A new US Republican thread 2016

andrewjoy

09 Feb 2017, 18:11

That russian "hacking" won him the election
That he liked to watch hookers piss on eachother
That he sexually abuses women
That he is racist
That he wants to deport all Mexicans.

All of them have been said or reported on the news about trump and all of them are false.

Good things he has done

Get rid of the TPP
Pushing to a quick and positive trade deal with the UK after Brexit
Improve relations with russia.

User avatar
chuckdee

09 Feb 2017, 18:11

andrewjoy wrote: His point is , everyone always criticises Trump , much of the time with good reason.
And my point is that even if the alternative is bad, Trump is the one who is in office. You don't take the heat off the one in office and focus on the one that's not. That's just stupid. At the worst, you put the heat on both. But that's not what he's doing- his rhetoric actually helps to remove the focus from the clear and present danger.

At worst, you condemn both. Turning a blind eye to the sins of those that come before is not the correct approach. But turning a blind eye to those that are now in order to make a point?

jacobolus

09 Feb 2017, 19:30

When Putin raised the possibility of extending the 2010 treaty, known as New START, Trump paused to ask his aides in an aside what the treaty was, these sources said.

Trump then told Putin the treaty was one of several bad deals negotiated by the Obama administration, saying that New START favored Russia. Trump also talked about his own popularity, the sources said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-t ... SKBN15O2A5

jacobolus

09 Feb 2017, 19:56

andrewjoy wrote: That russian "hacking" won him the election
That he sexually abuses women
That he is racist
That he wants to deport all Mexicans.
Russian hacking almost certainly made the difference in the election. If you take out either that, or Comey’s illegal shenanigans, then Hillary wins. Of course, this is a counter-factual question, and it took millions of American idiots voting for Trump to elect him, and the self-castration of the entire Republican party. There’s plenty of blame to go around.

Not sure what you mean by “sexually abuses”. He beat and raped his first wife after a bad hair operation. He has sexually assaulted at least dozens of women, and bragged about it on tape.

Trump is unquestionably a racist, and has been his whole career. Heaps and heaps of evidence.

He said he wanted to deport millions of Mexicans, and has made lengthy racist rants about it. Not sure where you’re getting “all” from.
That he liked to watch hookers piss on eachother
This is a rumor whose truth is impossible to verify. Comes from a British intelligence officer.

You can read the whole dossier if you like:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/kenbensinger/t ... -to-russia

User avatar
seebart
Offtopicthority Instigator

09 Feb 2017, 20:15

jacobolus wrote: He beat and raped his first wife after a bad hair operation.
That sounds like a really bad movie plot...
Harry Hurt III’s 1993 book Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump reveals just how desperate Trump is to keep up appearances. He underwent scalp reduction surgery in 1989, probably to correct a bald patch, but the surgeon botched the procedure. The infuriated mogul stormed home to confront then-wife Ivana Trump, who had recommended the plastic surgeon to her husband.

Barging into her bedroom, Trump screamed, “Your fucking doctor has ruined me!” He then tore fistfuls of hair from her head, ripped off her clothes, and forced himself on her. Ivana described the incident as “rape,” in their divorce deposition. She softened her account in later years, first claiming that her Trump had not violated her in any criminal sense, and then subsequently stating that the story was “totally without merit.” Trump, unsurprisingly, denied that any of it ever happened.

jacobolus

09 Feb 2017, 20:20

She “softened her account” after the hush money came through.

User avatar
seebart
Offtopicthority Instigator

09 Feb 2017, 20:35

jacobolus wrote: She “softened her account” after the hush money came through.
Yes I should mention that my quote is of course only an excerpt of that book that I never read and never will read. Pretty creepy stuff...

User avatar
vivalarevolución
formerly prdlm2009

09 Feb 2017, 21:49

chuckdee wrote:
andrewjoy wrote: His point is , everyone always criticises Trump , much of the time with good reason.
And my point is that even if the alternative is bad, Trump is the one who is in office. You don't take the heat off the one in office and focus on the one that's not. That's just stupid. At the worst, you put the heat on both. But that's not what he's doing- his rhetoric actually helps to remove the focus from the clear and present danger.

At worst, you condemn both. Turning a blind eye to the sins of those that come before is not the correct approach. But turning a blind eye to those that are now in order to make a point?
This is a much shorter way of saying what I wanted to say, so thanks.

Basically the focus now in American politics is on the present leaders that are attempting to consolidate power and intimidate any opposition and make decisions that only seem to benefit the wealthy and corporations and the extreme fringes of their base. Many of us realize the Democrats have been guilty of similar things over of the years, but they are not in power now. If that changes, then I hope we can treat them in the same way.

Americans are tired of being jacked around by their old politicians. Some felt voting for Trump would solve that. Women are getting interested and organized in politics at a fever I've never seen before. F-ing scientists are tired of being pushed to the side and becoming more vocal. I'm seeing people in my generation that didn't give two shits about politics suddenly caring beyond voting day, just wondering what else they can do.

Who knows what will happen. Maybe Bannon will get his civil war and mass international conflict. Maybe this is the last ride of baby boomer white conservatives until they are swept into the dust bin of history and the progressive revolution takes over. All I know is that we are living in a key point of Western history and lots of people are fired up.

User avatar
seebart
Offtopicthority Instigator

09 Feb 2017, 22:16

I think this thread needs to be "lightened up a bit"...

So the green alien is Kellyanne Conway... does that mean Sean Spicer is Salacious Crumb?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don ... d304c02016?
Vsy5qrn.jpg
Vsy5qrn.jpg (332.61 KiB) Viewed 5161 times
Last edited by seebart on 09 Feb 2017, 22:19, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
fohat
Elder Messenger

09 Feb 2017, 22:19

vivalarevolución wrote:
Maybe this is the last ride of baby boomer white conservatives
The baby boomers were also the hippies who blissed out and failed to change the world.

User avatar
vivalarevolución
formerly prdlm2009

09 Feb 2017, 22:49

fohat wrote:
vivalarevolución wrote:
Maybe this is the last ride of baby boomer white conservatives
The baby boomers were also the hippies who blissed out and failed to change the world.
Yes, the baby boomers are as a diverse of generation as any other. It's just the white conservative segment that is steering the wheels of government right now that I'm tired of.

As a budding Grateful Dead fan here, I would personally like to thank the baby boomer generation for giving us the greatest music experience of all time. If everyone just sat back, relaxed, and turned up a full-length Grateful Dead concert from the archives every now and then, we would be alright, man.


Fyi, Kellyanne Conway violated ethics rules for executive branch employees. As a state executive branch employee that understands the ethics issues with promoting certain private businesses over others, I can't wait to hear the spin on this one: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/legal-experts ... 04433.html#

User avatar
fohat
Elder Messenger

10 Feb 2017, 01:33

US Federal law:

"§ 2635.702 Use of public office for private gain.
An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity .... "

User avatar
vivalarevolución
formerly prdlm2009

10 Feb 2017, 02:47

fohat wrote: US Federal law:

"§ 2635.702 Use of public office for private gain.
An employee shall not use his public office for his own private gain, for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity .... "
It would be wonderful it that law applied to the president as well.

jacobolus

10 Feb 2017, 02:51

The President can’t make private business deals with foreigners. It’s crystal clear right in the constitution.

Trump has been in obvious brazen violation of the constitution from the moment of his inauguration.

If the Republican congress wasn’t stuffed with corrupt spineless hypocrites (or if a Democratic Party president tried the same thing), there would be wall-to-wall hearings followed by impeachment proceedings.

In 1979, the Republican congress hired a special prosecutor and spent 6 months and $350,000 doing a thorough investigation of squeaky-clean Jimmy Carter’s peanut farm. (Of course, there was nothing remotely shady there, and they didn’t find anything.) https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/ ... 7e78b76b0/

In 2016, the Republicans elect a career conman to the presidency, whose mob ties, history of illegal racial discrimination, habitual sexual assaults, tax evasion, illegal use of his charity as a private piggybank, bribery of public officials, and standing practice of defrauding customers, investors, lenders, and partners, and dubious ties to at least one hostile foreign government (Russia) is a matter of public record. The congress does nothing, because Jason Chaffetz (who spent years and millions of dollars on bogus Benghazi and Clinton email horseshit) doesn’t feel like it.
Last edited by jacobolus on 10 Feb 2017, 03:03, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
fohat
Elder Messenger

10 Feb 2017, 02:58

jacobolus wrote:
followed by impeachment proceedings.
I think that I would be (almost?) as terrified of President Pence as I am of President Trump, particularly if Pres Trump was in power long enough to enact the truly dirty stuff and then Pres Pence simply allowed it to stand, subsequently adding his own theocracy to the mix.

jacobolus

10 Feb 2017, 03:06

Pence is a corrupt and evil man who wreaked destruction on Indiana, but (a) he isn’t going to start a nuclear war, and (b) he would staff at least some positions in executive agencies with nominally responsible people. For instance, Bannon, Flynn, et al. would be right out of the white house.

User avatar
vivalarevolución
formerly prdlm2009

10 Feb 2017, 03:39

fohat wrote:
jacobolus wrote:
followed by impeachment proceedings.
I think that I would be (almost?) as terrified of President Pence as I am of President Trump, particularly if Pres Trump was in power long enough to enact the truly dirty stuff and then Pres Pence simply allowed it to stand, subsequently adding his own theocracy to the mix.
jacobolus wrote: Pence is a corrupt and evil man who wreaked destruction on Indiana, but (a) he isn’t going to start a nuclear war, and (b) he would staff at least some positions in executive agencies with nominally responsible people. For instance, Bannon, Flynn, et al. would be right out of the white house.
It wasn't all terrible with Pence as governor, he was just incompetent and ineffective, more a slow deterioration. The social mishaps that made national news (gay rights, rejecting Syrian refugees) are par for the course in Indiana. The Indiana GOP is already unraveling some of his legacy: http://www.indystar.com/story/news/poli ... /97699694/

Pence doesn't scare me as much because he is more predictable, amicable, and backs down when challenged enough. He has his theocratic dreams, but his main goal is to seek more status, power, and glory, that's what he likes. He staffs agencies with people that will do what he wants and basically stall the agency, because regulation is bad, essentially. If he is president, he will work to get re-elected and stay popular enough, first and foremost, and be wary if his agenda becomes too extreme. He ego bruises less easily. His handlers know this. Although I would not be too confident that he will kick out extremists like Bannon and Flynn or roll back the nonsense, he tends to defer to authority rather than shake things up too much.

User avatar
vivalarevolución
formerly prdlm2009

10 Feb 2017, 04:37

Fyi, the newly confirmed AG Sessions does not understand basic statistical trends as well and will manipulate the data to push his agenda of fear, paranoia, and "law and order". The more these people talk, the more they de-legitimize themselves: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pol ... 8c52da4627

I would like to personally invite Trump and Sessions to spend some time in a crime-ridden inner city neighborhood so they can understand the problem first hand. Now that would be an entertaining reality show.

jacobolus

10 Feb 2017, 04:58

The planned Republican tax code changes will result in 0.4% increase in after-tax income for the bottom 40% of households, an 0.5% increase in after-tax income for the next 40% of households (for folks between 60–80th percentiles, an average savings of $400 per year). The top 0.1% of the country will have a 16.9% increase in after-tax income, or an average savings of $1,260,000 per year. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/09/busi ... x-cut.html

Buying the election has been a great return on investment for billionaires.

It’s going to be pretty shitty for most Trump voters, since along with their $100–400 tax savings, they’re also going to lose education, healthcare, unemployment insurance, worker compensation, collective bargaining rights, pensions, protection against fraud, basic infrastructure, clean water, breathable air, a livable environment, etc. But hey, at least we can kick some undocumented immigrants out, forcing up food prices (Republicans in the CA central valley are freaking out), and get in a trade war, forcing up prices of everything else.

jacobolus

10 Feb 2017, 07:58

SHERIFF AUBREY: Sheriff John Aubrey, fifth-term sheriff, Jefferson County, Kentucky. Past president of National Sheriffs’ Association. And my fellow sheriffs have brought up a number of points, and I’d like to add two to it that I know are on your plate and the administration’s plate. The 1033 program, where we were sharing Department of Defense surplus material that helps us in our war. They were used in the war, and they helped us in our war. That got severely curtailed.

And the other thing is asset forfeiture. People want to say we’re taking money and without due process. That’s not true. We take money from dope dealers —

THE PRESIDENT: So you’re saying – okay, so you’re saying the asset-taking you used to do, and it had an impact, right? And you’re not allowed to do it now?

SHERIFF AUBREY: No, they have curtailed it a little bit. And I’m sure the folks are —

THE PRESIDENT: And that’s for legal reasons? Or just political reasons?

SHERIFF AUBREY: They make it political and they make it – they make up stories. All you’ve got to do —

THE PRESIDENT: I’d like to look into that, okay? There’s no reason for that. Dana, do you think there’s any reason for that? Are you aware of this?

[Then-acting Attorney General Dana Boente]: I am aware of that, Mr. President. And we have gotten a great deal of criticism for the asset forfeiture, which, as the sheriff said, frequently was taking narcotics proceeds and other proceeds of crime. But there has been a lot of pressure on the department to curtail some of that.

THE PRESIDENT: So what do you do? So in other words, they have a huge stash of drugs. So in the old days, you take it. Now we’re criticized if we take it. So who gets it? What happens to it? Tell them to keep it?

MR. BOENTE: Well, we have what is called equitable sharing, where we usually share it with the local police departments for whatever portion that they worked on the case. And it was a very successful program, very popular with the law enforcement community.

THE PRESIDENT: And now what happens?

MR. BOENTE: Well, now we’ve just been given – there’s been a lot of pressure not to forfeit, in some cases.

THE PRESIDENT: Who would want that pressure, other than, like, bad people, right? But who would want that pressure? You would think they’d want this stuff taken away.

SHERIFF AUBREY: You have to be careful how you speak, I guess. But a lot of pressure is coming out of – was coming out of Congress. I don’t know that that will continue now or not.

THE PRESIDENT: I think less so. I think Congress is going to get beat up really badly by the voters because they’ve let this happen. And I think badly. I think you’ll be back in shape. So, asset forfeiture, we’re going to go back on, okay?

SHERIFF AUBREY: Thank you, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: I mean, how simple can anything be? You all agree with that, I assume, right?
Anyone who wants to feel some outrage about asset forfeiture, read http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken

Or
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/10/us/p ... seize.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/us/l ... uired.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/invest ... and-seize/

Or:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... om-people/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... last-year/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... ant-a-cut/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... h-a-crime/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... occer-mom/

Or watch:
Of course, clueless Trump is all in favor of theft, because “Who would want that pressure, other than, like, bad people, right? But who would want that pressure? You would think they’d want this stuff taken away.”

User avatar
vivalarevolución
formerly prdlm2009

10 Feb 2017, 13:48

Please provide a source of information that isn't leftist or have obvious liberal bias. I'm too cynical and biased to even consider reading such a source.

User avatar
fohat
Elder Messenger

10 Feb 2017, 14:12

vivalarevolución wrote:
Please provide a source of information that isn't leftist
I found his source:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... y-sheriffs

Here is another good quote from it:

" PARTICIPANT: Mr. President, on asset forfeiture, we got a state senator in Texas who was talking about introducing legislation to require conviction before we can receive their forfeiture.

THE PRESIDENT: Can you believe that?"

User avatar
vivalarevolución
formerly prdlm2009

11 Feb 2017, 14:14

In more fun news, Jason Chaffetz, the head of the House Oversight Committee who seems very wishy-washy about what might qualify as an ethics violation these days, had a rough reception at his local town hall. Everybody came with their pitchforks.

A 10-year-old girl with a simple unanswered question about believing in science about what he will do to protect our air and water for future generations is the highlight of the show.
This young girl just wants to know if Congressman Jason Chaffetz believes in science. At a heated town hall meeting in Utah this week, Hannah Bradshaw asked Chaffetz two simple questions: “What are you doing to help protect our water and air for our generations and my kids’ generations?”
And a pointed follow-up: “Do you believe in science? Because I do.”

.........

His response was predictably lackluster. After agreeing that “things thrown into our air, what is thrown into our water” affect the environment, he defended an “all of the above” energy strategy and stated his support for coal.
Later, because Chaffetz clearly lives in his own fantasy world and likes to deny the present reality right in front of himself, says the protesters were paid and it was an attempt to bully and intimidate. If he is so concerned about bullying, hopefully he will do his job and take on the bully-in-chief. But I doubt it, he has proven himself to be a flip-flopping shill over and over again.

jacobolus

11 Feb 2017, 22:20

Someone suggested he may want to investigate to make sure no child labor laws are being broken, with all the out-of-state 10-year-old paid protestors at his town hall meetings.

Why should 10-year-olds care about air pollution or toxic waste dumped in waterways, anyway? They should all be sitting inside studying the part of the bible where Jesus advocates deporting the poor, locking up the minor drug offenders for life, and handing public infrastructure over to oligarchs.

Kurplop

12 Feb 2017, 01:15

jacobolus wrote: Someone suggested he may want to investigate to make sure no child labor laws are being broken, with all the out-of-state 10-year-old paid protestors at his town hall meetings.

Why should 10-year-olds care about air pollution or toxic waste dumped in waterways, anyway? They should all be sitting inside studying the part of the bible where Jesus advocates deporting the poor, locking up the minor drug offenders for life, and handing public infrastructure over to oligarchs.

I missed that part in the Bible but I'm with you, Jacobolus. Parents and other authorities shouldn't be indoctrinating young children in their views about world affairs and civil morality until they are old enough to have the critical thinking skills to make their own decisions about such things.

I'm sure the children present at the town hall meeting came by bus after independently reading newspapers and scientific journals and arriving at their convictions without parental or teacher influence.

jacobolus

12 Feb 2017, 01:48

What incredible “indoctrination”: quote, “Do you believe in science? Because I do.”

I can’t believe there are irresponsible parents out there who would brainwash their children into saying they believe in science. Those kids might grow up into scientists or engineers or architects or something horrible like that.
Parents and other authorities shouldn't be indoctrinating young children in their views about world affairs and civil morality until they are old enough to have the critical thinking skills to make their own decisions about such things.
I agree. You know what we especially shouldn’t do with children who have no critical thinking skills and who aren’t capable of even reading a newspaper, and don’t make their own decisions about anything? We shouldn’t elect children to the US presidency.

It’s not clear if Trump can (or has the patience to) read his own executive orders or the bullet-point one-page briefing papers he gets instead of the lengthy (dozens of pages long) memos typical in other administrations.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the ... a129eb6ed6

Is Trump functionally illiterate?
Last edited by jacobolus on 12 Feb 2017, 03:36, edited 5 times in total.

jacobolus

12 Feb 2017, 02:52

The Republicans found an illegal voter: a middle-aged Texas woman who was brought to the USA as an infant, is a US permanent resident (green card holder), and has four teenaged US citizen children as a single mother. She didn’t go to school past 6th grade and didn’t understand the difference between being a permanent resident and being a citizen, so voted (one time each) in a few elections. She is a registered Republican party member, and voted for Romney and for the Republican Texas AG.

Now she’ll go to prison for 8 years (costing the state $100,000+ per year) and then be deported, leaving her kids to fend for themselves (probably costing the state quite a bit more for foster care etc.).

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... RAUD_TEXAS
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... in-prison/

Trump’s claims about millions of fraudulent votes costing him the popular vote continue to be lies.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... raudulent/

Texas GOP: party of cruel spiteful racists.

User avatar
fohat
Elder Messenger

12 Feb 2017, 03:23

jacobolus wrote:
Texas GOP: party of cruel spiteful racists.
When Texas goes blue the country will be rid of its biggest and most virulent cancer.

jacobolus

12 Feb 2017, 09:21

Seems like even some conservative Mormons in Chaffetz’s district are fed up with him not even pretending to do his job as chairman of the House oversight committee, evidence of a categorical lack of moral virtue (something I hear some religious people care about), https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ce/516303/

jacobolus

12 Feb 2017, 16:14

Not implausible analysis, http://www.salon.com/2017/02/12/trumps- ... proves-it/
Trumpism is a movement built around the loss of privilege and perceived social status and a desire to re-create social hierarchy. It is one that requires its adherents to live in a state of constant fear and victimization. This mythology requires extensive ideological work and media filtering to remain true. Conservatives must create an ideological bubble in which crime is out of control (instead of hovering near historic lows), the rate of abortion is rising (instead of falling), refugees are committing terrorist attacks en masse (they aren’t at all) and immigrants are taking jobs (it’s the capitalists), all while the government is funneling money to undeserving black people (black people receive government support in accordance with their share of the population, despite making up a disproportionately large share of the poor). Conservatives, and many in the general public, believe that Muslims and immigrants (both legal and unauthorized) make up a dramatically larger share of the population than they actually do.
In other words, Trumpism (and far-right movements across Europe, etc.) are the result of a delusional constructed self-victimization by whites, used to justify ongoing abuse of others in the society. (Not necessarily constructed by themselves; what they have legitimately been victims of is a relentless propaganda campaign from the right.)

As shorthand, we might say Trump supporters have been thoroughly snowflaked, and are now being used.

Related WaPo editorial: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

Post Reply

Return to “Off-topic”