.