Do you approve of the job the President of the United States is doing?

[Red Cat]

Yeah, the whole source thing is stupid. If you're going to post something, just check to make sure it's true before you post it. No one gives a crap about an article you link to because no one wants to waste their time reading it. If someone generally posts stuff that's true, I take them at their word and if someone repeatedly posts fake stuff, then I assume that everything they say is incorrect. Much easier than dealing with sources.

 

[Haskell]

Here's an informative video, please tell me how u "do it right"

"Part of the problem is that election laws in the United States are a complicated hodgepodge of federal, state, and local rules, regulations, and red tape." - Tom Fitton

 

[LambdaDelta]

oh and, re: electoral college

are you by any chance aware of gerrymandering? because this is precisely why the electoral college is a failure of an idea in modern times

 

[tumut]

It's pretty said that Hillary won by a larger margin of popular votes than Obama did in 2012 and still lost.

 

[Haskell]

It's pretty said that Hillary won by a larger margin of popular votes than Obama did in 2012 and still lost.

Trump won states that Obama won both times. Trump won states that democrats had held for a while.

 

[tumut]

Trump won states that Obama won both times. Trump won states that democrats had held for a while.

Which goes to show what a ****ty candidate Hillary was, and how ****ed up the democrats have become in the past decade. Literally anyone else could've beaten Trump. Even Martin O'Malley ****ing plastic boy himself.

 

[Haskell]

Which goes to show what a ****ty candidate Hillary was, and how ****ed up the democrats have become in the past decade. Literally anyone else could've beaten Trump. Even Martin O'Malley ****ing plastic boy himself.

Trump built up a movement we have not seen before.

If 'literally anyone else could've beaten Trump' then why didn't...

Ted Cruz?
Ben Carson?
Bernie Sanders?
Gary Johnson?
Jill Stein?
Willie Wilson?
John Wolfe Jr?
Michael Alan Steinburg?
Rocky De La Fuente?
John Kasich?
Marco Rubio?
Jeb Bush?
Carly Fiorina?
Rand Paul?
Mike Huckabee?
Rick Santorum?
Chris Christie?
Jim Gilmore?

Huh? Out of all these people... (and more)...

 

[DJStarstryker]

Good job? Look at Fort Hood, Orlando, California! It's not doing a good enough job.

He is putting the safety of the U.S over support. That's what a good POTUS does. He got rid of all ties to his business. "[

None of those people were refugees though. Refugees in general, even before this ban, get much more strict scrutiny than people coming into the country on other visas (tourist, school, work, etc). If someone wanted to come into the country to do something bad in the country, they wouldn't do it on refugee status.

Heck, the biggest terrorist attack on US soil, 9/11, wouldn't of been affected by this ban. Most of those people were Saudi nationals (which isn't affected by the ban) and came on tourist visas.

That's why this ban is dumb. It's not making us any safer, and is in fact causing many people lots of issues and making the rest of the world trust us less.

 

[Haskell]

None of those people were refugees though. Refugees in general, even before this ban, get much more strict scrutiny than people coming into the country on other visas (tourist, school, work, etc). If someone wanted to come into the country to do something bad in the country, they wouldn't do it on refugee status.

Heck, the biggest terrorist attack on US soil, 9/11, wouldn't of been affected by this ban. Most of those people were Saudi nationals (which isn't affected by the ban) and came on tourist visas.

That's why this ban is dumb. It's not making us any safer, and is in fact causing many people lots of issues and making the rest of the world trust us less.

While I respect and understand your opinion. I don't agree with it. At all.

I think the ban is another step forward to making America safe.

 

[Koden]

Didn't he mention at one point that he wanted to "ban all Muslims"?

 

[Haskell]

Didn't he mention at one point that he wanted to "ban all Muslims"?

He wants to ban all and any immigration from terror stricken regions. As well as block immigration from people that have recently visited those terror stricken regions.

 

[forestyne]

While I respect and understand your opinion. I don't agree with it. At all.

I think the ban is another step forward to making America safe.

'kay, but there are people who have a right to be in america who can't be.

And what's the point of banning Syrian refugees? There's no way of telling who's a terrorist and who's not, most are just fleeing the war caused BY IS. I know it's safety measures, but refusing people based on where they've come from, their religion and what they post on their social media accounts doesn't seem fair and isn't keeping terrorists out. people say all kinds of crazy **** on twitter.

- - - Post Merge - - -

He wants to ban all and any immigration from terror stricken regions. As well as block immigration from people that have recently visited those terror stricken regions.

I thought he wanted to ban Mexicans too, or was that just making them pay for the wall? I think he did mention banning all muslims if it came to it but then again nobody took his campaign seriously at that point.

 

[Haskell]

'kay, but there are people who have a right to be in america who can't be.

And what's the point of banning Syrian refugees? There's no way of telling who's a terrorist and who's not, most are just fleeing the war caused BY IS. I know it's safety measures, but refusing people based on where they've come from, their religion and what they post on their social media accounts doesn't seem fair and isn't keeping terrorists out. people say all kinds of crazy **** on twitter.

13% have admitted they support ISIS. Those are just the ones that are not thinking rational on admitting that.

Government should be able to see social media accounts before allowing anyone into this country.

Where they come from happens to be a region of terror. A region which is in such terror where people are set on fire. We cannot and have not been correctly accessing and vetting the people from that region. Look at Europe.

 

[Haskell]

'kay, but there are people who have a right to be in america who can't be.

And what's the point of banning Syrian refugees? There's no way of telling who's a terrorist and who's not, most are just fleeing the war caused BY IS. I know it's safety measures, but refusing people based on where they've come from, their religion and what they post on their social media accounts doesn't seem fair and isn't keeping terrorists out. people say all kinds of crazy **** on twitter.

13% have admitted they support ISIS. Those are just the ones that are not thinking rational on admitting that.

Government should be able to see social media accounts before allowing anyone into this country.

Where they come from happens to be a region of terror. A region which is in such terror where people are set on fire. We cannot and have not been correctly accessing and vetting the people from that region. Look at Europe.

 

[Koden]

'kay, but there are people who have a right to be in america who can't be.

And what's the point of banning Syrian refugees? There's no way of telling who's a terrorist and who's not, most are just fleeing the war caused BY IS. I know it's safety measures, but refusing people based on where they've come from, their religion and what they post on their social media accounts doesn't seem fair and isn't keeping terrorists out. people say all kinds of crazy **** on twitter.

- - - Post Merge - - -



I thought he wanted to ban Mexicans too, or was that just making them pay for the wall? I think he did mention banning all muslims if it came to it but then again nobody took his campaign seriously at that point.

hes destroying one of the most important things that this country was founded on, freedom to practice any religion, by "banning" people from a certain nation or with a certain religious value youre completely going against that

- - - Post Merge - - -

13% have admitted they support ISIS. Those are just the ones that are not thinking rational on admitting that.

Government should be able to see social media accounts before allowing anyone into this country.

Where they come from happens to be a region of terror. A region which is in such terror where people are set on fire. We cannot and have not been correctly accessing and vetting the people from that region. Look at Europe.

what exactly does "thinking rational on admitting that" mean?

 

[forestyne]

13% have admitted they support ISIS. Those are just the ones that are not thinking rational on admitting that.

Government should be able to see social media accounts before allowing anyone into this country.

Where they come from happens to be a region of terror. A region which is in such terror where people are set on fire. We cannot and have not been correctly accessing and vetting the people from that region. Look at Europe.

But that doesn't necessarily mean they're all terrorists, that's jumping the gun too early. I don't like battered cod, but a lot of British people love fish and chips. Not everyone's the same. Watch lists exists for that very reason, but people can (very rarely) slip through the cracks. There's Americans killing other Americans. And Anonymous are doing a better job at exposing ISIS links than the government is. Maybe they should try, oh yea, in-dept screening.

 

[Haskell]

what exactly does "thinking rational on admitting that" mean?

If you support ISIS, you aren't going to rationally say you do when you are trying to "flee from them"...

- - - Post Merge - - -

But that doesn't necessarily mean they're all terrorists, that's jumping the gun too early. I don't like battered cod, but a lot of British people love fish and chips. Not everyone's the same. Watch lists exists for that very reason, but people can (very rarely) slip through the cracks. There's Americans killing other Americans. And Anonymous are doing a better job at exposing ISIS links than the government is. Maybe they should try, oh yea, in-dept screening.

You're comparing food to violent terrorists.

One bad skittle can ruin the bag.

 

[forestyne]

hes destroying one of the most important things that this country was founded on, freedom to practice any religion, by "banning" people from a certain nation or with a certain religious value youre completely going against that

- - - Post Merge - - -



what exactly does "thinking rational on admitting that" mean?

Wonder where the sources are for that statistic.

Wasn't there a whole rebellious phase of America wanting to be independent and "free"? Freedom does not look like deporting races/religions.

 

[Koden]

Wonder where the sources are for that statistic.

Wasn't there a whole rebellious phase of America wanting to be independent and "free"? Freedom does not look like deporting races/religions.

what statistic are you talking about? i dont think i referenced any

also i agree with you, we can be very close minded sometimes

 

[forestyne]

If you support ISIS, you aren't going to rationally say you do when you are trying to "flee from them"...

- - - Post Merge - - -



You're comparing food to violent terrorists.

One bad skittle can ruin the bag.

I'm comparing not being the same as other people. That tainted view on an entire religion, just for people who go AGAINST what that religion is about, is exactly what's wrong with the world today.

- - - Post Merge - - -

what statistic are you talking about? i dont think i referenced any

also i agree with you, we can be very close minded sometimes

Sorry, I meant the 13% of refugees admitting to supporting IS.