Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Trump









Juan Albion

Chicken Sniffer 3rd Class
The problem is that it very well might be a mandate from the Russians and not a mandate from the (American) people.

And he didn't run a border wall as one of his policies. He ran on a border wall paid for by Mexico as one of his policies.

Plus, he had two years when Republicans controlled Congress and he knew that his own party were just as happy to block his wall as it is a total waste of money.
 


RexCathedra

Aurea Mediocritas
Jan 14, 2005
3,499
Vacationland


Albion my Albion

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Feb 6, 2016
17,834
Indiana, USA
Interesting case for the mayoral election in Chicago. There are about 20 candidates. The incumbent mayor, Rahm Emanuel, worked for Obama and then went back to his and Barack's home town of Chicago and translated his national popularity into the mayoral victory.

Due to excessive violence in the African American community that the mayor, Emanuel, has no way to really cure due to economic opportunities and liberal gun laws, the imcumbent mayor decided not to face the heat and because his children have all left home and he decided not to subject his wife to more unearned scrutiny. He also was involved in the cover up of a police shooting where the officer put 16 bullets into the body of an African American teenager coming at him high on PCP with a knife. He, Emanuel, I believe, was trying to stem violent protests in the business center "high" streets.

The twenty candidates will run and if no one has a majority, which is almost impossible, there will be a two person run off. They are expecting the two run off candidates to garner 16% to 18% of the popular vote to get to the two candidate run off.
 
Last edited:




Greg Bobkin

Silver Seagull
May 22, 2012
14,837
He ran with a border wall as one of his policies. He won. Democrats should not be blocking a mandate from the people who voted him into power.
So why hasn't 'Obamacare' repealed and replaced and why hasn't he locked 'her' up?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 


Greg Bobkin

Silver Seagull
May 22, 2012
14,837
BBC America saying Republicans are now worried that Trump may have shot himself in the foot. His action could allow the Democrats, when they eventually get back into power, to call a similar "State of Emergency" to fund climate control, gun control etc. as he has now set a precedent by this action.
But he won't care. The only person the guy really cares about is himself.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 


Bevendean Hillbilly

New member
Sep 4, 2006
12,805
Nestling in green nowhere
He often references the drugs that are coming in to the US as a major reason to build the wall, what will happen if the drugs don't get in any more ? Going to be some VERY pissed off people there.

Yeah. Because all the drugs are being carted across by people on foot hiking across the desert.

If I was going to smuggle drugs into America I’d be using, oh I don’t know, some of the 8 million vehicles that cross through the frontier legally every month or a plane or, well just about any means other than Pedro and Manuela on shank’s pony.
 




RexCathedra

Aurea Mediocritas
Jan 14, 2005
3,499
Vacationland
So why hasn't 'Obamacare' repealed and replaced and why hasn't he locked 'her' up?

The damned Congress stood in the way, remember -- the one with a GOP majority in both houses until last month. ???
 


Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,663
West west west Sussex
:thumbsup:

[tweet]1097047337342504960[/tweet]
 








Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
The problem is that it very well might be a mandate from the Russians and not a mandate from the (American) people.

Do you realise that Russia spent a total of just over $4000 in trying to influence the US elections? That came from Facebook itself.

As opposed to the US who spend billions trying to influence other nations elections.

Trump won because the Democrats stunk, not because of the poor ole Ruskis.
 


Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
You say this every single time your pro-Trump drivel is debunked. And it is drivel.

If I get voted in by saying "free sports cars for everyone and the state won't be paying", but then I get in and immediately try dipping into the public purse to pay for it, I'd expect the opposition to say no. Why are you so stupid that you can't see that the same thing applies to Donald Trump?

The opposition didn't say no.

They gave him over 1.3 billion for it.

It's not pro Trump, it's anti-cry baby. Trump derangement syndrome is alive an well in this thread.

Why can't we just enjoy this laugh fest for what it is? This is the funniest presidency ever. What of his Presidency has impacted you personally? Hasn't impacted me one bit.

You never seem to take issue with the pro-Democrat drivel posted in this thread. Any reason? I mean if Trump is an utter **** then so to are the Dems. Consistency?
 




Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
BBC America saying Republicans are now worried that Trump may have shot himself in the foot. His action could allow the Democrats, when they eventually get back into power, to call a similar "State of Emergency" to fund climate control, gun control etc. as he has now set a precedent by this action.

Guns are covered by the Constitution would seem to be the difference. They could try it, but it would be challenged heavily in court. Climate control might be possible though.
 


Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
The polls suggest that only about 30% of the population support his using federal funds for the wall and that's before he declared a state of national emergency, something even some Republicans are uneasy about.

He may well get some of the wall built but the signs are that it's far from being a vote winner.

Texas has said give us a small amount of money and they'll build the wall themselves.

It's not about winning votes, it's about being able to say "I said I'd get a wall built", even if it's only in Texas he'll claim a victory.

That's how political spin works.
 


Mo Gosfield

Well-known member
Aug 11, 2010
6,284
Texas has said give us a small amount of money and they'll build the wall themselves.

It's not about winning votes, it's about being able to say "I said I'd get a wall built", even if it's only in Texas he'll claim a victory.

That's how political spin works.


Yep.....Kennedy said they would get a man on the moon by the end of the 60's. The people like politicians setting ambitious targets and going for them. It didn't matter that Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon spent half the federal reserve on beating the Russians to it. That was the be all and end all. This is Trump's be all and end all and he is hell bent on doing it. Its gonna be his legacy. Thats what they will remember him for.
 


Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
Yep.....Kennedy said they would get a man on the moon by the end of the 60's. The people like politicians setting ambitious targets and going for them. It didn't matter that Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon spent half the federal reserve on beating the Russians to it. That was the be all and end all. This is Trump's be all and end all and he is hell bent on doing it. Its gonna be his legacy. Thats what they will remember him for.

Spot on. It's all about ego.

Trump was driven by Obama saying he'd never be President. Trump in that respect had the last laugh.

He's not even a Republican, spent more time as a Democrat in his lifetime.
 




Albion my Albion

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Feb 6, 2016
17,834
Indiana, USA
Do you realise that Russia spent a total of just over $4000 in trying to influence the US elections? That came from Facebook itself.

As opposed to the US who spend billions trying to influence other nations elections.

Trump won because the Democrats stunk, not because of the poor ole Ruskis.

The US government (Congress, FBI, CIA, etc.) definitely believes otherwise. Why does the amount spent have to do with how much influence the Russians had over the elections?
 


Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
The US government (Congress, FBI, CIA, etc.) definitely believes otherwise. Why does the amount spent have to do with how much influence the Russians had over the elections?

Because they stated social media was a big part of influencing the result(which is utter bullshit). Yet when under questioning Google’s chief executive said a grand total of $4700 was spent purchasing ads. The Russians had minimal influence over the election.

Using accounts believed to be connected to the Russian government, the agents purchased $4,700 worth of search ads and more traditional display ads, according to a person familiar with the company’s inquiry who was not allowed to speak about it publicly. Google found the accounts through its own research and information provided by other technology companies.

Have you ever stopped to think, what actually does Trump collusion with Russia actually mean? I've yet to see anyone produce a sane argument as to how Russia made the people of Iowa vote for him. Have you got the answer to that?

It's all much ado about nothing. Drummed up by Hilary and her cronies because they still can't handle being beaten. Even sane Liberals are mocking the Russia gate clowns like Rachael Maddow who are unhinged over it.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here