# Donald Trump's cabinet picks



## nintendofan85 (Dec 12, 2016)

What have you guys thought of Donald Trump's cabinet picks? I know he isn't finished with all of them, but according to a poll released today by the New York Times, Trump's cabinet has the lowest approval rate of any cabinet choices since when polling began during the Ronald Reagan to George H. W. Bush transition in 1989. These were the approval rates for each:
George H. W. Bush, January 1989: 59%
Bill Clinton, January 1993: 64%
George W. Bush, January 2001: 58%
Barack Obama, December 2008: 71%
Donald Trump, December 2016: 40%
Trump has handily beat the record that George W. Bush set in 2001. Trump's cabinet has the first net disapproval rating for a president-elect. Anyways, here's the cabinet picks so far:
State: Rex Tillerson
Treasury: Steven Mnuchin
Defense: James Mattis
Attorney General: Jeff Sessions
Commerce: Wilbur Ross
Labor: Andrew Puzder
Health: Tom Price
Housing: Ben Carson
Transport: Elaine Chao
Education: Betsy DeVos
Homeland Security: John F. Kelly
Energy: Rick Perry


----------



## seliph (Dec 12, 2016)

They're garbage

Thread closed everyone go home


----------



## Bowie (Dec 12, 2016)

I swear, I'm finding more and more things about this man I dislike every week.


----------



## nintendofan85 (Dec 12, 2016)

Bowie said:


> I swear, I'm finding more and more things about this man I dislike every week.



Well, you must imagine how many of us Americans feel with him becoming our president on January 20.
Many people have been shocked enough about how Jeff Sessions is going to Attorney General, but I personally can't believe that Steve Bannon is going to be his top advisor.


----------



## hamster (Dec 12, 2016)

i'm sick of these threads now, sorry
i do love talking about politics & whatever but everything is just negative.


----------



## nintendofan85 (Dec 12, 2016)

Ekcriptia said:


> i'm sick of these threads now, sorry
> i do love talking about politics & whatever but everything is just negative.



I know, but it's not like a presidential transition isn't a big deal.


----------



## Xandra (Dec 12, 2016)

*sigh* What has America come to... i can't believe there's no turning back, Donald Trump will become our president. But why?! Why don't people come to their senses and realize he's a bad choice, he can't be the one running the U.S! D:<


----------



## KatRose (Dec 12, 2016)

gyro said:


> They're garbage
> 
> Thread closed everyone go home



amen
/thread


----------



## Bunnilla (Dec 12, 2016)

gyro said:


> They're garbage
> 
> Thread closed everyone go home



Best Comment of 2k16 award goes to gyro


----------



## Red Cat (Dec 12, 2016)

He's draining the swamp... and then filling it with nuclear waste.


----------



## ams (Dec 13, 2016)

Time to start learning Mandarin


----------



## Stalfos (Dec 13, 2016)

This is what happens when you start taking democracy for granted.


----------



## Trent the Paladin (Dec 13, 2016)

Stalfos said:


> This is what happens when you start taking democracy for granted.



It's okay it's better than crooked #Shillary right guys!!!!!! We're better off right?!!!!!! 

The American public doesn't care. They hate the nation this much.


----------



## tumut (Dec 13, 2016)

Hhahhahah #draintheswamp XD trump will fight against the corrupt political system u w u


----------



## Antonio (Dec 13, 2016)

I'm scared


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Antonio said:


> I'm scared



Be scared all you what. I can't change your opinion no matter how uneducated it is.


Side Note : I realized when this thread was posted and I apologize for commenting on it this late.


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 3, 2017)

i think Van Jones summarized Trump's election pretty accurately by calling it a "whitelash"


----------



## cIementine (Jan 3, 2017)

wow. i am deeply shocked to hear that donald trump, of all people, chose mostly rich white people with views just as backwards as his own to be in his cabinet. never thought i would see the day.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

@pumpkins

That's liberal propaganda. He's picking whom he trusts. Rich white people? Please, you're just not happy your crooked politician didn't win because she's more unpopular than Trump.

Ben Carson. Good for housing and development. 
Elaine Chao. Good for secretary of transportation.
Nikki Haley. Good for. U.S. Ambassador to United Nations.
Linda Machon. Good for Administrator of the Small Business Administration.
Kellyane Conway. Good for counseling the president.

Take a look at our cabinets. Some other administrations are less diverse. Get your facts straight.

Just because he isn't running with the common PC stuff doesn't mean he's wrong.


----------



## Jarrad (Jan 3, 2017)

drowning in a sea of liberals here

help


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

It's funny. People are saying they would leave the country if Trump got elected, which he did.

Either they didn't leave... or they're "fleeing" to an even more "white nation" like Canada. Why not go to Mexico? Haha... I'm dying with the hypocrisy.


----------



## Jarrad (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> It's funny. People are saying they would leave the country if Trump got elected, which he did.
> 
> Either they didn't leave... or they're "fleeing" to an even more "white nation" like Canada. Why not go to Mexico? Haha... I'm dying with the hypocrisy.



People said they'd kill themselves if he was elected. 

idk sometimes people take politics far too seriously. Trump becoming president isn't the end of the world. It doesn't give him the authority to blow up China or something. 

I'm British - I voted to leave Britain. I don't think that Trump is the perfect electee that could have been elected (Bernie would have probably been better, but he wasn't a natural leader + he wasn't the republican candidate). I think Trump will be exactly what America needs, though. He has a backbone, and the west has become far too soft (england included). America needs a leader like Trump.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Who even said he would blow up China? Not him. Not his administration. The people against him getting elected.

He is putting out a message that we won't be jacked up on our trade deals anymore. If you want a good relationship and act on getting a good relationship, we'll do the same. Not a big probo.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Jarrad said:


> People said they'd kill themselves if he was elected.
> 
> (Bernie would have probably been better, but he wasn't a natural leader + he wasn't the republican candidate).



Democrats have won the last two elections. For them to win a third was unlikely. Also, Bernie would have put us downhill. Look at how France is doing. Similar values and propositions..


----------



## Jarrad (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Who even said he would blow up China? Not him. Not his administration. The people against him getting elected.
> 
> He is putting out a message that we won't be jacked up on our trade deals anymore. If you want a good relationship and act on getting a good relationship, we'll do the same. Not a big probo.



I was making a joke out of what people think he'll be able to do now that he'll be the next president. I agree, that the followers of the  adjacent party did so much fear-mongering to deter people voting for him. 

Trump + trading with uk post-brexit (assuming he'll still be in office by the time it happens) = Good 

I also think a lot of what trump said to agitate liberals and gain votes (like building a wall and enforcing a ban on muslims entering the country) was just mongering. Now that he's actually in a position of true power he'll take what he said back regarding the inhumane things and devise a sensible humane strategy towards illegal immigrants from Mexico and Islamic extremists.


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Who even said he would blow up China? Not him. Not his administration. The people against him getting elected.
> 
> He is putting out a message that we won't be jacked up on our trade deals anymore. If you want a good relationship and act on getting a good relationship, we'll do the same. Not a big probo.
> 
> ...



How is that unlikely? Clinton DID win the popular vote after all. Also I'm pretty sure that if they would have chosen a less unpopular person than Clinton  democrats might have won.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Jarrad said:


> I was making a joke out of what people think he'll be able to do now that he'll be the next president. I agree, that the followers of the  adjacent party did so much fear-mongering to deter people voting for him.
> 
> Trump + trading with uk post-brexit (assuming he'll still be in office by the time it happens) = Good
> 
> I also think a lot of what trump said to agitate liberals and gain votes (like building a wall and enforcing a ban on muslims entering the country) was just mongering. Now that he's actually in a position of true power he'll take what he said back regarding the inhumane things and devise a sensible humane strategy towards illegal immigrants from Mexico and Islamic extremists.



I know you don't believe that he will actually blow up China. lol

But, for the wall I have explained this. Many countries build a wall. Walls work against ILLEGAL immigration. Mexico and Guatemala built a wall (call it a fence if it makes anyone feel better). Trump just proposes and promises what works.

Now the ban on Muslims entering the country was a bit extreme but the man is seventy years old. With the democrats working against him, it'd be hard to do anything. In his defense though, he was putting out a message or trying to that we have to make sure that we aren't just letting anyone into this country, especially from regions of terror.

Anyone who knows me knows that I've had a Muslim friend, in which I went to NASA with him and his family. If anything I'm a bit biased against Christians.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Cynicat said:


> How is that unlikely? Clinton DID win the popular vote after all. Also I'm pretty sure that if they would have chosen a less unpopular person than Clinton  democrats might have won.



The electoral college is much more sophisticated and challenging. If it was for the popular vote, Trump would have campaigned differently.

It is unlikely because if you look at past elections, it is common that the individual who won the election is obligated to a different party than the past POTUS. It's "I don't like what this party did, so I'm going to vote for this party."


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> I know you don't believe that he will actually blow up China. lol
> 
> But, for the wall I have explained this. Many countries build a wall. Walls work against ILLEGAL immigration. Mexico and Guatemala built a wall. (call it a fence if it makes anyone feel better). Trump is just proposes and promising what works.
> 
> ...



Possibly yes. But that still doesn't mean democrats couldn't have won if they didn't chose Clinton for the Democratic Party. Also there is no proof that he would have campaigned differently (I'm not saying he might have done that, since I have no proof either to support the opposite). But he is known for changing his opions on different things A LOT. In 2012 he called electoral college a disaster but now he has won he doesn't anymore..  

https://mobile.twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/266038556504494082?lang=en


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Cynicat said:


> Possibly yes. But that still doesn't mean democrats couldn't have won if they didn't chose Clinton for the Democratic Party. Also there is no proof that he would have campaigned differently (I'm not saying he might have done that, since I have no proof either to support the opposite). But he is known for changing his opions on different things A LOT. In 2012 he called electoral college a disaster but now he has won he doesn't anymore..
> 
> https://mobile.twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/266038556504494082?lang=en



Don't talk about changing opinions. Hillary Clinton has changed her opinion on many things. Running against Barack - against gay marriage. Running against Trump - for gay marriage. 
^ that's just one example.

You can't prove someone would have campaigned differently in a hypothetical situation. I think a lot of people can see that both candidates would have campaigned differently if it was for the popular vote.

He doesn't talk about how the electoral college is screwed up because he has more pressing matters. I can understand why you see it your way though. I think the electoral college electoral votes should split up over who won what county, etc. Each state splits up the electoral votes. Like Maine does. Another state does it too but I forget what state it is. I want to say Georgia but I'm not sure.


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Don't talk about changing opinions. Hillary Clinton has changed her opinion on many things. Running against Barack - against gay marriage. Running against Trump - for gay marriage.
> ^ that's just one example.
> 
> You can't prove someone would have campaigned differently in a hypothetical situation. I think a lot of people can see that both candidates would have campaigned differently if it was for the popular vote.
> ...



I'm not actually a Clinton supporter. I would have much rather see Bernie as president, and I'll admit I rather have Clinton than Trump but I'm not a big fan of her.. And I agree with you that both candidates have changed their opinion a lot.
I do however think Clinton now actually supports gay marriage while trump chose mike pence to be Vice President...

Anyways, where I live we don't have electoral college because we have more than 2 parties (so it wouldn't really work anyways). That might be one of the reasons why I just don't get why you wouldn't have popular vote. I agree that the method used in Maine might be better.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Cynicat said:


> I'm not actually a Clinton supporter. I would have much rather see Bernie as president, and I'll admit I rather have Clinton than Trump but I'm not a big fan of her.. And I agree with you that both candidates have changed their opinion a lot.
> I do however think Clinton now actually supports gay marriage while trump chose mike pence to be Vice President...
> 
> Anyways, where I live we don't have electoral college because we have more than 2 parties (so it wouldn't really work anyways). That might be one of the reasons why I just don't get why you wouldn't have popular vote. I agree that the method used in Maine might be better.



Not changed their opinion. Good chance. I said change how they campaigned, or at least that's what I meant to put out.

Bernie was cheated out by the DNC. That wasn't right. But I don't like him. Look at France, they're failing. Bernie has similar values and propositions.

I'm gay and as you can see idrc about stances against LGBT. I think that we will be able to still love who we want to because there is a lot of people who are fighting for it.


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Not changed their opinion. Good chance. I said change how they campaigned, or at least that's what I meant to put out.
> 
> Bernie was cheated out by the DNC. That wasn't right. But I don't like him. Look at France, they're failing. Bernie has similar values and propositions.
> 
> I'm gay and as you can see idrc about stances against LGBT. I think that we will be able to still love who we want to because there is a lot of people who are fighting for it.



I don't think values are what is wrong in French, economics definitely are. People are dissatisfied. Populism takes over and we get people like le Pen. I don't think thats a good solution. But they do need someone who knows how to fix their economy and they don't have that person at the moment.
Im a little less positive about the future of LGBT people in America, but I do think that as long people keep fighting for what they believe there is no reason to give up.


----------



## misakixx (Jan 3, 2017)

i dont even know those guys since im not american but trump is still ***** so his cabinet too. 
They should bring bernie back. My soul cries everytime i watch bernie come back on youtube.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Cynicat said:


> I don't think values are what is wrong in French, economics definitely are. People are dissatisfied. Populism takes over and we get people like le Pen. I don't think thats a good solution. But they do need someone who knows how to fix their economy and they don't have that person at the moment.
> Im a little less positive about the future of LGBT people in America, but I do think that as long people keep fighting for what they believe there is no reason to give up.



America is the best country to express yourself in. Be LGBT. Whatever. Be less positive. 
I was talking about France's economic and immigration policies.

- - - Post Merge - - -



misakixx said:


> i dont even know those guys since im not american but trump is still ***** so his cabinet too.
> They should bring bernie back. My soul cries everytime i watch bernie come back on youtube.



You obviously know nothing about American politics. Bernie can't come back.


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> America is the best country to express yourself in. Be LGBT. Whatever. Be less positive.
> I was talking about France's economic and immigration policies.



I disagree, America legalized gay marriage in 2015 which is not that long ago, the first country to legalize gay marriage did this in 2001. Is America a lot better than other places in the world when it comes to expressing yourself? Definitely.


----------



## seliph (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> America is the best country to express yourself in.



Quietly looks at the recent uprise of neo-nazi nonsense

Hmm seems legit


----------



## misakixx (Jan 3, 2017)

- - - Post Merge - - -



You obviously know nothing about American politics. Bernie can't come back.[/QUOTE]

i know but it still would be great


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Cynicat said:


> I disagree, America legalized gay marriage in 2015 which is not that long ago, the first country to legalize gay marriage did this in 2001. Is America a lot better than other places in the world when it comes to expressing yourself? Definitely.



Imo it's the best country to express yourself in. You can't deny it's in the top 5.

- - - Post Merge - - -



misakixx said:


> - - - Post Merge - - -
> 
> 
> 
> You obviously know nothing about American politics. Bernie can't come back.



i know but it still would be great[/QUOTE]

No it wouldn't. Our economy would be worse off and there would be uprisings since he didn't win the election, he just came back.

- - - Post Merge - - -



gyro said:


> Quietly looks at the recent uprise of neo-nazi nonsense
> 
> Hmm seems legit



*reads this post*

*stares for a second*

*moves on with life*


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Imo it's the best country to express yourself in. You can't deny it's in the top 5.


Top 5 isn't the best. Also I can deny it because America is really big and its really different depending on where you are, which why you can't speak about a whole country if its about this issue. There are certainly places that might be in the top 5, but a lot of places (/states) I'd say don't belong in that list.


----------



## seliph (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> *reads this post*
> 
> *stares for a second*
> 
> *moves on with life*



Glad you can just up and move on from the rampant racism, antisemitism, and general bigotry that your new president elect woke up in people. Must be nice.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

And this is why I didn't want to post... We were having intellectual conversations until people decided to mess it up.


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 3, 2017)

misakixx said:


> i know but it still would be great



Agreed but wishful thinking isn't going to help making the world a better place


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Bernie would be bad for America's economy. He would continue the Obama Era just like Hillary would've. Glad democrats didn't get the oval office.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 3, 2017)

Jarrad said:


> idk sometimes people take politics far too seriously. Trump becoming president isn't the end of the world. It doesn't give him the authority to blow up China or something.



Um... it actually does give him the authority to blow up China or any other country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Command_Authority



irhaskell8 said:


> The electoral college is much more sophisticated and challenging. If it was for the popular vote, Trump would have campaigned differently.



Elections are not supposed to be like a board game. The point of an election is not to be sophisticated and challenging, it's to be representative of the will of the people. The ability for someone to become president of the United States without actually being popular puts the U.S. in company with countries like Russia, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, and Iran where you also don't have to be popular to be the leader.


----------



## N e s s (Jan 3, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> Um... it actually does give him the authority to blow China or any other country.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Command_Authority



Isn't that just lovely.


----------



## demoness (Jan 3, 2017)

i wonder what it's like living in other realities.

anyway, i think his cabinet is basically the usual alt-right nonsense except now we have to take this past year's right-wing sociopathic tantrum seriously because the public forgets every 20 some years that surprise, these kinds of angry, anti-intellectual  businessmen do not care about them.  i would argue that people that aren't troubled by his cabinet choices either have nothing to lose or aren't informed enough to realize they're all against their own best interest.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 3, 2017)

umjammer brandi said:


> i wonder what it's like living in other realities.
> 
> anyway, i think his cabinet is basically the usual alt-right nonsense except now we have to take this past year's right-wing sociopathic tantrum seriously because the public forgets every 20 some years that surprise, these kinds of angry, anti-intellectual  businessmen do not care about them.  i would argue that people that aren't troubled by his cabinet choices either have nothing to lose or aren't informed enough to realize they're all against their own best interest.



The last major U.S. recession was in 2008, so it actually took the public less than 8 years to forget that letting businessmen run the government ends in disaster. My cats have better long-term memory than most Americans.


----------



## nami26 (Jan 3, 2017)

I don't think theyre that bad, he could have done better than Rex Tillerson butttt.... I think he chose people that he knew would be right for that position. we don't know anything about why he picked these people, and so there must be a good reason for each of them


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> Um... it actually does give him the authority to blow up China or any other country.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Command_Authority
> 
> ...



You got that from Wikipedia. He doesn't have interest in just blowing up another country randomly. .-.

Elections are challenging because you have to sophistically represent yourself to the people. Before the election Trump was popular in the business aspect.

- - - Post Merge - - -



nami26 said:


> I don't think theyre that bad, he could have done better than Rex Tillerson butttt.... I think he chose people that he knew would be right for that position. we don't know anything about why he picked these people, and so there must be a good reason for each of them



He picked them based on their qualifications.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Red Cat said:


> The last major U.S. recession was in 2008, so it actually took the public less than 8 years to forget that letting businessmen run the government ends in disaster. My cats have have long-term memory than most Americans.



The people we have in office right now are doing a bang-up job. .-.

It makes sense that Mr. Trump and his economic plans will help save the country from financial ruin. Don't make fun of Americans.
.-.

- - - Post Merge - - -



umjammer brandi said:


> i wonder what it's like living in other realities.
> 
> anyway, i think his cabinet is basically the usual alt-right nonsense except now we have to take this past year's right-wing sociopathic tantrum seriously because the public forgets every 20 some years that surprise, these kinds of angry, anti-intellectual  businessmen do not care about them.  i would argue that people that aren't troubled by his cabinet choices either have nothing to lose or aren't informed enough to realize they're all against their own best interest.



I wish you could see it differently. Hillary didn't win the election because the American people were right to feel that she did not care about them.


----------



## ReesesRainbowHelixXOXO (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Bernie would be bad for America's economy. He would continue the Obama Era just like Hillary would've. Glad democrats didn't get the oval office.



Correct me if I'm wrong here, didn't Trump plan to rid of Obamacare- then changed his mind? I don't like the guy *AT ALL*, but personally, Obamacare hasn't been very helpful for my family.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

MayorSarah13 said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong here, didn't Trump plan to rid of Obamacare- then changed his mind? I don't like the guy *AT ALL*, but personally, Obamacare hasn't been very helpful for my family.



He's still against Obamacare. That doesn't help many families.


----------



## ReesesRainbowHelixXOXO (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> He's still against Obamacare. That doesn't help many families.



What's going on with it, then? It doesn't seem like it's being taken care of, I can only hope change will happen for that when he steps into office.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/state-governor-obamacare-repeal/2016/11/26/id/760756/

He hasn't even stepped into office. .-.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Elections are challenging because you have to sophistically represent yourself to the people. Before the election Trump was popular in the business aspect.



Trump is anything but sophisticated. He got votes by being a shock-jock in an era where people are obsessed with reality TV and think the president should be entertaining. It's fascinating that so many people are so loyal and unquestioning to a guy who has done literally nothing for them. His defenders worship him like a god and think everything bad about him is a lie even when there is solid proof that it's true. They think every action he takes is out of the goodness of his heart and that there is not any remote chance that he could be doing something for his own self-interest even though he's been doing that his entire life. The one thing Trump deserves credit for is being so good at finding sheep looking for a shepard.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> Trump is anything but sophisticated. He got votes by being a shock-jock in an era where people are obsessed with reality TV and think the president should be entertaining. It's fascinating that so many people are so loyal and unquestioning to a guy who has done literally nothing for them. His defenders worship him like a god and think everything bad about him is a lie even when there is solid proof that it's true. They think every action he takes is out of the goodness of his heart and that there is not any remote chance that he could be doing something for his own self-interest even though he's been doing that his entire life. The one thing Trump deserves credit for is being so good at finding sheep looking for a shepard.



People are in an era where they're tired of politicans doing NOTHING for anyone else and doing everything for themselves! If you do a poll over why people voted for President-Elect Donald J. Trump there will be no responses in which they state they voted for him because he's entertaining.

You're calling all the individuals who voted for Trump unintelligent. They don't worship him like a god. We don't worship him like a god.

Trump has done many things. Helping out a single African-American mother. Donating and fighting for the veterans association. And much more. He is a successful businessman.

This thread started as an intellectual conversation going on between many individuals with different opinions. Now it's "he said, she said".

- - - Post Merge - - -

1.(of a machine, system, or technique) developed to a high degree of complexity

His campaign was sophisticated enough to get the electoral college vote.


----------



## N e s s (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> He's still against Obamacare. That doesn't help many families.



Obamacare is how my family gets me insulin for my type one diabetes. My parents are both still together, but my dad has a teacher job while my mom is unemployed. Insulin isn't cheap, you know. Trump is literally threatening to take away my fail safe for the thing that literally keeps me alive.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> People are in an era where they're tired of politicans doing NOTHING for anyone else and doing everything for themselves! If you do a poll over why people voted for President-Elect Donald J. Trump there will be no responses in which they state they voted for him because he's entertaining.
> 
> You're calling all the individuals who voted for Trump unintelligent. They don't worship him like a god. We don't worship him like a god.
> 
> ...



His campaign was sophisticated enough because the voters are not. Hillary Clinton won among college educated voters and Trump won among non-college educated voters. So statistically speaking, Trump voters are less intelligent.


----------



## N e s s (Jan 3, 2017)

And by the way, i'm sure my family will likely find some way to get health insurance if Trump repeals affordable health care (which, i'm sure he will.) but it is going to be a lot harder. Thats what pisses me off about Trump. You don't know it, but i'm certain you can name a middle class family you know that uses Obamacare.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Red Cat said:


> His campaign was sophisticated enough because the voters are not. Hillary Clinton won among college educated voters and Trump won among non-college educated voters. So statistically speaking, Trump voters are less intelligent.



One of the other reasons Hillary lost was because millenials were stupid enough to vote for Gary Johnson and Jill Stein thinking nothing of it. However surprise surprise you wasted your vote on candidates that didn't even win. My brother voted for Jill Stein and a day after he did he called my mom and dad crying.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> His campaign was sophisticated enough because the voters are not. Hillary Clinton won among college educated voters and Trump won among non-college educated voters. So statistically speaking, Trump voters are less intelligent.



Did you know there has been proof and accusations over college professing blackmailing/forcing their students to lean a certain way politically? 

Pull up the statistics for that please. As far as I know Trump voters are more educated and much more sophisticated when debates start between Trump voters vs Hillary voters. 

I could randomly say... Hillary voters are all middle-class. It's believable, to a point. Doesn't make it true. .-.

- - - Post Merge - - -



N e s s said:


> And by the way, i'm sure my family will likely find some way to get health insurance if Trump repeals affordable health care (which, i'm sure he will.) but it is going to be a lot harder. Thats what pisses me off about Trump. You don't know it, but i'm certain you can name a middle class family you know that uses Obamacare.
> 
> - - - Post Merge - - -
> 
> One of the other reasons Hillary lost was because millenials were stupid enough to vote for Gary Johnson and Jill Stein thinking nothing of it. However surprise surprise you wasted your vote on candidates that didn't even win. My brother voted for Jill Stein and a day after he did he called my mom and dad crying.



Your brother cried because he chose to vote for a third-party? 

Jill Stein and Gary Johnson both affected Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The thing is... Donald Trump came out stronger... Hm, wonder why.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Did you know there has been proof and accusations over college professing blackmailing/forcing their students to lean a certain way politically?
> 
> Pull up the statistics for that please. As far as I know Trump voters are more educated and much more sophisticated when debates start between Trump voters vs Hillary voters.
> 
> ...



http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html?_r=0

Now do me a favor and pull up the source for your college blackmailing story.


----------



## N e s s (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Did you know there has been proof and accusations over college professing blackmailing/forcing their students to lean a certain way politically?
> 
> Pull up the statistics for that please. As far as I know Trump voters are more educated and much more sophisticated when debates start between Trump voters vs Hillary voters.
> 
> ...



Would you stop and look at the way you're treating other people in your posts, you're being an incredibly rude to everyone in this thread. I didn't say anything rude about you, I just stated what I think about Trump and my own political opinions. My family is democratic, and my brother said he felt like horses*** because he thought he wasted his vote and he let people around him convince him to make the wrong choice. He never liked trump, but he said afterwards that he thought back and should have voted for Clinton.

If you can't handle being civil to other people in a political conversation, then its time for you to stop. What you're saying is uncalled for when I didn't say anything rude to you, I only put in my 2 cents.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

http://dennismichaellynch.com/college-professor-caught-tape-referencing-students-vote-hillary/

There are more to these. Watching various news networks I've seen reports on them. College professors are supposed to teach students not tell them who to vote for. .-.

- - - Post Merge - - -

Let's agree to disagree, Red Cat? I only see this escalating.


----------



## ams (Jan 3, 2017)

I find what's going on in the US so interesting. The parallels between what's going on now and conservative revolutions in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world are particularly fascinating. I really look forward to watching how everything plays out from up here in Canada


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

If I upset you, I apologize. I'm done with this thread. Ok?

- - - Post Merge - - -



N e s s said:


> Would you stop and look at the way you're treating other people in your posts, you're being an incredibly rude to everyone in this thread. I didn't say anything rude about you, I just stated what I think about Trump and my own political opinions. My family is democratic, and my brother said he felt like horses*** because he thought he wasted his vote and he let people around him convince him to make the wrong choice. He never liked trump, but he said afterwards that he thought back and should have voted for Clinton.
> 
> If you can't handle being civil to other people in a political conversation, then its time for you to stop. What you're saying is uncalled for when I didn't say anything rude to you, I only put in my 2 cents.



I apologize if I made you that upset. I'm done with this thread.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> http://dennismichaellynch.com/college-professor-caught-tape-referencing-students-vote-hillary/
> 
> There are more to these. Watching various news networks I've seen reports on them. College professors are supposed to teach students not tell them who to vote for. .-.
> 
> ...



Well, I already know that I'm not changing your mind lol. But you seriously posted a link to a website called dennismichaellynch.com that has a story on the front page about some secret revenge plot to kill thousands of people by Hillary Clinton? And then people like you wonder why people like me think fake news is a serious problem. I don't even want to know what your "various news networks" are (well actually I do so I can get a few more chuckles in). It's impossible to have an "intellectual discussion" with someone who doesn't even get their news from legitimate sources and thus is making arguments based on things which aren't even true. And yes, I know I have a 0% chance of changing your mind, but I like to draw attention to this kind of stuff for other people who just happen to be reading this.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 3, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> Well, I already know that I'm not changing your mind lol. But you seriously posted a link to a website called dennismichaellynch.com that has a story on the front page about some secret revenge plot to kill thousands of people by Hillary Clinton? And then people like you wonder why people like me think fake news is a serious problem. I don't even want to know what your "various news networks" are (well actually I do so I can get a few more chuckles in). It's impossible to have an "intellectual discussion" with someone who doesn't even get their news from legitimate sources and thus is making arguments based on things which aren't even true. And yes, I know I have a 0% chance of changing your mind, but I like to draw attention to this kind of stuff for other people who just happen to be reading this.



Last thing before I leave. I found many links to that same article. Just google it. Many reported on it.

Yes. I'm wrong, you all are right.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 3, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Last thing before I leave. I found many links to that same article. Just google it. Many reported on it.



I'm sure there are some bad college professors out there who inappropriately try to influence their students' political opinions just like there are some bad businessmen out there who inappropriately touch their employees' private parts.


----------



## nintendofan85 (Jan 3, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> His campaign was sophisticated enough because the voters are not. Hillary Clinton won among college educated voters and Trump won among non-college educated voters. So statistically speaking, Trump voters are less intelligent.



Which basically undermines the reason the founding fathers created the electoral college.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Red Cat said:


> The last major U.S. recession was in 2008, so it actually took the public less than 8 years to forget that letting businessmen run the government ends in disaster. My cats have have long-term memory than most Americans.



2007-2009 to be precise. It lasted from December 2007 to June 2009. I agree with your point, I'm justing pointing out that it was a lengthy recession and the business-politics mix definitely had an effect.

- - - Post Merge - - -



irhaskell8 said:


> Don't talk about changing opinions. Hillary Clinton has changed her opinion on many things. Running against Barack - against gay marriage. Running against Trump - for gay marriage.
> ^ that's just one example.
> 
> You can't prove someone would have campaigned differently in a hypothetical situation. I think a lot of people can see that both candidates would have campaigned differently if it was for the popular vote.
> ...



Nebraska. It did so in the 2008 election.


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 4, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> His campaign was sophisticated enough because the voters are not. Hillary Clinton won among college educated voters and Trump won among non-college educated voters. So statistically speaking, Trump voters are less intelligent.



just to add a wrinkle to these statistics, Hillary performed worse than Obama did in 2012 with people who had a high school education or less. more importantly, she did far worse with people who had "some college education," which is a group that I think includes people who are currently in college and people who dropped out (just to reiterate: Obama won this group in 2012 while Hillary lost it in 2016). she certainly performed better with people who had college degrees, but i think there's more to this than just college/non-college educated voters.

when you break down the education category by race, Trump won with white college voters and white non-college voters. there's a considerable margin between whites and non-whites with college degrees along with whites and non-whites without college degrees. i think it's important to make that distinction because simply calling Trump voters the voters that are "uneducated" completely excludes the huge percentage of white college voters that enabled his victory especially in the swing states. 

simply calling Trump voters less intelligent is dangerous because Hillary did not win among all college-educated voters; she lost the white college-educated vote and by not facing this reality we ignore issues that run on more than just separate racial, educational, and class divisions


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 4, 2017)

SuperVandal said:


> just to add a wrinkle to these statistics, Hillary performed worse than Obama did in 2012 with people who had a high school education or less. more importantly, she did far worse with people who had "some college education," which is a group that I think includes people who are currently in college and people who dropped out (just to reiterate: Obama won this group in 2012 while Hillary lost it in 2016). she certainly performed better with people who had college degrees, but i think there's more to this than just college/non-college educated voters.
> 
> when you break down the education category by race, Trump won with white college voters and white non-college voters. there's a considerable margin between whites and non-whites with college degrees along with whites and non-whites without college degrees. i think it's important to make that distinction because simply calling Trump voters the voters that are "uneducated" completely excludes the huge percentage of white college voters that enabled his victory especially in the swing states.
> 
> simply calling Trump voters less intelligent is dangerous because Hillary did not win among all college-educated voters; she lost the white college-educated vote and by not facing this reality we ignore issues that run on more than just separate racial, educational, and class divisions



It's true that the education gap in the polls is more nuanced than I made it out to be in my post. Education is more of a symptom than the cause of how people voted. The race and gender gaps were far worse and while having a college education helped some whites and males see why Trump's language about women and minorities was really bad, it is by no means a "cure" to racism and sexism. Part of it was on Hillary Clinton as she was terrible at communicating to working-class and college-educated whites, but that doesn't really excuse them for turning a blind eye to Trump's words and actions either.


----------



## Bacon Boy (Jan 4, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> It's true that the education gap in the polls is more nuanced than I made it out to be in my post. Education is more of a symptom than the cause of how people voted. The race and gender gaps were far worse and while having a college education helped some whites and males see why Trump's language about women and minorities was really bad, it is by no means a "cure" to racism and sexism. Part of it was on Hillary Clinton as she was terrible at communicating to working-class and college-educated whites, but that doesn't really excuse them for turning a blind eye to Trump's words and actions either.



I think that the problem we're facing here, especially in this election, was the refusal to vote third party. The nation treated this election like it had only two parties running. Our refusal to break from that tradition is hurting us deeply. Despite the rhetoric and the words used by each person, Donald Trump and Hillary are more alike than most people realize. Donald Trump is the most moderate republican that has ever run, with his views leaning towards the left on a lot of issues. However, the reason he won is because he didn't treat Hillary's voters like Hillary treated Trump's voters. By grouping everyone into one group (deplorables, alt-right, racist, misogynistic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, etc.), they were less likely to vote for her. There were a lot of people on the fence in this election and Hillary's out of touch-ness with the American people hurt her. Not as in Trump was in touch with the middle class man, but he knew how to talk to people on a "real" level, whereas Hillary didn't. Also, just to state this, I didn't like either of them, nor did I vote for either of them. This is in no way a defense of anything that Trump has said or done.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 4, 2017)

Pollsters said educated college voters voted for Hillary. 
Pollsters said non-educated college voters voted for Trump.

Pollsters also said that Hillary was going to get elected.

See that pattern?

Side Note : College educated and non-college educated are two large categories. You can't simplify them into two different standoffs. Just because someone went to college doesn't make them more intelligent. Just look at what is happening on college campuses. .-.

- - - Post Merge - - -

Now let everyone classify things into the "black vote", "white vote", "latino vote"... or how about we just call it the American vote? People are irritating me more to a day-to-day basis. I've had people tell me several times that my opinion is wrong because I'm white.

"White people are trash." - Not racist.
"Black people are trash." - Racist.

It's called a double standard in which we don't have anymore. It doesn't matter what you're race is or your gender. Well, it shouldn't matter. .-.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Red Cat said:


> It's true that the education gap in the polls is more nuanced than I made it out to be in my post. Education is more of a symptom than the cause of how people voted. The race and gender gaps were far worse and while having a college education helped some whites and males see why Trump's language about women and minorities was really bad, it is by no means a "cure" to racism and sexism. Part of it was on Hillary Clinton as she was terrible at communicating to working-class and college-educated whites, but that doesn't really excuse them for turning a blind eye to Trump's words and actions either.



Part of it was that Hillary just doesn't like America and many see that. She only likes filling her pockets.


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 4, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Pollsters said educated college voters voted for Hillary.
> Pollsters said non-educated college voters voted for Trump.
> 
> Pollsters also said that Hillary was going to get elected.
> ...



I saw the real truth about college education. More years in college doesn't mean more education. The reason why conservates are "less educated" is because liberals have dominated the education system for a while. Colleges indoctrinate students to be liberals. They don't teach them anything new. They're not only taught to believe that communism is right and capitalism is wrong when I was told that communism is one of the worst ideas ever invented, but they also shove their social beliefs down their throats. Good thing my college doesn't do that, but most colleges do. It's not really education to only be in your comfort zone when you learn.



> Now let everyone classify things into the "black vote", "white vote", "latino vote"... or how about we just call it the American vote? People are irritating me more to a day-to-day basis. I've had people tell me several times that my opinion is wrong because I'm white.
> 
> "White people are trash." - Not racist.
> "Black people are trash." - Racist.
> ...



Conservatives may have been more of a limited demographic (straight, white, male, Christian, and middle-class) while liberals are more diverse in many categories, but the truth is, liberals are ten times more intolerant than conservatives, yet they don't admit it or realize it. Granted, there are more tolerant liberals than intolerant liberals while conservatives outnumber liberals in our country, but most intolerant people in the political spectrum are liberals. Here's some proof:

- They denounce all white conservatives as racists and try to silence them, but they say very racist things towards conservatives of different groups
- They are more likely to unfriend, stop following, or block people on Facebook or Twitter over who you voted
- They are more likely to boycott or buy-cott businesses based on political beliefs (they even say Chick-fil-a is the worst fast food chain despite being mostly positive in quality and satisfaction while actually not discriminating against anyone)
- They accuse conservatives of intolerance for simply having different beliefs
- They try to silence conservatives in talk shows and schools, but force people to listen to them
- They are more likely to call Trump voters bad names for voting Trump than conservatives are to call Hillary voters the same thing, while not caring why they really voted
- They use the terms "racist", "misogynist", "homophobe", and "Nazi" incorrectly AND use them as an excuse for bullying conservatives. They even call it "the right thing" to bully people. So while they accuse of intolerance, they're being even more intolerant

The list could go on and on. We can drop racial discrimination, LGBT (and their counterparts) discrimination, sex discrimination, and class hatred from both sides, but if there's anything liberals are doing wrong, it's political discrimination.


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 4, 2017)

Bacon Boy said:


> I think that the problem we're facing here, especially in this election, was the refusal to vote third party. The nation treated this election like it had only two parties running. Our refusal to break from that tradition is hurting us deeply. Despite the rhetoric and the words used by each person, Donald Trump and Hillary are more alike than most people realize. Donald Trump is the most moderate republican that has ever run, with his views leaning towards the left on a lot of issues. However, the reason he won is because he didn't treat Hillary's voters like Hillary treated Trump's voters. By grouping everyone into one group (deplorables, alt-right, racist, misogynistic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, etc.), they were less likely to vote for her. There were a lot of people on the fence in this election and Hillary's out of touch-ness with the American people hurt her. Not as in Trump was in touch with the middle class man, but he knew how to talk to people on a "real" level, whereas Hillary didn't. Also, just to state this, I didn't like either of them, nor did I vote for either of them. This is in no way a defense of anything that Trump has said or done.



third party voting is way more complicated than just voting or not voting for parties. there's a reason why America has a two-party system while other countries such as Britain have a three-party system. it's based on election rules and changing it would involve more than just voting patterns. if you want a new party to emerge, you'd have to see one of the two current parties replaced as seen in American politics in the past. if you're _really_ interested in how it works(though i doubt most people here are) most introductory political science classes go over this concept. or, y'know, youtube works as well lol

as for how Trump won- it's way more complicated than how each candidate treated the other side's voters. i think what you're getting at is how the media impacted this election in the portrayal of each candidate. i would say most of us know the very worst of each candidate simply because news outlets regurgitated talking points or "bombshells" of the past year - the deplorables comment, Trump's comments about women, etc. you're right, i think Trump played better at appearing more moderate than Hillary did throughout the campaign. much of that has to do with how he backtracked so much on his statements that no one really knows what the hell he's standing for. the right forgave Trump for reaching out towards the middle far more than the left did for Hillary. which, again, ties back to media portrayal. Hillary received far more flack for switching positions on issues than Trump did and it played into people's prejudices of her.

as for being out of touch- again, I'd like to mention how the media played into this election. i think both candidates were equally out of touch to the other side, but Trump was able to touch into the anger and energy of his own camp far more effectively than Hillary. he played towards his base and i dont think it had anything to do with him speaking on a real level, whatever that means. it amazes me to this day how Trump utilized the media to win. he called and called on a bias against him and that all news networks were out to get him. he had the camera pointed on him since the very beginning, and he used that to galvanize voters for him by playing to the fears and worries people had. i don't remember ever seeing a full Hillary rally being broadcast on television unless it was to denote an important milestone (primary victory, veep selection, etc.) Trump had his rallies broadcast on a daily basis because he knew what to say. and that's what it takes to be a winner.
he was better at playing politician than Hillary, and that's what I find extremely amusing as people call for him to "drain the swamp."

at the end of the day, Trump won by electoral vote. that means he won on a strategic level. he knew where to campaign in which key areas/states because he saw the weakness in Hillary's voter appeal. 



Apple2012 said:


> I saw the real truth about college education. More years in college doesn't mean more education. The reason why conservates are "less educated" is because liberals have dominated the education system for a while. Colleges indoctrinate students to be liberals. They don't teach them anything new. They're not only taught to believe that communism is right and capitalism is wrong when I was told that communism is one of the worst ideas ever invented, but they also shove their social beliefs down their throats. Good thing my college doesn't do that, but most colleges do. It's not really education to only be in your comfort zone when you learn.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



congratulations, you speak of generalizations and discrimination as you yourself participate in the act of perpetuating generalizations.


----------



## Antonio (Jan 4, 2017)

Well, it's time to move to canada, anyone care to join me in this exciting adventure to escape before the apocalypse begins. I got popcorn...


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 4, 2017)

SuperVandal said:


> congratulations, you speak of generalizations and discrimination as you yourself participate in the act of perpetuating generalizations.



But I wasn't trying to say all liberals are bigots. I was pointing out that liberals in general are more intolerant than conservatives because when it comes to intolerance like that, more often it's done by liberals. But I can say this much. I'm not perfect. I'm just frustrated at how liberals behaved in the past few years.


----------



## Annabloem (Jan 4, 2017)

Maybe it's just because I'm from the Netherlands, were we have many political parties, who get elected based on how many people vote for them (we always have coalitions) but I really don't get why there are only "two parties" in the USA (and I'm genuinely interested). I'll look for some youtube video's later!
even the uk's three party-system has interested me (to me, it was hilarious how freaked out they were by having a coalition government, while that's all we have, all the time xD)


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 4, 2017)

Annabloem said:


> Maybe it's just because I'm from the Netherlands, were we have many political parties, who get elected based on how many people vote for them (we always have coalitions) but I really don't get why there are only "two parties" in the USA (and I'm genuinely interested). I'll look for some youtube video's later!
> even the uk's three party-system has interested me (to me, it was hilarious how freaked out they were by having a coalition government, while that's all we have, all the time xD)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo


----------



## moonford (Jan 4, 2017)

N e s s said:


> Would you stop and look at the way you're treating other people in your posts, you're being an incredibly rude to everyone in this thread. I didn't say anything rude about you, I just stated what I think about Trump and my own political opinions. My family is democratic, and my brother said he felt like horses*** because he thought he wasted his vote and he let people around him convince him to make the wrong choice. He never liked trump, but he said afterwards that he thought back and should have voted for Clinton.
> 
> If you can't handle being civil to other people in a political conversation, then its time for you to stop. What you're saying is uncalled for when I didn't say anything rude to you, I only put in my 2 cents.



They wanted to talk to me about Politics because I'm a "Hillary supporter", glad I declined their offer for a "civil" discussion, because if they were going to behave like this it would be annoying.
----------------------------------------------------

As for this thread, Its just another reason for me to hate that orange faced creep, those choices are unbearable. 

I'm independent and most of my views agree with the Green Party (In UK & Ireland politics), so I disagree with Trump and Clinton on many many things.

I hate Trump because he has said many nasty things including racist, xenophobic, LGBT+ phobic slurs and actions, he made fun of a physically disabled man, he acts like a child during debates, he has been accused of sexual assault, he has no political experience, he objectifys women and his arrogance annoys me.

I dislike Clinton because she has done many horrible things in the past, has had homophobic and racist views in the past (which she no longer agrees with, I assume), her husband is Bill Clinton who has been accused of many inappropriate acts towards women and I lose all respect for anyone who stays with a man/women who sexually abuses people, and therefore I have no respect for her. 

The only reason I prefer Hillary is because:
1. She has political experience. 
2. I agree with a few things she has said.
 3. I believe she has changed a lot for the greater good unlike Trump who is still an abomination.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 4, 2017)

Antonio said:


> Well, it's time to move to canada, anyone care to join me in this exciting adventure to escape before the apocalypse begins. I got popcorn...



Move to Canada. For one, they're more "white". For two, they're socialist. For three, their economy is failing like many others. For four, they're less tolerant.  xoxo

- - - Post Merge - - -



Whiteflamingo said:


> The only reason I prefer Hillary is because:
> 1. She has political experience.
> 2. I agree with a few things she has said.
> 3. I believe she has changed.



Just because she has political experience doesn't mean she'll be better. Coolidge for example had a lot of political experience. Didn't do so good in office. American people are also tired of politicians who don't care for the them and act like any other politician filling their own agenda.

Few things that she changes her mind on to fit the left? 2008 - LGBT marriage is wrong. 2016 - LGBT marriage is right.

Any politician can "change".


----------



## N e s s (Jan 4, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Move to Canada. For one, they're more "white". For two, they're socialist. For three, their economy is failing like many others. For four, they're less tolerant.  xoxo
> 
> - - - Post Merge - - -
> 
> ...



Didn't you say you were done with this thread


----------



## Haskell (Jan 4, 2017)

N e s s said:


> Didn't you say you were done with this thread



I didn't know you were me and making decisions for me. If you're that upset that put me in your ignore list.


----------



## N e s s (Jan 4, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> I didn't know you were me and making decisions for me. If you're that upset that put me in your ignore list.



lol I just think its silly that you said you were done with this thread and you're here again

whatever floats your boat bud.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 4, 2017)

You misinterpreted. That was for the night or till' I cool off because I'm not going to attack children. .-.


----------



## N e s s (Jan 4, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> You misinterpreted. That was for the night or till' I cool off because I'm not going to attack children. .-.



To me it just sounds like you're too stubborn to stop but whatever. You do whatever you want i won't stop you

- - - Post Merge - - -



irhaskell8 said:


> You misinterpreted. That was for the night or till' I cool off because I'm not going to attack children. .-.



To me it just sounds like you're too stubborn to stop but whatever. You do whatever you want i won't stop you


----------



## Haskell (Jan 4, 2017)

And here we go again, folks...


----------



## Haskell (Jan 4, 2017)

Can you please just leave me alone on this forum? It's supposed to be relaxing, not triggering.

- - - Post Merge - - -

1) Trump’s private jet flew a seriously ill jewish boy from California to New York for medical treatment.
2) The time that Donald Trump saved Ed McMahon’s house by purchasing it and allowing Ed to continue living in it.

3) Trump has donated his money to several health organizations including the American Cancer Society, American Diabetes Association, Alliance for Lupus Research, Autism Speaks, Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation of America, and many more.

4) Donald Trump called on the family at its home after their son, Ryan White, died of AIDS at age 18.

5) He saved an ice skating rink in Central Park by taking over the over – budget project, and finishing the rink by Christmas time for free. He was two months ahead of schedule, and $750,000 under budget. He also operated the ice skating rink for a year, and donated all profits to charity.

6) Donald Trump and Mel Farr teamed up to help young Detroit artists Appear at Carnegie Hall.

7) Donald Trump kept the Harlem Hoops program alive after learning the man who ran it was killed during the September 11th attacks.

8) How Trump Fought Antisemitism and Racism in Palm Beach Two Decades Ago

9) Barbara Res, at 33 years old became the first women to ever be put in charge of supervising the construction of a skyscraper, when Donald Trump hired her in 1980.


10) Donald Trump’s flagpole got fined $1250 per day, but sued the city citing the 1st amendment. Eventually they cut a deal ($100,000) that benefited Iraq War Veterans, the American flag and/or the local VA hospital.

11) After Jennifer Hudson’s mother, brother, and nephew were murdered, Trump sheltered her and her family at the Trump International Hotel & Tower free of charge.

12) Trump offered a $10,000 reward to the Buffalo bus driver who stopped a young woman from leaping off a bridge to her death in 2013.

13) Donald Trump was on ground zero after the September 11th attacks. He sent over 200 of  his own people to look for survivors in the wreckage.

14) Donald J. Trump and his siblings gave a $1 million gift to the hospital that treated their parents.

Millions of trump supporters feel this way about Donald J. Trump....."We don't care if the guy swears... or how many times he's been married...or who he voted for in the past, or what his income tax return shows. We want the problems fixed. Yes he's an egomaniac, but we don't care. We know he's not a racist, or bad to women, or all the other things the liberal media is trying to label him with. We know he's raised a good family, and that says a lot about him.
The country is a mess because politicians suck, the Republican Party is two faced & gutless, and illegals are everywhere and Muslims are openly trying to hurt this country and make the civilized world adjust to them. We want it all fixed!
We don't care that Trump is crude, we don't care that he has changed positions, we don't care that he fights with Megan Kelly, Rosie O'Donnell, and so many of the elected establishment. We don't care that Rubio, Cruz, Ryan, the Bush's, and so many other top old and new Republicans refuse to endorse him for their own selfish reasons, and we know what they are. We don't care that he doesn't know the name of some Muslim terrorists, we don't care that he tried some businesses that didn't work out.
This country is weak, bankrupt, our enemies are making fun of us, we are being invaded by illegals, we are becoming a nation of victims, where every Tom, Ricardo and Hasid is a special group with special rights to a point where we don't even recognize the country we were born and raised in, AND WE JUST WANT IT FIXED. And TRUMP is the only guy who seems to understand what the people want.
We're sick of politicians, sick of the Democratic and Republican Party. We're angry about the Iran deal, the budget, treatment of Israel, military weakness, lobbyists, special interests, overpaid politicians with their self serving bills and back room deals, trade deals, loss of jobs, manipulated economic numbers, businesses fleeing, and even the phony pay for play Clinton Foundation.
Americans are no longer going to be fooled, and the movement is out to change the direction we're taking. Trump may not be a saint, but he doesn't have lobbyist money holding him, he doesn't have political correctness restraining him, and all you know is that he has been very successful, a good negotiator, he has built a lot of things, he's flexible, and he's also not a politician. And he says he'll fix it. And we believe him because he is too much of an egotist to be proven wrong or looked at and called a liar.


*One Youtube comment. Find the video here! * 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9FPbgeQFvY


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 4, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Can you please just leave me alone on this forum? It's supposed to be relaxing, not triggering.



The problem is, politics is one of those subjects people couldn't get along on, especially in a time of polarization. So anything can easily offend them, even if you voice your opinion respectfully. I also think people are still mad at the election results and how people would vote Trump even after his poor behavior in the election and in the past. It's more than the cabinet members he picked, the repeal of Obamacare (which is already happening), and the plans on blocking Syrian refugees and building a wall on Mexico's northern border. People have been used to all of the social progresses that have happened, and the Republicans have dominated the federal government and state governments. A lot of these progresses may be reversed or facing new challenges. An example of the former is that Roe v Wade would be overturned, granting states more rights to limit abortion. An example of the latter is that same-sex marriage will remain legal nationwide, but churches, bakeries, flourists, and wedding coordinators can refuse serving a same-sex wedding to avoid violating their religious beliefs without getting legal trouble. It's not just about Trump, it's the fact that Republicans that oppose the popular social issues have won the election. Sorry if you're not feeling comfortable, but politics is always going to cause drama online in this time and age.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 4, 2017)

Apple2012 said:


> The problem is, politics is one of those subjects people couldn't get along on, especially in a time of polarization. So anything can easily offend them, even if you voice your opinion respectfully. I also think people are still mad at the election results and how people would vote Trump even after his poor behavior in the election and in the past. It's more than the cabinet members he picked, the repeal of Obamacare (which is already happening), and the plans on blocking Syrian refugees and building a wall on Mexico's northern border. People have been used to all of the social progresses that have happened, and the Republicans have dominated the federal government and state governments. A lot of these progresses may be reversed or facing new challenges. An example of the former is that Roe v Wade would be overturned, granting states more rights to limit abortion. An example of the latter is that same-sex marriage will remain legal nationwide, but churches, bakeries, flourists, and wedding coordinators can refuse serving a same-sex wedding to avoid violating their religious beliefs without getting legal trouble. It's not just about Trump, it's the fact that Republicans that oppose the popular social issues have won the election. Sorry if you're not feeling comfortable, but politics is always going to cause drama online in this time and age.




2. I just feel like he's being overly-obnoxious on purpose.
3. Private businesses have the right. It's their business.
4. The KKK originated from the democratic party. Republicans aren't against social progress as their out-to-be.
5. The wall isn't racist.
6. Repealing Obamacare is good.
7. Abortion should be allowed in special cases if the Mother's life is in danger of if she was raped by a heartless ape.
8. His cabinet picks are fine. Ben Carson was a good choice. Chao was Bill Clinton's secretary of labor... so that shows he's looking at everyone and everything.


The only thing I have a problem with is Roe V. Wade and he can't overturn Roe V. Wade


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 4, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> 2. I just feel like he's being overly-obnoxious on purpose.
> 3. Private businesses have the right. It's their business.
> 4. The KKK originated from the democratic party. Republicans aren't against social progress as their out-to-be.
> 5. The wall isn't racist.
> ...



2. I'm not sure what you mean
3. I agree on this.
4. When I was referring to social progresses, I meant like social issues such as political correctness, same-sex marriage, abortion, bathroom issue, and investigating police departments for racism.
5. I agree, but I was trying to add what people are upset about after the election.
6. I also agree. But repealing it is not popular on gaming sites or social media (where it's liberal-dominant).
7. I agree to this too.
8. Better than Obama's IMO

If you have strong right-wing bias, I can get along pretty easily. I am more right-winged in general, and I agree with what the Republicans say. However, I am in support of legalizing same-sex marriage mainly to get it out of politics rather than to keep people debating on it.

Even if I don't think Trump is great, any Republican is better than the Democrats that ran for president this year. I am more of a Cruz supporter, who has extreme views on the right wing, despite being less intolerant than Trump.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 4, 2017)

Apple2012 said:


> 2. I'm not sure what you mean
> 3. I agree on this.
> 4. When I was referring to social progresses, I meant like social issues such as political correctness, same-sex marriage, abortion, bathroom issue, and investigating police departments for racism.
> 5. I agree, but I was trying to add what people are upset about after the election.
> ...



To number 4... police departments aren't racist. BLM is racist as the KKK.
Bathroom issue I go against... mostly.
Republicans care more about the economy than same-sex marriage. There are more support for LGBT from republicans tbh. It's slowly but surely.


----------



## Annabloem (Jan 4, 2017)

SuperVandal said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo



Thanks for the link! It was an interesting watch, but it does make me wonder, why no coalition? In the Netherlands we have a similar system, but Leopard wouldn't have been able to rule with only 20% of the votes. She would have to work with other parties to secure 50% in order to get a majority. In the Netherlands everyone gets an amount of say in the Parliament based on the percentage of votes they got. Being the government with only 20% would result in you not getting anything done, because 80% is opposition. You'd have to work together to get anything done. It makes so much more sense to me than winner takes it all


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 5, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Can you please just leave me alone on this forum? It's supposed to be relaxing, not triggering.



So let me get this straight: You ardently support a guy who calls Hispanics rapists and killers, repeatedly insults and demeans women, and mocks disabled people and POWs, and then you complain about people being mean and nasty and triggering you on a politics thread?


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 5, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> So let me get this straight: You ardently support a guy who calls Hispanics rapists and killers, repeatedly insults and demeans women, and mocks disabled people and POWs, and then you complain about people being mean and nasty and triggering you on a politics thread?



It's not supporting Trump that causes people to get angry in general (even if it does). Right now, America more divided than it was during the Civil War. For this reason, politics, regardless of how respectful people post, will cause heated debates. It can also be triggering because, like I said, people are still upset at the election results. We now have to deal with him, knowing what he did wrong in the past and how extreme his foreign policy views are. Plus, there's Mike Pence, who believes in harsh methods of re-educating LGBT (especially in a time it's more controversial). And the government can now repeal obamacare and possibly take North Carolina's bathroom bill to a federal level because it's Republican dominant. Not saying that any of that is bad, but that's why people are still angry at the results. Just adding my 2 cents why politics is a triggering subject. So yes, supporting Trump will cause people to be angry, but so does supporting Obama.


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 5, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> 2. I just feel like he's being overly-obnoxious on purpose.
> 3. Private businesses have the right. It's their business.
> 4. The KKK originated from the democratic party. Republicans aren't against social progress as their out-to-be.
> 5. The wall isn't racist.
> ...



The KKK having its roots in the Democratic party has absolutely nothing to do with the current members within the party. If you're going to ignore the history behind political realignments throughout American history, you're going to regurgitate statements with little to no merit in political discussions. _That's_ the issue. On top of misleading news, we have people spreading inaccurate and misleading comments that do not advance discussion at all.

Do some research on the meaning of the word racism. You've been throwing it around a lot and you're continuously using it out of context and not even using it correctly. Trump's rhetoric on the wall is based in racist thought, and his portrayal of the Mexican people as rapists and criminals is a textbook example of racism.

Fact: Republicans have no alternative to replacing Obama. Fact: a majority of Americans want a national healthcare system. The repercussions of repealing the ACA is going to be felt strongly in the red states that need these services more than those in well-off states.

His cabinet picks have all been cherry-picked from the swamp he has promised to drain. His choices are people that are members of the alt-right (see also: Nazi) movement and either Trump has no idea what he's doing or he's purposely screwing everyone over. 

No one is above criticism. Pretending that Trump is doing everything flawlessly would be letting him go unaccountable. He is not, nor should he be.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 5, 2017)

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...-video-airs/ar-BBxUAVu?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=HPCDHP

Watch this link! This is why Trump got elected! Because people are tired of there being no double standard!

- - - Post Merge - - -



SuperVandal said:


> The KKK having its roots in the Democratic party has absolutely nothing to do with the current members within the party. If you're going to ignore the history behind political realignments throughout American history, you're going to regurgitate statements with little to no merit in political discussions. _That's_ the issue. On top of misleading news, we have people spreading inaccurate and misleading comments that do not advance discussion at all.
> 
> Do some research on the meaning of the word racism. You've been throwing it around a lot and you're continuously using it out of context and not even using it correctly. Trump's rhetoric on the wall is based in racist thought, and his portrayal of the Mexican people as rapists and criminals is a textbook example of racism.
> 
> ...



Do your research. Other countries have built a wall just like good ol' Mr. Trump is speaking of. Calling ILLEGALS rapist and drug lords is correct. It's obvious that it's not all of them but a good majority come into this country to do illegal things when they came here illegaly in the first place. 

He knows nothing of what he's doing? That's right, he's a billionaire. .-.

His cabinet picks aren't Nazi's. That's like me calling liberals cavemen. Ben Carson is for secretary of housing and development? He's a Nazi? Chao is secretary of transportation and was Bill CLINTON's secretary of labor. She's a Nazi? You're just upset your crooked politician with her fake self and fake beliefs didn't get elected. 

Trump is not a racist. Liberal propaganda put that against him. Imagine you're a corrupt politician with many friends, couldn't you get that done?

- - - Post Merge - - -

Just because you say "fact" doesn't mean it's true. I know more people that want OBAMACARE GONE than I do that want it to stay. And I go to a liberal high school with liberal teachers and I don't only talk to "Nazi's".

- - - Post Merge - - -



Red Cat said:


> So let me get this straight: You ardently support a guy who calls Hispanics rapists and killers, repeatedly insults and demeans women, and mocks disabled people and POWs, and then you complain about people being mean and nasty and triggering you on a politics thread?



So let me get this straight: You'd rather have someone who attacked a victim of pedophilia, attacked her husband accusers, steals, lies, deletes and thinks she is above the law? 

Again, liberal propaganda. Mr. Trump helps women, just because he is like any other and was talking locker room talk does not mean he does not respect them. I'm a guy and I hear worse everyday, even from teachers. .-. He called the illegals that were rapists and killers rapists and killers. Look back at that Youtube comment I posted. It's factual, research if you must. Waste your time.


----------



## Trent the Paladin (Jan 5, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...-video-airs/ar-BBxUAVu?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=HPCDHP
> 
> Watch this link! This is why Trump got elected! Because people are tired of there being no double standard!
> 
> ...


He got elected because a gang of idiots kidnapped a poor guy and tortured him? I 100% doubt that. 

What countries built walls? Great Wall of China doesn't count, Mongols are gone. Ah yes, all illegals are rapists and drug lords guys. Nobody comes here to get their child a better life, to live the American dream. They just come to sell crack. Assuming a majority does that just buys into Fox fearmongering, plus how does one even identify illegal immigrants? And why can't legal citizens be the same thing?

Just because you hear worse from others, doesn't make it okay. Broken clock is right twice a day, doesn't mean blanket statements are great.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 5, 2017)

Tom said:


> What countries built walls? Great Wall of China doesn't count, Mongols are gone.


The Soviet Union, which is the former name of Trump's favorite country in the world.


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 5, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...-video-airs/ar-BBxUAVu?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=HPCDHP
> 
> Watch this link! This is why Trump got elected! Because people are tired of there being no double standard!
> 
> ...



before you accuse me of doing my own research, why don't you take your own advice? learn what the alt right movement is about. hint: there's a whole lot of white supremacy in there. i did not say his cabinet picks were Nazis, i likened the alt-right movement to the Nazis. when did i ever imply Carson or Chao in my response? stop misconstruing people's statements to provide talking points that sound like they come off a campaign website. i was referring to Steve Bannon since he's the guy that has actual ties to the alt-right.

that's exactly right - he doesn't know anything about being a political leader. saying he'll be successful as president because he was "successful" as a businessman billionaire contradicts _everything_ about what Trump supporters wanted in their government. America is *not* a business, and must not be treated as such. a businessman who at any point in time during his presidency may act in the interests of his own and not the country is a dangerous precedent. 

please tell me 
http://www.gallup.com/poll/191504/majority-support-idea-fed-funded-healthcare-system.aspx
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...americans-support-federally-funded-healthcare

when i say fact when it is not - where is the lie? where exactly am i lying?
your claims are not substantive. you live in an area where most people want the ACA gone? fantastic, i live in an area where most people want it to stay. so what's the truth then, according to you?  do you mean to say your own personal experience outweighs my own? no, it doesn't. this is why i don't speak from personal experience. if you want to create a substantial discussion about these things, you might want to reconsider falling back on statements that offer no merit in a discussion about polling and statistics.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 5, 2017)

SuperVandal said:


> before you accuse me of doing my own research, why don't you take your own advice? learn what the alt right movement is about. hint: there's a whole lot of white supremacy in there. i did not say his cabinet picks were Nazis, i likened the alt-right movement to the Nazis. when did i ever imply Carson or Chao in my response? stop misconstruing people's statements to provide talking points that sound like they come off a campaign website. i was referring to Steve Bannon since he's the guy that has actual ties to the alt-right.
> 
> that's exactly right - he doesn't know anything about being a political leader. saying he'll be successful as president because he was "successful" as a businessman billionaire contradicts _everything_ about what Trump supporters wanted in their government. America is *not* a business, and must not be treated as such. a businessman who at any point in time during his presidency may act in the interests of his own and not the country is a dangerous precedent.
> 
> ...



Trying to argue with a Trump supporter is like arguing with a rock, but at least a rock believes gravity is real.


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 5, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> Trying to argue with a Trump supporter is like arguing with a rock, but at least a rock believes gravity is real.



we applied that logic for the last 8 years and look where we are now


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 5, 2017)

SuperVandal said:


> we applied that logic for the last 8 years and look where we are now



I think of it more as a one-off event caused by the very poor decision of the Democrats to nominate Hillary Clinton. Obama won big in his two elections, so I think it had more to do with the messenger than the message which was mostly the same. Trump people were never going to vote for anyone else no matter what, but a better candidate could have done a better job motivating the voters needed to beat him.


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 5, 2017)

SuperVandal said:


> The KKK having its roots in the Democratic party has absolutely nothing to do with the current members within the party. If you're going to ignore the history behind political realignments throughout American history, you're going to regurgitate statements with little to no merit in political discussions. _That's_ the issue. On top of misleading news, we have people spreading inaccurate and misleading comments that do not advance discussion at all.
> 
> Do some research on the meaning of the word racism. You've been throwing it around a lot and you're continuously using it out of context and not even using it correctly. Trump's rhetoric on the wall is based in racist thought, and his portrayal of the Mexican people as rapists and criminals is a textbook example of racism.
> 
> ...



I'm not gonna respond to all of that, but the Obamacare repeal, I actually support it. I know a lot of Americans want a universal healthcare, but it has failed a lot. To pay for peoples' healthcare, you have to raise income taxes. Honestly, it's a bad idea to take money away from those who work hard and give it to those who don't contribute much. I'm okay with property tax, sales tax, excise taxes, and corporate taxes, but not income taxes. I also don't think the government should regulate healthcare like how Canada and Britain are doing it. Only the doctors make the medical decisions. Laws should not inhibit what's best for the patients. Not only that, but Obamacare has a few regulations that I am against. The individual mandate - you should not be forced to own something or do something as a requirement of being American citizen. The employer mandate - employers have the right to regulate their businesses the way they want as long as they pay people reasonably, not discriminate, and pay their bills. They don't need to pay for anyones' insurance or anything people can get on their own. Contraceptive mandate, same thing. Requiring restaurants and fast foods to place calorie information in public and not just the internet, still violating employers' rights. So I am for repealing Obamacare.

But if there is one thing Obamacare has that I support, it would be the plan where people can stay on their parents' insurance until they turn 26. Only the extreme right would oppose that, but I don't.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 5, 2017)

Apple2012 said:


> I'm not gonna respond to all of that, but the Obamacare repeal, I actually support it. I know a lot of Americans want a universal healthcare, but it has failed a lot. To pay for peoples' healthcare, you have to raise income taxes. Honestly, it's a bad idea to take money away from those who work hard and give it to those who don't contribute much. I'm okay with property tax, sales tax, excise taxes, and corporate taxes, but not income taxes. I also don't think the government should regulate healthcare like how Canada and Britain are doing it. Only the doctors make the medical decisions. Laws should not inhibit what's best for the patients. Not only that, but Obamacare has a few regulations that I am against. The individual mandate - you should not be forced to own something or do something as a requirement of being American citizen. The employer mandate - employers have the right to regulate their businesses the way they want as long as they pay people reasonably, not discriminate, and pay their bills. They don't need to pay for anyones' insurance or anything people can get on their own. Contraceptive mandate, same thing. Requiring restaurants and fast foods to place calorie information in public and not just the internet, still violating employers' rights. So I am for repealing Obamacare.
> 
> But if there is one thing Obamacare has that I support, it would be the plan where people can stay on their parents' insurance until they turn 26. Only the extreme right would oppose that, but I don't.



Obamacare has a lot of flaws, but it's important to note that some of the problems you mentioned were problems before Obamacare was passed. Decisions were often not made just between the patient and doctor because a lot depends on what the insurance company will pay for. People do end up paying for other people's health care when someone needs a procedure and has no insurance and can't afford it. Everyone else ends up paying more in insurance costs because of that, and doctors are not just going to let a patient die because he may not be able to afford his care. That is the point of the mandate, so that people can't freeload by not buying insurance. The problem with this actually was that the penalty was not stiff enough, so a lot of young people opted to pay the penalty instead of buying health insurance. Healthcare has to be paid for one way or another, and Obamacare tried to distribute that load between taxpayers and businesses. Repealing it will likely mean a greater percentage of health care costs will fall onto middle class families and people who are responsible and buy insurance. Also, more of those decisions that you make with your doctor will have to be signed-off by insurance companies if things like lifetime-limits come back.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 5, 2017)

Tom said:


> He got elected because a gang of idiots kidnapped a poor guy and tortured him? I 100% doubt that.
> 
> What countries built walls? Great Wall of China doesn't count, Mongols are gone. Ah yes, all illegals are rapists and drug lords guys. Nobody comes here to get their child a better life, to live the American dream. They just come to sell crack. Assuming a majority does that just buys into Fox fearmongering, plus how does one even identify illegal immigrants? And why can't legal citizens be the same thing?
> 
> Just because you hear worse from others, doesn't make it okay. Broken clock is right twice a day, doesn't mean blanket statements are great.



Tom, you're missing everything! You're taking Trump's "wall" like the great wall of china! He's already talked about details. 36 foot tall fence with better and efficiency security. Capability to prevent "dig-unders".

Who says he's wrong? He's saying it how it is! Illegal immigrants are rapists and in the drug cartel. I understand all are not but it's enough so that it is a problem!

I will never stop loving America, even if Hillary were elected.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Red Cat said:


> Obamacare has a lot of flaws, but it's important to note that some of the problems you mentioned were problems before Obamacare was passed. Decisions were often not made just between the patient and doctor because a lot depends on what the insurance company will pay for. People do end up paying for other people's health care when someone needs a procedure and has no insurance and can't afford it. Everyone else ends up paying more in insurance costs because of that, and doctors are not just going to let a patient die because he may not be able to afford his care. That is the point of the mandate, so that people can't freeload by not buying insurance. The problem with this actually was that the penalty was not stiff enough, so a lot of young people opted to pay the penalty instead of buying health insurance. Healthcare has to be paid for one way or another, and Obamacare tried to distribute that load between taxpayers and businesses. Repealing it will likely mean a greater percentage of health care costs will fall onto middle class families and people who are responsible and buy insurance. Also, more of those decisions that you make with your doctor will have to be signed-off by insurance companies if things like lifetime-limits come back.



Because of Obama's agenda, you have to pay a fine if you don't have healthcare. .-. And... repealing is what most Americans want. Proof: Trump got elected. It's expensive and it only lets you choose from a select few doctors.

Too much government involvement.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 5, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Tom, you're missing everything! You're taking Trump's "wall" like the great wall of china! He's already talked about details. 36 foot tall fence with better and efficiency security. Capability to prevent "dig-unders".
> 
> Who says he's wrong? He's saying it how it is! Illegal immigrants are rapists and in the drug cartel. I understand all are not but it's enough so that it is a problem!
> 
> ...



More Americans voted for Hillary Clinton than Trump, so by your logic most Americans want Obamacare to stay. If Obamacare gets repealed, you won't get fined for not having health insurance; you'll just lose your house if you get sick / injured and don't have enough money on hand to buy a Lamborghini.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 5, 2017)

Trump campaigned for the electoral college not the popular vote. You won't get fined for not having healthcare? Explain that to people who have gotten fined... like my friend's uncle, a gamer friend, a teacher's grandfather. I'm sure there are more examples. 

By him winning shows that America choose him rather than Hillary. If it was popular vote it would be more unfair and less challenging.


----------



## Blu Rose (Jan 5, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Trump campaigned for the electoral college not the popular vote. You won't get fined for not having healthcare? Explain that to people who have gotten fined... like my friend's uncle, a gamer friend, a teacher's grandfather. I'm sure there are more examples.
> 
> By him winning shows that America choose him rather than Hillary. If it was popular vote it would be more unfair and less challenging.


it would also reflect more surely the "thoughts" of people that voted for hillary because ZOMG FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT XD
it would, also, however, probably balance out with those that voted trump because ZOMG "POLITICAL OUTSIDER" XD
my aunts, uncles, and their friends don't have health care and they're totally fine.  granted, that's in colorado


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 5, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Trump campaigned for the electoral college not the popular vote. You won't get fined for not having healthcare? Explain that to people who have gotten fined... like my friend's uncle, a gamer friend, a teacher's grandfather. I'm sure there are more examples.
> 
> By him winning shows that America choose him rather than Hillary. If it was popular vote it would be more unfair and less challenging.



I said if it got repealed, you wouldn't pay a fine, but instead lose your house. And how the hell is choosing a president by the popular vote unfair? That's like saying it's unfair that the team which scored the most points in a game won. Do you think about what you type, or do you just bang your head on the keyboard and post whatever comes out?


----------



## Haskell (Jan 5, 2017)

Because demographics. That's why. I have not said anything negative towards you beside my opinion but now you're saying all I do is bang my head on a keyboard? Have an intelligent conversation and let's treat each other with respect. God damn.

I didn't want to play the "Hillary's a women so more people voted for her" card but someone did and they're absolutely right.


----------



## Eudial (Jan 5, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...-video-airs/ar-BBxUAVu?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=HPCDHP
> 
> Watch this link! This is why Trump got elected! Because people are tired of there being no double standard!



Yet, no one said a word about this: http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/12/white-high-school-football-player-handicapped-black-teammate-with-coat-hanger-walks-free/

The person who committed that crime is walking free, whereas the four idiots up there in the link you provided are apprehended by the police. THIS is what double standards look like. Trump doesn't care about any of that. That's why he picked all the money munchers to be on his team. This place is going to be a hot mess. 

I don't care about Hillary, either for that matter. She's another money muncher, the only person I'd like to see in office is someone who will put the PEOPLE first. I'm already hearing about the defunding of Planned Parenthood, and things of that nature, so we are already heading backwards.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 5, 2017)

Eudial said:


> Yet, no one said a word about this: http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/12/white-high-school-football-player-handicapped-black-teammate-with-coat-hanger-walks-free/
> 
> The person who committed that crime is walking free, whereas the four idiots up there in the link you provided are apprehended by the police. THIS is what double standards look like. Trump doesn't care about any of that. That's why he picked all the money munchers to be on his team. This place is going to be a hot mess.
> 
> I don't care about Hillary, either for that matter. She's another money muncher, the only person I'd like to see in office is someone who will put the PEOPLE first. I'm already hearing about the defunding of Planned Parenthood, and things of that nature, so we are already heading backwards.



Money munchers? I didn't know that Carson, Chao, Mad Dog Mattis were money munchers...

Planned Parenthood? Please, that place is a mess! With a third s, Messs!

Trump does care about double standards or he wouldn't be running. He talked about running for a while. Do you know the reasons why he ran?

- - - Post Merge - - -

Just a side note : I'm realizing that I'm really opinionated. I appreciate you all tolerating it and allowing this conversation to continue.


----------



## Trent the Paladin (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Tom, you're missing everything! You're taking Trump's "wall" like the great wall of china! He's already talked about details. 36 foot tall fence with better and efficiency security. Capability to prevent "dig-unders".
> 
> Who says he's wrong? He's saying it how it is! Illegal immigrants are rapists and in the drug cartel. I understand all are not but it's enough so that it is a problem!
> 
> ...


They will still "dig-under", they will over, boat over, drive over. A big ol chainlink fence with many some concrete below won't stop the determined.

There you go with that blanket statement again. 



irhaskell8 said:


> Money munchers? I didn't know that Carson, Chao, Mad Dog Mattis were money munchers...
> 
> Planned Parenthood? Please, that place is a mess! With a third s, Messs!
> 
> Trump does care about double standards or he wouldn't be running. He talked about running for a while. Do you know the reasons why he ran?


DeVos, Tillerson, Ross, Pudzer, Mnuchin, and of course Trump himself however fit that description nicely.

Ah yeah, Planned Parenthood, providing birth control and healthcare options are horrible. Don't need em. Throw it out. /s

Because he wanted to gut America clean and instigate a war with CHina?


----------



## Haskell (Jan 6, 2017)

He wants a better relationship with China. We can't just let ANY country be unfair to us. Our trade deal with China is causing a lot of deficit. Look at our national debt. We can't afford deficit.

We need to prevent what ILLEGAL immigration we can... fences/walls - call it what makes you feel the safest - work! Mexico built a wall - working. Guatemala - working. Other countries too! We will always have illegal immigration but it's out of control right now! Sanctuary cities are absolutely unlawful. We are one country formed by states, not an empire with city-states. .-.

Planned Parenthood? An organization that sells fetuses, aborts babies for dumb teenage girls that got themselves pregnant. Planned Parenthood is garbo.

Those "rich white men" are what Trump knows. He doesn't select them if he doesn't think they'll work and be efficient. I would rather having a rich man who's pushing the right legislature. I find it funny that you get onto a FEW of Trump's cabinet picks for being rich when Hillary is only rich for taking money and from donations. .-. Oh, and she tried to get more rich by stealing from the white house when her sexual husband was leaving office. .-.


----------



## cIementine (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Planned Parenthood? An organization that sells fetuses, aborts babies for dumb teenage girls that got themselves pregnant. Planned Parenthood is garbo.



oh dear
planned parenthood provides affordable birth control and education on birth control, which means the rate of teenage pregnancy is decreasing. and if these girls do happen to get pregnant, they should have the right to get a safe and legal abortion. 
most people who use planned parenthood aren't teenagers and are looking for contraceptives to prevent pregnancy in the first place. not to forget annual exams, screenings, etc.
but sure, all they do is sell babies really lmao
this is just my opinion and if you believe planned parenthood is 'garbo', then i'm not going to try and convince you otherwise. that'd be like the government trying to tell women what to do with their bodies. which would be totally absurd!!


----------



## lostineverfreeforest (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Planned Parenthood? Please, that place is a mess!



I'm wondering if you realize how silly you sound.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> He wants a better relationship with China. We can't just let ANY country be unfair to us. Our trade deal with China is causing a lot of deficit. Look at our national debt. We can't afford deficit.


So he wants a better relationship with China, but the first thing he's going to do is start a trade war with China over his protectionist trade policies?



> We need to prevent what ILLEGAL immigration we can... fences/walls - call it what makes you feel the safest - work! Mexico built a wall - working. Guatemala - working. Other countries too! We will always have illegal immigration but it's out of control right now! Sanctuary cities are absolutely unlawful. We are one country formed by states, not an empire with city-states. .-.


So if Mexico's wall is working, then why is so much crime supposedly coming from Mexico? It's one thing to say stuff that's total BS, it's another thing to say a bunch a BS that contradicts itself. We are not "one country". We are a collection of broken jigsaw pieces glued together and that's how Trump managed to become president. So cities should have the right to govern themselves.



> Planned Parenthood? An organization that sells fetuses, aborts babies for dumb teenage girls that got themselves pregnant. Planned Parenthood is garbo.


Ok, please stop pretending you're not sexist. And no, you can't just say something sexist and then undo it by saying you're not sexist.


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Planned Parenthood? An organization that sells fetuses, aborts babies for dumb teenage girls that got themselves pregnant. Planned Parenthood is garbo.



For that reason, I was thinking Planned Parenthood should be obliterated, but I didn't realize how extreme my suggestion is. But I do think they should stop providing abortions in general, especially to those who want abortions because they are too lazy to take care of a child, don't want children, or just didn't want the pregnancy. I also support overturning Roe v Wade, and allow all states to decide what abortion laws they want, but laws against abortions in case of rape, incest, or to save the mother's life should still be unconstitutional.


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 6, 2017)

Apple2012 said:


> For that reason, I was thinking Planned Parenthood should be obliterated, but I didn't realize how extreme my suggestion is. But I do think they should stop providing abortions in general, especially to those who want abortions because they are too lazy to take care of a child, don't want children, or just didn't want the pregnancy. I also support overturning Roe v Wade, and allow all states to decide what abortion laws they want, but laws against abortions in case of rape, incest, or to save the mother's life should still be unconstitutional.



Why would you want children to be born without parents wanting to take care of them? I would argue thats really immoral as well... If abortion was illegal and these women would be forced to have children, its not like that will make them want their children more or be less "lazy".


----------



## lostineverfreeforest (Jan 6, 2017)

Apple2012 said:


> But I do think they should stop providing abortions in general, especially to those who want abortions because they are too lazy to take care of a child, don't want children, or just didn't want the pregnancy.



1) A woman should be able to decide what she wants to do with her own body.
2) Accidents happen, abortions serve a purpose outside of rape, incest, or medical complications.
3) How is forcing somebody to birth an unwanted child good for either the parents or the child?

Really don't understand why people wouldn't want resources like this to be available. Let people decide for themselves whether they would like to use them or not.


----------



## seliph (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Planned Parenthood? An organization that sells fetuses, aborts babies for dumb teenage girls that got themselves pregnant. Planned Parenthood is garbo.



Ok I've stayed in lurk-mode for this thread 'cause I can't be bothered with you but adding to pumpkin's post: Planned Parenthood does not sell fetuses or "fetus parts". They use and provide _tissue_ for research. Anyone telling you they "sell fetuses" is just trying too hard to put you against them. ( x x x )

Also, Planned Parenthood and abortions as a whole are not for "dumb teenage girls that got themselves pregnant" (Got _themselves_ pregnant? Do you know how conception works? You need _two_ people for it). They're also for girls and women who were raped. They're also for girls and women who got pregnant, the father bailed out, and now cannot afford to take care of the baby. They're for girls and women whose pregnancies put them and/or the baby's life in danger and now the pregnancy must be terminated. 

Abortions aren't just a "I got pregnant and now I don't want it" thing but you know what? Even if that's their reason, they have every right to a safe abortion. If you hate that "dumb teenage girls" have to get abortions, direct your hate to the pathetic, useless, or sometimes complete lack of sexual education, as well as ****ty teenage boys who pressure their girlfriends into having sex with them when they aren't ready.


Side note: Planned parenthood provides way more than just birth control and abortions. They also provide help for transgender people, HIV/STI testing, breast exams, men's cancer screenings, affordable health care, and _sexual education and adoption_. Abortions only take up roughly 3% of what they do. Perhaps learn about your enemy before tackling it.


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> We need to prevent what ILLEGAL immigration we can... fences/walls - call it what makes you feel the safest - work! Mexico built a wall - working. Guatemala - working. Other countries too! We will always have illegal immigration but it's out of control right now! Sanctuary cities are absolutely unlawful. We are one country formed by states, not an empire with city-states. .-.



Do your research dude, a wall isn't going to help at all. Between 40 and 72 % of undocumented immigrants in America came there with PLANES. guess what? A wall doesn't stop planes!
Also your wall will just prevent people to go back. Ever heard circular flow? Immigrants work there for a bit then go back to their own country. Making it harder to cross the border actually decreased America's immigration problem. This wall won't stop people from coming in, it will just stop people from going back.
Just a few reasons why it won't work let alone how expensive it would be...


----------



## moonford (Jan 6, 2017)

pumpkins said:


> oh dear
> planned parenthood provides affordable birth control and education on birth control, which means the rate of teenage pregnancy is decreasing. and if these girls do happen to get pregnant, they should have the right to get a safe and legal abortion.
> most people who use planned parenthood aren't teenagers and are looking for contraceptives to prevent pregnancy in the first place. not to forget annual exams, screenings, etc.
> but sure, all they do is sell babies really lmao
> this is just my opinion and if you believe planned parenthood is 'garbo', then i'm not going to try and convince you otherwise. that'd be like the government trying to tell women what to do with their bodies. which would be totally absurd!!





Cynicat said:


> Why would you want children to be born without parents wanting to take care of them? I would argue thats really immoral as well... If abortion was illegal and these women would be forced to have children, its not like that will make them want their children more or be less "lazy".





lostineverfreeforest said:


> 1) A woman should be able to decide what she wants to do with her own body.
> 2) Accidents happen, abortions serve a purpose outside of rape, incest, or medical complications.
> 3) How is forcing somebody to birth an unwanted child good for either the parents or the child?
> 
> Really don't understand why people wouldn't want resources like this to be available. Let people decide for themselves whether they would like to use them or not.





gyro said:


> Ok I've stayed in lurk-mode for this thread 'cause I can't be bothered with you but adding to pumpkin's post: Planned Parenthood does not sell fetuses or "fetus parts". They use and provide _tissue_ for research. Anyone telling you they "sell fetuses" is just trying too hard to put you against them. ( x x x )
> 
> Also, Planned Parenthood and abortions as a whole are not for "dumb teenage girls that got themselves pregnant" (Got _themselves_ pregnant? Do you know how conception works? You need _two_ people for it). They're also for girls and women who were raped. They're also for girls and women who got pregnant, the father bailed out, and now cannot afford to take care of the baby. They're for girls and women whose pregnancies put them and/or the baby's life in danger and now the pregnancy must be terminated.
> 
> ...



Wow, look at all these informed and logical people! It would be cool if you guys were like this. hehehe 
Women should be able to do whatever the hell they want with their bodies, that's all I'm going to say because gyro and pumpkins already covered most of what I wanted to say anyway. Thanks you two. ^^



> But I do think they should stop providing abortions in general, especially to those who want abortions because they are too lazy to take care of a child, don't want children, or just didn't want the pregnancy.


 - Apple2012 
I can't, I just can't not today.


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 6, 2017)

Whiteflamingo said:


> - Apple2012
> I can't, I just can't not today.



I just wanted to get that off my head and share my thought. I'm against abortion because I believe human life begins at conception, the fetus is not part of the mother's body, and an unborn fetus has the right to life. If a woman wants to do anything else to her body (like smoking, piercings, tattooing), I'm okay with that. It's just abortions that I am iffy about because everybody deserves a chance to live.


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> He wants a better relationship with China. We can't just let ANY country be unfair to us. Our trade deal with China is causing a lot of deficit. Look at our national debt. We can't afford deficit.
> 
> We need to prevent what ILLEGAL immigration we can... fences/walls - call it what makes you feel the safest - work! Mexico built a wall - working. Guatemala - working. Other countries too! We will always have illegal immigration but it's out of control right now! Sanctuary cities are absolutely unlawful. We are one country formed by states, not an empire with city-states. .-.
> 
> ...



yeah sure, he totally wants a better relationship with China. that's why he's attributing climate change as a conspiracy hoax perpetuated by the Chinese government

guess what? Hillary's not president. we've done criticizing her because she's not... relevant anymore. she lost, and she hasn't done anything within the last two months to assure people that she would continue fighting for the people she championed for. that's a damn shame, but guess what? she's not above criticism. stop acting as if Trump knows all, because he sure as hell doesn't.

you complain endlessly about fixing corruption within the government yet you fail to understand these men picked for cabinet have business ties that make them seem unreliable.  self-interest fuels corruption, and ignoring that these cabinet picks have a whole lotta self-interest is downright foolish.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 6, 2017)

Cynicat said:


> Do your research dude, a wall isn't going to help at all. Between 40 and 72 % of undocumented immigrants in America came there with PLANES. guess what? A wall doesn't stop planes!
> Also your wall will just prevent people to go back. Ever heard circular flow? Immigrants work there for a bit then go back to their own country. Making it harder to cross the border actually decreased America's immigration problem. This wall won't stop people from coming in, it will just stop people from going back.
> Just a few reasons why it won't work let alone how expensive it would be...



This comment is ignorant.

Planes? Dude... radars bro... detects planes.

Circular flow? It's be a legal cooperation between us and the Mexican government... it's not like it's a "NEVER CROSS". lmao

Will stop people from coming back? ok........ im done

- - - Post Merge - - -



SuperVandal said:


> yeah sure, he totally wants a better relationship with China. that's why he's attributing climate change as a conspiracy hoax perpetuated by the Chinese government
> 
> guess what? Hillary's not president. we've done criticizing her because she's not... relevant anymore. she lost, and she hasn't done anything within the last two months to assure people that she would continue fighting for the people she championed for. that's a damn shame, but guess what? she's not above criticism. stop acting as if Trump knows all, because he sure as hell doesn't.
> 
> you complain endlessly about fixing corruption within the government yet you fail to understand these men picked for cabinet have business ties that make them seem unreliable.  self-interest fuels corruption, and ignoring that these cabinet picks have a whole lotta self-interest is downright foolish.



Where'd you get that he's putting China as the hoax of climate change? Everyone knows Al Gore is a contributor of the hoax. Climate change? Ain't real.

Um... It's called a double standard. If Hillary got elected, libs would be fine and would be attacking people who go against her. But since Trump is elected, libs are outraged and attack people who go against her.

These "men"... Any cabinet pick is shady. Look at past POTUS cabinet picks. :-/ Chao & Carson are two of the best picks. 

Call me downright foolish for having an opinion that you don't support. But yet forbid me to call you foolish for being "right".

- - - Post Merge - - -

Planned Parenthood shouldn't receive government funding in the first place...

- - - Post Merge - - -



Red Cat said:


> So he wants a better relationship with China, but the first thing he's going to do is start a trade war with China over his protectionist trade policies?
> 
> 
> So if Mexico's wall is working, then why is so much crime supposedly coming from Mexico? It's one thing to say stuff that's total BS, it's another thing to say a bunch a BS that contradicts itself. We are not "one country". We are a collection of broken jigsaw pieces glued together and that's how Trump managed to become president. So cities should have the right to govern themselves.
> ...



Oh! I don't like who became president! Let's let cities govern themselves. How ridiculous! This is the worst thing you've said.

I'm not sexist. Trump is not sexist. I don't have problems with women or those that identify themselves as women. Trump doesn't have problems with women or those that identify themselves as women. Do a little research... he's helped women out - donating to causes for women... helping a homeless African-American women..... Um... and Kellyanne Conway is in a high position with Trump... explain that... don't dare go saying stuff about my Conway. She is extremely hardworking and intelligent.

- - - Post Merge - - -

Apple2012 and Whiteflamgo are the two people that I respect the most on this thread. May not agree with them but...


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Um... It's called a double standard. If Hillary got elected, libs would be fine and would be attacking people who go against her. But since Trump is elected, libs are outraged and attack people who go against her.



I think I mentioned this before, but liberals are even more intolerant than what they believe about conservatives. They are also bigger liars and hypocrites. They think it's okay to practice political discrimination or religious discrimination, but when conservatives are doing the same thing or stand up to the liberals, they take offense and feel threatened. They also ignore facts and jump to conclusions. That's why liberals would attack Hillary opponents no matter who wins.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 6, 2017)

If teenagers get knocked up, it's their fault. Can't be unethical. After a certain number of weeks, they shouldn't be able to abort. UNLESS, and now I have to clarify everything to the last detail...

1) Their life is in danger.
2) They were raped.
3) The baby has a extremely high chance of being extremely disabled and has a high chance, an extreme one of dying shortly after birth.


----------



## seliph (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> After a certain number of weeks, they shouldn't be able to abort. UNLESS, and now I have to clarify everything to the last detail...
> 
> 1) Their life is in danger.
> 2) They were raped.
> 3) The baby has a extremely high chance of being extremely disabled and has a high chance, an extreme one of dying shortly after birth.



Ok but this is literally already the case though... lmao....


----------



## Haskell (Jan 6, 2017)

gyro said:


> Ok but this is literally already the case though... lmao....



Yes. It's never their fault that they're pregnant.


----------



## nintendofan85 (Jan 6, 2017)

I've now been regretting creating this thread.


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Where'd you get that he's putting China as the hoax of climate change? Everyone knows Al Gore is a contributor of the hoax. Climate change? Ain't real.
> 
> Um... It's called a double standard. If Hillary got elected, libs would be fine and would be attacking people who go against her. But since Trump is elected, libs are outraged and attack people who go against her.
> 
> ...



http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...nald-trump-did-call-climate-change-chinese-h/

You know, I don't think a lot of people would be frustrated in this thread had it not been the continuous denial of responsibility. I think a lot of people would have lauded Trump for being one of the most progressive Republicans in a long time had it not been for his inflammatory comments that have brought out the absolute worst in society. Many of us can't reconcile the way in which he's attacked communities and people for being different, and we can't sit still as we see him deny reality in order to incite fear and apathy. You've denied my request for you to see Trump as someone who is not flawless, and I don't think any conversation can happen if we live in that kind of bubble. 

I didn't call you foolish. If you can't properly read what I or others type for you, there's no discussion happening here.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 6, 2017)

There's been a discussion happening here. .-.

1. Climate change is a hoax.
2. Trump is not god. I'm not sorry if you think his supporters think he is.
3. Trump just doesn't want people to jip America in trade deals... China.
4. We're getting nowhere. All you do is call Trump and I a bigot and all I do is defend the liberal propaganda set out against him to have a corrupt, crooked politician get elected. Which didn't happen.

He's not a racist sexist bigot who wants to destroy everyone but white people. That's how liberals make their message sound.


----------



## nintendofan85 (Jan 6, 2017)

Listen, my intention when creating this thread was to discuss Trump's cabinet, not Trump himself. I feel like this thread is digressing in subject too much. I see why it reached this point, but...


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 6, 2017)

nintendofan85 said:


> Listen, my intention when creating this thread was to discuss Trump's cabinet, not Trump himself. I feel like this thread is digressing in subject too much. I see why it reached this point, but...



To stay on topic rather than shaming liberals in general, I actually do like his cabinet. The fact is, those agencies have been corrupted under Obama. Picking the secretaries that hate Obama's departments would turn things around.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 6, 2017)

We're also talking about Trump's cabinet picks... you can't include "Trump" in a title of a thread and expect people not to talk about him.


----------



## nintendofan85 (Jan 6, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> We're also talking about Trump's cabinet picks... you can't include "Trump" in a title of a thread and expect people not to talk about him.



I know, but people were turning it into an argument about Trump himself and his policies and the election and how the election went. I see why people are discussing it, but I wanted more discussion about the cabinet itself rather than Trump himself and the election.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 6, 2017)

nintendofan85 said:


> I know, but people were turning it into an argument about Trump himself and his policies and the election and how the election went. I see why people are discussing it, but I wanted more discussion about the cabinet itself rather than Trump himself and the election.



Most people don't actually care about the cabinet picks, which is why the thread died in one day before being revived with the other stuff.



I'll add that a major reason why these threads usually boil over is because people no longer accept the same facts. We've reached a point where it's like some people believe that 2+2=4 and some people believe 2+2=5. We can't have any real discussion other than a he said, she said kind of argument if there are people who believe 2+2=5. I know I'm a really opinionated person, but I'm okay with people having different opinions if they reinforce their arguments with 2+2=4 statements. What pisses me off is when people state an opinion, even if it's one I agree with, when they are backing it up with statements which are as false as 2+2=5. If you have to add 2 and 2 together, and you say 5, it doesn't mean you have a different opinion and people should respect it; it means you are flat out wrong and need to do more studying. There is only one set of true facts, and if we can't even agree on that, then we are really screwed as a society.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 6, 2017)

You seemed pretty upset over his cabinet picks...... ^^


----------



## cIementine (Jan 7, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> If teenagers get knocked up, it's their fault. Can't be unethical. After a certain number of weeks, they shouldn't be able to abort. UNLESS, and now I have to clarify everything to the last detail...
> 
> 1) Their life is in danger.
> 2) They were raped.
> 3) The baby has a extremely high chance of being extremely disabled and has a high chance, an extreme one of dying shortly after birth.



i do agree with this. this is what happens already anyway, though?

however i'm sorry, but saying climate change is a hoax is just silly.


----------



## moonford (Jan 7, 2017)

> 1. Climate change is a hoax.


Are you for real? I feel like you aren't being serious at this point.

http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/gw-causes
http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/gw-real/ (kinda goes back and foward but still)
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

There are many many more, I'm getting off topic so I'll just leave it at that.


----------



## Cynicat (Jan 7, 2017)

> This comment is ignorant.
> 
> Planes? Dude... radars bro... detects planes.
> Circular flow? It's be a legal cooperation between us and the Mexican government... it's not like it's a "NEVER CROSS". lmao



How will radars help? They come here legally they just overstay their visa... Its not like people don't know about the planes?


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

To say that we have no national security at all is absurd. We have technology, border agents, and the DHS. You guys are talking about America, my country like it's a third world country. :-/

- - - Post Merge - - -

Climate change is a hoax. It's liberal propaganda so they can get more votes. It's not real.

Why are polar bears thriving? Those cute cuddly ferocious beasts! 

- - - Post Merge - - -

Sometimes it's just simple, it doesn't have to be complex reasoning, et cetera.


----------



## moonford (Jan 7, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> To say that we have no national security at all is absurd. We have technology, border agents, and the DHS. You guys are talking about America, my country like it's a third world country. :-/
> 
> - - - Post Merge - - -
> 
> ...



You seem to blame almost everything on "liberal propaganda".


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 7, 2017)

pumpkins said:


> i do agree with this. this is what happens already anyway, though?
> 
> however i'm sorry, but saying climate change is a hoax is just silly.





Whiteflamingo said:


> Are you for real? I feel like you aren't being serious at this point.
> 
> http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/gw-causes
> http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/gw-real/ (kinda goes back and foward but still)
> ...





Cynicat said:


> How will radars help? They come here legally they just overstay their visa... Its not like people don't know about the planes?



Guys, it isn't worth it anymore. Like most Trump supporters, irhaskell8's mental development came to a screeching halt sometime in elementary school. As I said in my previous post, he basically believes 2+2=5 and everyone who says 2+2=4 is part of some liberal conspiracy. So you can say 2+2=4 until your face turns blue and he'll still believe 2+2=5. Either that or he's a fantastic troll, but either way stop feeding him because he'll keep coming back with stuff like "climate change is a hoax because polar bears".


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 7, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> Guys, it isn't worth it anymore. Like most Trump supporters, irhaskell8's mental development came to a screeching halt sometime in elementary school. As I said in my previous post, he basically believes 2+2=5 and everyone who says 2+2=4 is part of some liberal conspiracy. So you can say 2+2=4 until your face turns blue and he'll still believe 2+2=5. Either that or he's a fantastic troll, but either way stop feeding him because he'll keep coming back with stuff like "climate change is a hoax because polar bears".



I don't want to be rude, but this is a good example of how liberals engage in political discrimination. They demonize Trump supporters, but to bully people for having different opinions or using different sources is not acceptable. Both sides do it, but more often, it comes from the liberals. You may accuse Trump of intolerance and bigotry, but your post is sounding like you're being intolerant and a bigot yourself. Calling conservatives stupid for beliving in God, not believing in global warming, or supporting a candidate you don't like is just as bad (if not worse) than what you and other liberals believe about Trump or his cabinet (racist, sexist, homophobe). That's political discrimination.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

Red Cat... are you kidding me? So  now you're attacking me personally? Real mature.

- - - Post Merge - - -

Liberals advertised Trump as a bigot, sexist idiot who has no clue what he's doing and will play children games in office.
Liberals advertise climate change as if it's real..

Those are the things that I refer to as liberal propaganda. Ty very much. xoxo


----------



## moonford (Jan 7, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> Guys, it isn't worth it anymore. Like most Trump supporters, irhaskell8's mental development came to a screeching halt sometime in elementary school. As I said in my previous post, he basically believes 2+2=5 and everyone who says 2+2=4 is part of some liberal conspiracy. So you can say 2+2=4 until your face turns blue and he'll still believe 2+2=5. Either that or he's a fantastic troll, but either way stop feeding him because he'll keep coming back with stuff like "climate change is a hoax because polar bears".



The only thing I like about this post is the last 8 words, its unnecessary being rude to someone just for having a different opinion or if they haven't researched something thoroughly, (which they haven't in my eyes anyway) are you trying to get this thread closed, because I'm not.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

http://www.globalclimatescam.com/opinion/top-ten-reasons-climate-change-is-a-hoax/


----------



## moonford (Jan 7, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Red Cat... are you kidding me? So  now you're attacking me personally? Real mature.
> 
> - - - Post Merge - - -
> 
> ...



You probably didn't read those sites because you don't like facts and I say this because you haven't gave any information to back up "global warming is a hoax" so please do. Ty xoxo. <3  

Ops, didn't realise you posted a link, let's read.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

View attachment 191888

http://www.newsmax.com/MKTNews/global-warming-hoax-facts/2014/10/17/id/601458/

- - - Post Merge - - -

Multiple links, please do read! 

We send twice as much money on fighting "global warming" than we do securing our borders.

I'm an environmentalist. I'll pick up trash, recycle, but global warming is a hoax. Point. Period. Blank.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Whiteflamingo said:


> You probably didn't read those sites because you don't like facts and say thos because you haven't gave any information to back up "global warming is a hoax" so please do. Ty xoxo. <3
> 
> Ops, didn't realise you posted a link, let's read.




You assume the worst of anyone supporting Trump. Just like Hillary, you assume the worst out of 40-50% of America. Referencing her "basket of deplorables" comment.

- - - Post Merge - - -

I have a theories on why Trump supporters aren't found throughout the internet as much as Hillary supporters.

a) They have a life. Unlike me.
b) They know they'll just get "put-down". They're afraid of the liberal propaganda and don't want to deal with it; being called racist, bigot, sexist, et cetera.
c) A "good chunk" don't use the internet as much as Hillary supporters.

Now people on this forum think I'm sexist. I've had two individuals PM me calling me sexist. .-. If anyone is discriminatory, it's them.


----------



## moonford (Jan 7, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> View attachment 191888
> 
> http://www.newsmax.com/MKTNews/global-warming-hoax-facts/2014/10/17/id/601458/
> 
> ...



Did you really just say that? 1. Some of my friends support Trump and I'm still friends with them 2. I don't even like Hillary and rarely agree with anything she says (I've said to you I would prefer having her be President, I don't support her views or actions. 3. I don't think or assume the worst of anyone who supports Trump, please stop making up BS.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 7, 2017)

Apple2012 said:


> I don't want to be rude, but this is a good example of how liberals engage in political discrimination. They demonize Trump supporters, but to bully people for having different opinions or using different sources is not acceptable. Both sides do it, but more often, it comes from the liberals. You may accuse Trump of intolerance and bigotry, but your post is sounding like you're being intolerant and a bigot yourself. Calling conservatives stupid for beliving in God, not believing in global warming, or supporting a candidate you don't like is just as bad (if not worse) than what you and other liberals believe about Trump or his cabinet (racist, sexist, homophobe). That's political discrimination.



I'm not calling people stupid for having different opinions. I'm calling people stupid for repeatedly saying things which are false. It's perfectly fine to have any opinion you want as long as you back it up with real facts. Going back to my analogy, if someone says 2+2=5 and I call that person stupid because of that, I'm not being intolerant; I'm being correct even if it's not the nicest way to put it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but people are not entitled to their own facts. It's okay to get your information from different sources as long as they are reliable and follow journalistic ethics. For example, the Wall Street Journal is generally considered to be more of a conservative publication, but it's still considered a good source. So if you get your information from there, that's good. But if you get your news from fringe conspiracy sites like Breitbart, then yeah I'm going to rip you because Breitbart has a track record of publishing false information. I don't just bash conservatives for this either. I have more respect for a conservative who gets his/her news from the Wall Street Journal than a liberal who just gets news from his/her Facebook account. So yeah, have your opinions; opinions are good. Just don't post bull**** repeatedly or I'll throw that **** back at you.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> I'm not calling people stupid for having different opinions. I'm calling people stupid for repeatedly saying things which are false. It's perfectly fine to have any opinion you want as long as you back it up with real facts. Going back to my analogy, if someone says 2+2=5 and I call that person stupid because of that, I'm not being intolerant; I'm being correct even if it's not the nicest way to put it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but people are not entitled to their own facts. It's okay to get your information from different sources as long as they are reliable and follow journalistic ethics. For example, the Wall Street Journal is generally considered to be more of a conservative publication, but it's still considered a good source. So if you get your information from there, that's good. But if you get your news from fringe conspiracy sites like Breitbart, then yeah I'm going to rip you because Breitbart has a track record of publishing false information. I don't just bash conservatives for this either. I have more respect for a conservative who gets his/her news from the Wall Street Journal than a liberal who just gets news from his/her Facebook account. So yeah, have your opinions; opinions are good. Just don't post bull**** repeatedly or I'll throw that **** back at you.



Breitbart backed up that article with facts. You have a limited view of news sources. Let me guess you think Fox News is biased? 

Looks like someone is getting triggered.

No matter what I say you will "put me down" calling anything I believe as "fake" and backed up with "false information".

- - - Post Merge - - -



Whiteflamingo said:


> Did you really just say that? 1. Some of my friends support Trump and I'm still friends with them 2. I don't even like Hillary and rarely agree with anything she says (I've said to you I would prefer having her be President, I don't support her views or actions. 3. I don't think or assume the worst of anyone who supports Trump, please stop making up BS.



You assume that I could not back up and did not back up my beliefs with facts. My opinion is substantiated. Looks like someone is getting triggered.


----------



## cIementine (Jan 7, 2017)

building on what red cat said about sources, a website called 'global climate scam' is going to be biased when discussing the 'climate change scam', as would someone finding information on 'reasons to love hillary clinton' (awful example lmao) from 'i love hillary clinton .net' or something lmao


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

pumpkins said:


> building on what red cat said about sources, a website called 'global climate scam' is going to be biased when discussing the 'climate change scam', as would someone finding information on 'reasons to love hillary clinton' (awful example lmao) from 'i love hillary clinton .net' or something lmao



The thing is... it's backed up with facts...

- - - Post Merge - - -

1. Record Ice

In 2014 there was record sea ice in Antarctica  in fact a global warming expedition got stuck in it. Arctic sea ice has also made a nice comeback in 2014. The Great lakes had record ice Lake Superior only had 3 ice free months in 2014. You’d think that in the hottest year ever that ice would be melting like Al Gore said.

2. Record Snow

2014 saw record snowfall in many areas, remember when they said that global warming would cause snow to disappear and children won’t know what snow is.

3. Record Cold

In 2014 we saw all kinds of cold records remember the Polar Vortex? You’d think that we’d be breaking all kinds of heat records in “the hottest year ever”

4. Oceans Are Rising Much Less Than Predicted


Al Gore predicted that oceans would rise 20 feet by 2100, it looks like were on track for about a foot. 80% of the tide gauges show less rise than the official “global average”. Many tide gauges show no rise in sea level, and almost none show any acceleration over the past 20 years.

5. Polar Bears Are Thriving

You’d think that Polar Bears would really be in trouble in 2014 “the hottest year ever” but they are thriving.

6. Moose Are Making A Comeback

A few years ago the moose population in Minnesota dropped rapidly and they immediately blamed global warming, then they did a study and found out it was actually wolves that were killing the moose. Wolves have been taken off the endangered species list and are now endangering other species so they opened a wolf hunting season in Minnesota and the moose are coming back. It turns out it had nothing to do with global warming in fact the years when the moose population declined were some very cold ones.

7. 99% of Scientists don’t believe in Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming


You’ve probably heard over and over that 99% of scientist believe in global warming well the opposite is true. That talking point came from a study where only 75 scientists said they believe in global warming on the other hand over 31,000 scientists have signed a petition saying they don’t believe in Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming.

8. Nature produces much more CO2 than man


In 2014 NASA finally launched a satellite that measures CO2 levels around the globe. They assumed that most of the CO2 would be coming from the industrialized northern hemisphere but much to their surprise it was coming from the rainforests in South America, Africa and China.

9. It Isn’t Actually the Warmest Year.


If you look at the satellite data 2014 was not the warmest year ever in fact there has been no global warming for over 18 years. The Reason they can say it’s the warmest year is because they are using the ground weather station data which is heavily influenced by the Urban Heat Island effect, many of which are near pavement. Even still they had to cherry pick that data to get at the warmest year ever and it is only the warmest by only two-100ths of a degree within a dataset that has a variability of a half of a degree. The fact they they had to ignore accurate data and fudge sketchy data to push their agenda proves (IMHO) that climate change is a hoax.

10. The Hypocrisy of the Main Players


One of the main reasons you can tell that global warming is a hoax is that the main purveyors of global warming live lifestyles opposite of what they preach, they all own multiple large homes and yachts and they fly around the world in private jets pushing their propaganda. Not to mention some people such as Al Gore actually profit from Carbon Taxes and other green energy laws. If they actually believed what they preached they would be leading quite different lives.

- - - Post Merge - - -

That's what http://www.globalclimatescam.com/opinion/top-ten-reasons-climate-change-is-a-hoax/ 

sums up.


----------



## Vizionari (Jan 7, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> The thing is... it's backed up with facts...


Just because a source has facts doesn't mean it's not biased.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

A good quote from H.L. Mencken, "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

Global warming is one of those hobgoblins.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Vizionari said:


> Just because a source has facts doesn't mean it's not biased.



That's true.

That site is biased. It's backing up it's belief. It's like a blog, in my opinion. The writer's thoughts.

He was attacking the hoax.


----------



## cIementine (Jan 7, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> That's true.
> 
> That site is biased. It's backing up it's belief. It's like a blog, in my opinion. The writer's thoughts.
> 
> He was attacking the hoax.



that would be like someone unsure about global warming's validity and looking up reasons why global warming is a hoax and finding an online forum with someone citing a source called 'climatechangescam .com' to form their opinions.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

Think what you want. 

It's backed up with facts. Just because it's a writer's thoughts does not mean it's not true.

I will always receive frowns from the dark side of tumblr and forums for supporting a president that will actually make a positive difference.


----------



## Waluigi (Jan 7, 2017)

Global warming is a serious problem. It absolutely stuns me people still believe that climate change isn't a problem in this day and age.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

"Serious problem."

It's a serious problem for America's economy. We waste money on supporting something that isn't true. That's not going to happen in Mr. Trump's administration. Tons of $ wasted. Obama just wants to look better for the liberals bc he actually gets nothing done...

- - - Post Merge - - -

View attachment 191891


----------



## moonford (Jan 7, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> View attachment 191888
> 
> http://www.newsmax.com/MKTNews/global-warming-hoax-facts/2014/10/17/id/601458/
> 
> ...



I could literally do the same thing to Trump supporters, here's an example for you.

"A good chunk of Trump supporters are mentally unstable rednecks who don't know how to use the internet so that's why you only see Hillary supporters" do I think this is true? No. Is there any facts to back it up? No.

"Hillary supporters try to avoid Trump supporters because their afraid of being called evil, libtards."
Is this true, in some cases it can be, but do I have any proof? No. 

Your literally putting down Hillary supporters by assuming the worst of them and your putting me down for no reason, I haven't said anything rude to you once (I even defended you), your saying things like "you're triggered" to annoy me, when I'm trying to have a conversation.


----------



## Stalfos (Jan 7, 2017)

Many of globalclimatescam.com's points doesn't even try to debunk global warming and others were just plain wrong. I just found it to be a very strange read.

You should give this a read: http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/. A much more credible source.


----------



## moonford (Jan 7, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Breitbart backed up that article with facts. You have a limited view of news sources. Let me guess you think Fox News is biased?
> 
> Looks like someone is getting triggered.
> 
> ...



I actually didn't assume anything, you just didn't provide facts to back up your statements and I asked you to provide some while also suggesting that you didn't have any facts to back up your points because you didn't provide any beforehand, there's a difference.

And another thing, " looks like someone is getting triggered" (grow up), if you were being put down and if you were being attacked with fake bs you would defend yourself right?

I'm done with you now, I went from respecting your opinions to being annoyed by you, bye.


----------



## Waluigi (Jan 7, 2017)

There is literally so much evidence pointing to global warming. Even an idiot with next to no scientific knowledge can understand the reasons why global warming is happening. What benefit would anyone even get about making up global warming? We put money into researching the climate and the environment, and all the research points to global warming. Stalfos gave a pretty good source.

You can't just blame every problem on "liberal propaganda".


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

Ok. For one. NASA has been flip-flopping between the controversy.

Ok. For two. I know Trump supporters that don't comment on their support because they get attacked, verbally and physically. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emffX8XT12E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvBkRHwHXaU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvBkRHwHXaU

"Blame White People"
"Burn The Flag" 

If I see ANYONE burning the flag! They'll pay.
If I see ANYONE showing true racism. Like the mentally challenged eighteen year old kid who got literally tortured for being white.

- - - Post Merge - - -

I'm not blaming everything on liberal propaganda. Global Warming and the way Trump is viewed is liberal propaganda.


----------



## Waluigi (Jan 7, 2017)

Nobody here is defending the actions of the people in this video. I'm not backing liberals either, I hate them as much as I hate conservatives. Climate change has always been an issue, and in these past 3 years, when we've seen the worst of it, we have more solid evidence than ever.


----------



## seliph (Jan 7, 2017)

You can't make anyone "pay" for burning the flag though. It is literally in the Constitution that people have the right to do so, as it falls under having free speech. It's 100% legal no matter how much you hate it lmao.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

I never denied that it wasn't legal. I will make them pay. It's unethical and unmoral to burn a flag that represents a great diverse, democratic country. America represents unity through hard times, perseverance through tough times, and different opinions that are legally and morally accepted by society.


----------



## Waluigi (Jan 7, 2017)

The only thing immoral that I see with flag burning is that it's a waste of a flag.

If someone came up and burned my countries flag, I wouldn't care. A flag has meaning, and they are important, but they're nothing to get emotional over.


----------



## seliph (Jan 7, 2017)

Flag burning is a form of protest. When your country if constantly killing your people or showing you any injustice you have every right to burn the flag.

Even if I disagree with why someone's burning a flag, at the end of the day it's just a piece of fabric that they (probably) wasted their own money on and nothing to cry over.


----------



## Eudial (Jan 7, 2017)

Waluigi said:


> The only thing immoral that I see with flag burning is that it's a waste of a flag.
> 
> If someone came up and burned my countries flag, I wouldn't care. A flag has meaning, and they are important, but they're nothing to get emotional over.



This ^

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/us/politics/trump-flag-burners-citizenship-first-amendment.html

lol.

Imagine stripping citizenship over burning a flag that can be made _en masse_ in some factory in China.


----------



## Trent the Paladin (Jan 7, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> To say that we have no national security at all is absurd. We have technology, border agents, and the DHS. You guys are talking about America, my country like it's a third world country. :-/
> 
> Climate change is a hoax. It's liberal propaganda so they can get more votes. It's not real.
> 
> Why are polar bears thriving? Those cute cuddly ferocious beasts!


Probably because we're on our way? Who cares about border control, even if we build all these glorious and great walls and databases and all that crap, we will still have home grown grade A 100% American terrorists. 

Ah yeah, climate change the great hoax. Hoax or not, why not better our damn enviroment? Spending money to help spread renewable energy, ha what a joke am I right? 



irhaskell8 said:


> Liberals advertised Trump as a bigot, sexist idiot who has no clue what he's doing and will play children games in office.


The Liberal bogeymans taking away the "freedums" didn't do that, Trump does it perfectly well himself. Have you seen that man tweet? He's still getting upset about losing the election in terms of popularity, not to mention the ever so classy "Happy New Year to all my enemies!"



irhaskell8 said:


> I'm an environmentalist.
> 
> Now people on this forum think I'm sexist. I've had two individuals PM me calling me sexist. .-. If anyone is discriminatory, it's them.


Again, as an enviromentalist, surely you'd want to invest in ways to better protect and save the enviroment. Even if Climate Change was some big hoax, lessening the uses of coal and their ilk is only a good thing.

If you receive harassing PMs you are welcome to report them and we can look at them. 



irhaskell8 said:


> Breitbart backed up that article with facts. You have a limited view of news sources. Let me guess you think Fox News is biased?


Breitbart is laughable, not to mention illegitimate news. Never use that in a political discussion, especially if Steve Bannon continues pallin around with Trump. I'm more willing to accept Fox News as a source than I am Breitbart. Breitbart tells me you just don't care at all. 



irhaskell8 said:


> supporting a president that will actually make a positive difference.


The man is more likely to instigate a war with China over Twitter than make a positive difference. 



irhaskell8 said:


> Ok. For one. NASA has been flip-flopping between the controversy.


Sources



irhaskell8 said:


> I never denied that it wasn't legal. I will make them pay. It's unethical and unmoral to burn a flag that represents a great diverse, democratic country. America represents unity through hard times, perseverance through tough times, and different opinions that are legally and morally accepted by society.


America is fading in a shadow of it's former self and Trump is just here to capitalize on his buck. He's a con-man, through and through.


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 7, 2017)

Tom said:


> Breitbart is laughable, not to mention illegitimate news. Never use that in a political discussion, especially if Steve Bannon continues pallin around with Trump. I'm more willing to accept Fox News as a source than I am Breitbart. Breitbart tells me you just don't care at all.



Even though I am conservative, I agree that Brietbart is not a trusted source. Even Wikipedia is more trustworthy.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 7, 2017)

It understand he's not trusted. That article was backed up with facts, links, and if you research it... it'll come out... factual.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Tom said:


> Ah yeah, climate change the great hoax. Hoax or not, why not better our damn enviroment? Spending money to help spread renewable energy, ha what a joke am I right?



Thing is... the money used for "climate change" is probably not even being used to help the environment. There's more pressing matters than our environment too. Spending double the amount of money on the environment rather than securing our GREAT nation is absurd.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Tom said:


> Probably because we're on our way? Who cares about border control, even if we build all these glorious and great walls and databases and all that crap, we will still have home grown grade A 100% American terrorists.
> 
> 
> The Liberal bogeymans taking away the "freedums" didn't do that, Trump does it perfectly well himself. Have you seen that man tweet? He's still getting upset about losing the election in terms of popularity, not to mention the ever so classy "Happy New Year to all my enemies!"



Nothing is wrong with his tweet. Just look at what he did with his twitter account. The plane that was going to cost more than it should... 

100% Grade A Homegrown terrorists... We need to focus on one problem before we can go to another. Illegal immigration is a problem. They don't respect America. They're crossing over ILLEGALY. "American Dream"... Citizens can't even live the American Dream due to failed liberal policies. That's why the liberals lost office pretty much nationwide.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Tom said:


> Sources
> 
> America is fading in a shadow of it's former self and Trump is just here to capitalize on his buck. He's a con-man, through and through.



NASA previous graphs before Obama took office showed climate change was a hoax. The Earth is fine, et cetera. When Obama took office, the graphs started slowly changing.

Trump is already rich as hell. He's not even going to receive the presidential pay by his choice. What does he need to con? Nothing. He's not a con man.


----------



## demoness (Jan 8, 2017)

so in other words, you live in a fantasy world and you can only back yourself up with talking points and conspiracy theories, is that about right? nasa has never at any point denied global warming as an organization.  49 some former NASA scientists penned a letter to urge NASA to "muzzle" climate scientists.  the problem is, these alleged experts had no expertise, education, or experience in climate science, and any bogus expert the alt-right touts around, you can bet they aren't climate science.  you're just a highschool kid by your own admission, i doubt you even have any real context of such a global issue unless you're a kid that cares about progressive issues.  what exactly do you think there is to gain for scientists to fabricate climate research?  do you think they're making bank, what?  there isn't anything to lose unless you're an oil tycoon.  

reality doesn't have to conform to your personal beliefs, and no matter how hard you try to bend reality to your narrative about the imaginary liberal conspiracy, you make yourself look like you can't think for yourself and your entire belief system depends on scapegoats and distorted sources.  progressives penned the first clinton foundation stuff, sanders hit her on corporate ties the entire primary.  meanwhile the republicans had no idea what donald trump was doing, mulled replacing him, wished cruz or rubio could have it, and trump was too busy bloviating.  if you want to get technical, progressive "liberals" had more to do with clinton losing.  and even without us, she still secured more popular votes against her opponent.  an opponent who says he doesn't need daily briefings and because of that flubbing foreign relations every time he opens his mouth and his supporters nod like these bozo decisions are enlightened because it's sticking it to... something?  

my ideology lost big, that i can get over, i'm an adult, a big girl, i know there is plenty of time to address issues within the DNC and built a grassroots movement.  what i can't get over is the lengths trump supporters go to contort themselves all around instead of taking responsibility for an inexperienced hack they elected who isn't an outsider, but an opportunist. the oligarchs have arrived, and this time there isn't a liberal to scapegoat?  speaking of which saying liberal is like saying food when someone asks what you wanna eat, the alt-right has made it non-descript; to them, a moderate corporate democrat woman is a threat, any legislation that isn't borderline nationalist and social darwinist is liberal.  the democrats to other countries are center right at best.  it's a made up strawman to pretend they've intimidated the right-wing into silence.  turn on the news, go online, use social media, look at the extreme right laws passing under republican governors, look at what the House just tried to pull with congressional oversight until Trump realized he doesn't want to pull fast ones like that--yet.  look at how far NC as gone to censor the incoming governor.  they're even poised to shift the direction of the SCOTUS and cripple years of progress.  news stations stereotyped as liberal are even caving toward neutrality over actual objectivity and quietly removing progressive talent in favor of centrists and balanced commentary.  even nbc just hired megyn kelly of all people, though to be fair, she was one of the only high profile republican personalities that actually questioned trump.  so when i hear people cowering beneath the liberal boogeyman i really have to laugh, because right now they're so politically privileged and hoarding the chessboard it's ridiculous.  they haven't had this much attention since ronald reagan, who by the way, granted amnesty to the undocumented immigrants currently in the US.  i don't particularly like his administration, and i'm sure as a republican he didn't really want to, but republicans used to be able to realize wasting resources on throwing out innocent people sure cost a lot more taxpayer dollars than putting them into the system so they actually can contribute.  it's not like they come here to loaf around.  

the other day trump said taxpayers would have to fund this wall fantasy of his.  are you concerned enough about our GREAT NATION to relinquish your paycheck to this if he builds it?  because i'm betting conservatives flip out.  he doesn't have the power to make "mexico pay" and even if he did he doesn't have the spine.  one minute he's appalled we're hacked, then he's sucking up to russia again.  as far as economists are concerned, we should be integrating undocumented immigrants already here, over 11 million, into our legitimate economy.  better for them and the country's future.

as for the "american dream" a history book could tell you this was propaganda and always has been.  but if you'd really like to blame someone, look no further than the baby boomers whose gratuitous consumption and being catered to left us with cynicism, debt, and inequality.  

finally, yeah you can argue about why we should trust known racists, domestic abusers, and corporate revolving door opportunists for cabinet, but when we go from highly qualified secretaries actually trained in their field to putting neurosurgeons in charge of urban housing and hiring random business people for jobs way above their education level, come on, you don't really believe trump's that concerned about the stability of the nation do you?  it's cognitive dissonance to say they're gonna be successful because they made a lotta money.  if trump would have invested his father's loan and never got into business he'd be wealthier now than anything he has ever done in his long career of uh, "business."  wouldn't a smart man have realized this before now 

i'm not trying to say because i'm a lefty i have some moral high ground, but when obama or clinton disappointed us, they got called out, i'm old enough to remember,  and i can tell you this.  the conservative voters who only grudgingly voted for trump, i wonder if they're gonna be quiet and swallow his goofs when he wears down their patience

anyway i'm not out to attack you specifically, life experience shapes our beliefs, but i see this same dubious commentary everywhere, and it's alarming, and i just kept seeing these posts.  it's one thing to have different ideas about how to govern, but it's another when someone is being contrarian and thinks it's acceptable to outright fabricate stuff or ignore information that contradicts their narrative.  i don't get it.  do you have something of substance to actually discuss the merits of his administration or cabinet you believe in or are you just here to say random interjections and unsupported claims and strawmen?  i'm like baffled kiddo.

anyway, kinda long winded, but i guess i don't really have anything else to add to this topic, not trying to make this a thing so i'm gonna pre-remove myself before circular argument makes my brain shut off.  because i can respect republicans that try to be legitimate but i think you may actually benefit from doing some research to better academically support your arguments.  maybe it's the maternal in me.

oh and he can't refuse presidential pay, it's mandated


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

Too long. Too boring. Read first few words. Don't want to read anymore.  It's also in pink and it's annoying when users put it in different font bc it's hard to read. It's not put together well. It's like your typing. No separation, nothing to make it more readable.


----------



## demoness (Jan 8, 2017)

haha, okay little guy, i guess that answers my questions.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

"little guy" ok. Irdc what anyone has to say rn. I would read it later if it was put together better.


----------



## lostineverfreeforest (Jan 8, 2017)

umjammer brandi said:


> haha, okay little guy, i guess that answers my questions.



You'd have better results trying to argue with a brick wall at this point TBH. Not sure why anyone is bothering to engage with him when he remains dismissive to anything that goes against his worldview. Don't have a horse in this race but it can be seen as clear as day.


----------



## Matramix (Jan 8, 2017)

Yikes at this thread..

Lincoln where u @ homie we need u


----------



## Hopeless Opus (Jan 8, 2017)

kinda scary that in 2017 people still deny the legitimacy of global warming.. it's a serious problem and if one needs to go on numerous websites to get enough proof of it, that's pretty sad. besides the other atrocious things that trump has said, one of the most stupid must be his ignorance toward global warming.

what's next? 'pollution doesn't hurt the environment'? yikes.


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 8, 2017)

Hopeless Opus said:


> kinda scary that in 2017 people still deny the legitimacy of global warming.. it's a serious problem and if one needs to go on numerous websites to get enough proof of it, that's pretty sad. besides the other atrocious things that trump has said, one of the most stupid must be his ignorance toward global warming.
> 
> what's next? 'pollution doesn't hurt the environment'? yikes.



You know, it actually bothers me that people are offended by those who don't believe global warming is a myth. Shaming people for denying climate change is still political discrimination. Yes pollution does hurt the environment, but the CO2 emissions have nothing to do with global warming and stopping them won't save the earth.


----------



## Hopeless Opus (Jan 8, 2017)

Apple2012 said:


> You know, it actually bothers me that people are offended by those who don't believe global warming is a myth. Shaming people for denying climate change is still political discrimination. Yes pollution does hurt the environment, but the CO2 emissions have nothing to do with global warming and stopping them won't save the earth.



i might've seemed like i was offended, but really i wasn't. i just gave my thoughts on how ignorant it is to believe that, and shared my own opinion which doesn't have to be agreed with. but your statement is very interesting, considering CO2 is the leading greenhouse gas emission which is also the primary cause of global warming.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

And that's the thing I was talking about. I support our president-elect. From me having my own opinion and supporting him, I'm getting personally attacked. Are you getting personally attacked from me? No. 

My point to umjammer brandi was that I could not read anything she wrote because a) it was not organized, b) it was in pink.

- - - Post Merge - - -

You act like I'm the old man or whomever from a Dr. Seuss book that factory polluted the land or something. I don't know, it was a children's book. What I'm saying is that I'm just against climate change. Am I against excess of pollution, yes. Pollution will always be here on Earth, it's the matter of controlling it.

You want to say Hillary is against climate change? She rides in expensive helicopters damaging the environment. She rides in expensive cars damaging the environment. She acts like the mother of nature for climate change. Atleast Trump isn't hypocritical with that. He says climate change is a hoax. Period. He doesn't say it's real and then does things that would damage the environment.

I get she "fought hard" for the election and had to travel a lot of different places to lie to the American public but if she were really against climate change, the hoax, she would try to limit her damaging of the environment. 

Surprise : Politicians lie.

- - - Post Merge - - -

I can respect your opinion, Hopeless Opus but I respectfully disagree with it. 

A) Trump will never say pollution isn't a problem. The day he does, I'll stop supporting him. Ok? 
B) Climate change isn't a hoax.

- - - Post Merge - - -

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html?_r=0
^ 2008


Look at this poll. NY times is not credible at all times but I believe they're credible with this.

Those that say he lost with college-educated people... lol...
The reasons he lost with minorities is because...
a) The left have had them voting for them for years.
b) The left made republicans appear to be racist m8s.
c) It's the social aspect of things. Social culture I want to say. It has been. No matter who on the republican side. It's been social culture for latinos, blacks, and Asians to not vote for republicans.

But I'd like to point out that Mr. Trump did good in his shoes as the republican nominee. For one. 29% in latino and Asians. 8% in blacks. 

From all the rhetoric from the left saying how Mr. Trump is a racist, he did fairly well. Lower than McCain in the 2008 election with latinos and Asians but higher than McCain with blacks. 

This was 2008. In 2012 Mitt Romney had 29%, 28%... in the high 20's for blacks and Asians and 6% for blacks.

Trump did worse than McCain (2008) for blacks and Asians.
Trump did better than Mitt Romney (2012) for blacks and Asians.
Trump did better than McCain and Mitt Romney for the black vote.

Call other republicans racist then... I dare you. 

- - - Post Merge - - -   -2012

http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president/exit-polls


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 8, 2017)

Apple2012 said:


> You know, it actually bothers me that people are offended by those who don't believe global warming is a myth. Shaming people for denying climate change is still political discrimination. Yes pollution does hurt the environment, but the CO2 emissions have nothing to do with global warming and stopping them won't save the earth.



Climate change isn't something people "believe" in. It's a scientific theory. You either accept the evidence that it exists or you deny it. It's like gravity. You can choose not to "believe" in gravity, but if you jump off a skyscraper, you're still going to die. The general scientific consensus is that climate change is real and that human activity is having an effect on it. Yes, not every climate scientist agrees that climate change is man-made, but just as they have challenged the evidence of man-made climate change, other climate scientists have challenged their evidence that climate change is not man-made, and most climate scientists find the evidence that climate change is man-made to be much more thoroughly tested and compelling than the evidence that it's not man-made. It's one thing for someone to say that the evidence for man-made climate change is flawed and then present a scientific argument refuting it. It's another thing to call it a "hoax", "myth", or "conspiracy" which implies that you have no actual evidence disputing it and have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to the subject.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

Four words: Polar Bears and Moose.

- - - Post Merge - - -

2 Words: Record Ice

- - - Post Merge - - -

2 Words: Record Snow


----------



## Riley9 (Jan 8, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> - - - Post Merge - - -
> 
> You want to say Hillary is against climate change? She rides in expensive helicopters damaging the environment. She rides in expensive cars damaging the environment. She acts like the mother of nature for climate change. Atleast Trump isn't hypocritical with that. He says climate change is a hoax. Period. He doesn't say it's real and then does things that would damage the environment.
> 
> I get she "fought hard" for the election and had to travel a lot of different places to lie to the American public but if she were really against climate change, the hoax, she would try to limit her damaging of the environment.


    I don't really understand what you are trying to say here. Most people in general that are against climate change still drive cars and take public transportation. Hillary Clinton using her "expensive vehicles" doesn't mean that she isn't representing her own views, in fact, she doesn't own any vehicles or drive any for that matter considering she was Secretary of State. She had her own plan going into office about how she planned to deal with climate change. People that are against climate change aren't going to stop using transportation or pay ridiculous amounts for a clean energy vehicle but we do support political leaders and other representatives who will work to stop climate change through a variety of methods.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

Matramix said:


> Yikes at this thread..
> 
> Lincoln where u @ homie we need u



Lincoln wasn't against slavery. He was only "against it" because he didn't want to receive backlash and his only motive was to not let America split. He owned slaves himself. He was one man on the outside, another on the inside.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Riley9 said:


> I don't really understand what you are trying to say here. Most people in general that are against climate change still drive cars and take public transportation. Hillary Clinton using her "expensive vehicles" doesn't mean that she isn't representing her own views, in fact, she doesn't own any vehicles or drive any for that matter considering she was Secretary of State. She had her own plan going into office about how she planned to deal with climate change. People that are against climate change aren't going to stop using transportation or pay ridiculous amounts for a clean energy vehicle but we do support political leaders and other representatives who will work to stop climate change through a variety of methods.



She doesn't care about what she stands for. She could limit or do more if she actually cared. Sometimes it's doesn't need to be complex. It's simple.

(I would like your comment, Riley but there is no option.)


----------



## Hopeless Opus (Jan 8, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> What I'm saying is that I'm just against climate change
> 
> B) Climate change isn't a hoax.



sorry but i don't really understand, are you saying that you're against the idea of climate change, or are you saying it's real? maybe i just misunderstood but i'm just a little bit confused.

anyways - i respect that you respect my opinion, so therefore i can respectfully disagree with yours as well 

in response to all of what you said.. the lorax, the book/movie you were speaking of, was a great example to bring up. it teaches us that we should probably be taking care of the environment and to not be too rough with earth since it's delicate and there's only so much we'll be able to take from it til it falls apart. and if we know that something we're doing is wrong then why should we not stop it? pollution of all kinds spoils our earth - oil spills, plastic which takes years to decompose and the constant cutting down of trees and destruction of the natural environment (forests, rainforests, etc - now i sound like the lorax lmao). so if there is a problem, then obviously we need to control or stop it. it's as simple as using paper bags instead of plastic which can take up to 1000 years to decompose.

all of us use cars. so that would make all of us, especially the ones who believe in global warming, hypocrites. if what i'm understanding is correct, you think that using cars and planes damages the environment, but who else is doing that? donald trump. he might not be hypocritical since he denies the fact that global warming exists but trump has many fancy toys to ride around and fly in. so, he's just as much as an offender as hillary, or anyone who drives a car, is. 

he says climate change is a hoax, but has he ever really said he truly 'cared' about the environment? here's what he said about the environmental protection agency:


> Q: Would you cut departments?
> TRUMP: Environmental Protection, what they do is a disgrace. Every week they come out with new regulations.
> Q: Who's going to protect the environment?
> TRUMP: We'll be fine with the environment. We can leave a little bit, but you can't destroy businesses.



meanwhile, everyday our environment is slowly being destroyed. but that's not all of it. apparently, this is also true:




			
				vox said:
			
		

> Trump has said, straight up, he wants to scrap many of the major regulations that President Obama painstakingly put in place to reduce US carbon dioxide emissions, including the Clean Power Plan. If Trump wants to weaken or delay these rules through executive action, he can. Even more drastically, Republicans in Congress could try to pass a law forbidding the EPA from ever regulating CO2 again.
> 
> Trump has said he wants to scale back federal spending on clean energy, including R&D for wind, solar, nuclear power, and electric vehicles. This would require Congress, but it’s hardly impossible.



but, trump said these to statements in 2013 and 2014 on twitter:



Spoiler: yikes

















so i think trump is truly the biggest hypocrite of all. claiming he wants clean air, but then he's against clean energy and wants to withdraw from it, which will only make air worse and global warming will continue to be on the rise from CO2 emissions.. that makes absolutely no sense to me. i mean he thinks global warming is a hoax and all, but still. that's pretty bad in my eyes.


----------



## xanisha (Jan 8, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Lincoln wasn't against slavery. He was only "against it" because he didn't want to receive backlash and his only motive was to not let America split. He owned slaves himself. He was one man on the outside, another on the inside.



Lincoln did not own slaves. He lived and grew up in Illinois which had banned slavery in 1787 (before he was born) and his parents attended an anti-slavery Baptist church. Lincoln is sometimes confused with other presidents that did own slaves like George Washington. Please cite your *credible * sources if you would like to say historically incorrect things like that, blatantly saying falsehoods will not provide any substance to a discussion.  

Here are a few links to some credible published books and articles on the matter. There are tons more, go to your local or school library to check out books about it. 
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/148705
https://books.google.com/books?id=w1mL2E0QMsUC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0307377148


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

Q: Would you cut departments?
 TRUMP: Environmental Protection, what they do is a disgrace. Every week they come out with new regulations.
 Q: Who's going to protect the environment?
 TRUMP: We'll be fine with the environment. We can leave a little bit, but you can't destroy businesses. 

When he is talking about cutting departments. He won't actually cut the EPA. He's saying that there regulations are interfering with the welfare of good, solid businesses.

I'm fine with "donating to environmental causes" but global warming is a scam. How do we know that the money that's being donated is going to the hoax? Too much $$$ is also being given by the federal government to "fight" global warming. Bull**** on that. We're 19 trillion dollars in debt. Our border isn't secure. Our schools are unfunded. Our teachers are underpaid. Our military is downsizing, thanks Obama!

- - - Post Merge - - -



xanisha said:


> Lincoln did not own slaves. He lived and grew up in Illinois which had banned slavery in 1787 (before he was born) and his parents attended an anti-slavery Baptist church. Lincoln is sometimes confused with other presidents that did own slaves like George Washington. Please cite your *credible * sources if you would like to say historically incorrect things like that, blatantly saying falsehoods will not provide any substance to a discussion.
> 
> Here are a few links to some credible published books and articles on the matter. There are tons more, go to your local or school library to check out books about it.
> http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/148705
> ...



Oml. I can't even respond to this. smh 

Where'd you get this information from? winnersmakehistory.scam?

You know the winning side makes history, right? You have to dig a little deeper. I have a friend who's a historian that specializes in presidents and government. xoxo


----------



## Hopeless Opus (Jan 8, 2017)

but what's more important? a stupid business? or the environment which is slowly deteriorating because of pollution?


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

The thing is... the second one is speculation. 

Business Environment

I think what Mr. Trump is trying to do is to lower the amount of funding and effort we put into environmental causes and put some into businesses. Middle ground.


----------



## xanisha (Jan 8, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Oml. I can't even respond to this. smh
> 
> Where'd you get this information from? winnersmakehistory.scam?
> 
> You know the winning side makes history, right? You have to dig a little deeper. I have a friend who's a historian that specializes in presidents and government. xoxo


I cited a few different credible sources. Can you name even 1? I know you have your opinions but stating falsehoods with no evidence or credibility will not take this discussion anywhere.


----------



## Hopeless Opus (Jan 8, 2017)

that's the problem. we _need _more funding for our environment. we only get one healthy environment just like we only get one chance at life. we have to try and make up for all the wrong we've done to it now while we still have a chance.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 8, 2017)

Guys, why are you posting pages of information about climate change trying to debate with an obviously irrational person? You could write an entire book about climate change and irhaskell8 would come back with "Polar Bears". Hillary Clinton was right when she called people "irredeemable" and this thread is a perfect example of that. Some people are so cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs that it's not worth your time trying to reason with them.


----------



## Waluigi (Jan 8, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> Guys, why are you posting pages of information about climate change trying to debate with an obviously irrational person? You could write an entire book about climate change and irhaskell8 would come back with "Polar Bears". Hillary Clinton was right when she called people "irredeemable" and this thread is a perfect example of that. Some people are so cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs that it's not worth your time trying to reason with them.



I feel like this entire comment sums up this whole thread. Nobody's opinion is gonna get changed, nobody's gonna believe otherwise. This thread isn't even about trumps cabinet picks anymore.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

Red Cat. So half of America are deplorable and irredeemable? Nice!

You are the definition of what's wrong with liberals. Thinking that republicans are wrong for every single controversial "issue". 
If you're that triggered by this thread to be a complete *****, then leave. 

irrational : not logical or reasonable

logical : characterized by or capable of clear, sound reasoning.

reasoning : the action of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way.


Half of America is neither logical, reasonable, or irrational? That statement that you just made is ignorant itself. 

If you're going to throw in personal insults, get off this thread.

- - - Post Merge - - -

This is what Apple2012 was mentioning a few posts ago. Liberals are more intolerant.

- - - Post Merge - - -



irhaskell8 said:


> And that's the thing I was talking about. I support our president-elect. From me having my own opinion and supporting him, I'm getting personally attacked. Are you getting personally attacked from me? No.
> 
> My point to umjammer brandi was that I could not read anything she wrote because a) it was not organized, b) it was in pink.
> 
> ...



Here's your "fact proofing", Red Cat. I do my research. Don't demonize me... that's what's wrong with you. If you don't like how someone is debating, supporting, or exampling then you throw out personal insults. You've thrown out the most personal insults on this thread. If you're going to continue on this thread, actually engage in the conversation instead of trying to get it closed.


----------



## cIementine (Jan 8, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Red Cat. So half of America are deplorable and irredeemable? Nice!
> 
> You are the definition of what's wrong with liberals. Thinking that republicans are wrong for every single controversial "issue".
> If you're that triggered by this thread to be a complete *****, then leave.
> ...



if we're going to stop with personal insults, maybe we should start by not calling others 'complete *****'. or irrational, as this does go both ways, before you accuse me of being the definition of what's wrong with liberals. it does suck that you feel you're being personally attacked, and i'm sorry if i have contributed to that in any way, but maybe we should be careful of what we're saying to others to warrant that reaction.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

This is a thread, for one. I'm stating my opinion.

Warrant an attack? That's like saying someone's defending Trump's Hollywood star and they should be attacked (actually happened).

If you start throwing out personal attacks, don't be afraid to receive them. This isn't snowflake school, my purple penguins.

- - - Post Merge - - -

I also never accused you of what's wrong with being a liberal. That was Red Cat. 

Now can we continue this conversation in a civilized manner without any drama?


----------



## cIementine (Jan 8, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> This is a thread, for one. I'm stating my opinion.
> 
> Warrant an attack? That's like saying someone's defending Trump's Hollywood star and they should be attacked (actually happened).
> 
> ...



i said 'reaction', not 'attack'. you have every right to state your opinion, like everyone else. in a thread that provides discussion, you are going to get a response and that response depends on what you say to others. it's not just you. like i said, this extends beyond you and the last thing i want to do is make you feel like i'm personally attacking you. that isn't what i'm about at all.
i'm aware that you never accused me, i was saying that in reference to what you already said with red cat. 

i think i've said plenty on this thread and i have nothing left to contribute, but if the thread could continue and we can finish with the issue of personal attacks, that would be nice!


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 8, 2017)

I don't really feel any guilt about calling people names and I don't get offended about being called names by other people. The one thing this election has taught me is that the United States is not a "let's all hug and be friends" country, but instead an "us versus them" country. As far as I'm concerned, Trump's election was the first shot fired in what will end up being an ugly war. There is no moral high ground left, so I'm not even going to pretend to take it.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

What do you all think of Mitt Romney as Secretary Of State?

Don't use "typical rich white guy". Please be intellectual.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 8, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> What do you all think of Mitt Romney as Secretary Of State?



I'd actually be okay with him. He was right about Russia being our number one geopolitical foe and his take-down of Trump was one of the best during the election. Which is why he'll never actually be Secretary of State because even though he's qualified, he is against Russia and Trump has a grudge against him which disqualifies him in Trump's eyes.


----------



## moonford (Jan 8, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> What do you all think of Mitt Romney as Secretary Of State?
> 
> Don't use "typical rich white guy". Please be intellectual.



I really don't like him or his political views so naturally I won't like him being the secretary of state.


----------



## Haskell (Jan 8, 2017)

Red Cat said:


> I'd actually be okay with him. He was right about Russia being our number one geopolitical foe and his take-down of Trump was one of the best during the election. Which is why he'll never actually be Secretary of State because even though he's qualified, he is against Russia and Trump has a grudge against him which disqualifies him in Trump's eyes.



Romney ran in 2012, right? McCain in 2008? Romney lost, so that shows his unpopularity. 

I think just because he is aggressive towards Russia and insults Trump when it's called for doesn't mean that Trump will disqualify him. His transition team and him have stated on how they're looking at everyone and not just the business men that Trump knows.

- - - Post Merge - - -

Who do you think is the best pick him and his transition team have come up with?


----------



## Hopeless Opus (Jan 8, 2017)

i personally can't stand mitt romney, and was very glad that he did not become president.


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 10, 2017)

as much as we praise the internet for spreading information at unprecedented levels, we should also consider how rampant false information has become alongside this wealth of knowledge
case in point this thread lmao


----------



## Haskell (Jan 10, 2017)

Um. What do you mean? Hopeless Opus posted two days ago, not sure what you're talking about...


----------



## moonford (Jan 10, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Um. What do you mean? Hopeless Opus posted two days ago, not sure what you're talking about...



Who are you replying too?


----------



## Haskell (Jan 10, 2017)

Super Vandal. He threw in a random topic when this thread was dying.


----------



## moonford (Jan 10, 2017)

Okay then...


----------



## KarlaKGB (Jan 10, 2017)

If these links to the kremlin that everyone suspects are proven true, it's over for Trump


----------



## Haskell (Jan 10, 2017)

Huh? Could you post links about what you're talking about? I haven't been keeping up with everything.


----------



## KarlaKGB (Jan 10, 2017)

http://edition.cnn.com/profiles/richard-quest-profile

The report itself seems to have been leaked by Buzzfeed: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html


----------



## Haskell (Jan 10, 2017)

Buzzfeed? That site is so glitchy and irritating.


----------



## KarlaKGB (Jan 10, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Buzzfeed? That site is so glitchy and irritating.



Wow luckily I didn't link to Buzzfeed itself, stop trying to deflect


----------



## Haskell (Jan 10, 2017)

I'm not trying to deflect. It's called a conversation. Wow... I was reading what you posted but it seems like it's rather not important. Until more comes out on it, I couldn't care less.

Happy?

- - - Post Merge - - -

And... I can read btw. I can see the link is not buzzfeed but... the fact that apparently it originates from buzzfeed is an issue itself. >.>


----------



## KarlaKGB (Jan 10, 2017)

I don't know how you can look at the allegations presented within the report and come to the conclusion that they aren't important.


----------



## Antonio (Jan 10, 2017)

On my behalf, i thought this thread was about Donald Trump picking Spices for his rack. &#55357;&#56384;


----------



## Haskell (Jan 10, 2017)

The thing is... there will be people freaking out over this (if at all) and if it's really that important, news will be released. I'd rather be doing something productive like the tons of homework I have, the 16 villager cycle. Not reading conspiracy theories. 

They're conspiracy theories. The link between Russia interfering with the U.S election is based on the fact no one is blaming Hillary. No one wants to say it's her fault. Like Kellyanne Conway said... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voYiupZgxDg


----------



## N e s s (Jan 10, 2017)

Lol people are still talking in this thread. Stop arguing on the internet: none of you are changing anyones minds.


----------



## Red Cat (Jan 11, 2017)

N e s s said:


> Lol people are still talking in this thread. Stop arguing on the internet: none of you are changing anyones minds.



I agree. Instead we should all be posting about stuff that is really important:

http://www.belltreeforums.com/showthread.php?405496-Toilet-paper-flap-over-the-top-or-bottom-!

http://www.belltreeforums.com/showthread.php?405510-pasta-or-pizza-the-real-question

http://www.belltreeforums.com/showthread.php?404582-What-s-your-dinner


----------



## verb1999 (Jan 11, 2017)

I like turtles!


----------



## SuperVandal (Jan 11, 2017)

Trumped-up trickle down economics makes sense now


----------



## Haskell (Jan 11, 2017)

It was let go, until someone started talking again. 

Anyways...... let's argue on the internet!


----------



## nintendofan85 (Jan 11, 2017)

I wonder what happened to the goal of this post:



gyro said:


> They're garbage
> 
> Thread closed everyone go home


----------



## lostineverfreeforest (Jan 11, 2017)

N e s s said:


> Stop arguing on the internet]



But that's the entire point of the internet.


----------



## Trent the Paladin (Jan 11, 2017)

Guys stay on topic. If you've nothing left to contribute, don't contribute.


----------



## Antonio (Jan 11, 2017)

Tom said:


> Guys stay on topic. If you've nothing left to contribute, don't contribute.



You can't tell me what to do...


----------



## Haskell (Jan 16, 2017)

Mad Dog Mattis

Is anyone NOT fine with him being Secretary Of Defense? Why?


----------



## nintendofan85 (Jan 16, 2017)

irhaskell8 said:


> Mad Dog Mattis
> 
> Is anyone NOT fine with him being Secretary Of Defense? Why?



I know that my mom is a big fan of him.


----------

