Page 12 of 13

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 1:37 pm
by pudgejeff
Duck07 wrote:
pudgejeff wrote:
Duck07 wrote:Funny that all the people wanting to leave the U.S. want to go to Canda and not Mexico.

Not funny all the rioting going on and it's foundation of hatred for those they disagree with.
Why is it funny? Seems to make perfect sense to me, care to extrapolate on your thoughts?
One of the foundational tenets of Trump's plan is to build a wall with Mexico. So many of those people upset with him use that as one of their first critiques against him yet none of them want to go to the warm, tropical environment but the wet and frigid environment because it's more stable. I find that hilarious. If the choice was say Cuba or Canada, I'd know where I'd be going.

The appropriate response was that of Lin Manuel Marada: F that. I love this country...
You find it hilarious that the people that don't want build a wall to keep people trying to go from a struggling country ours would choose not to go to said country? You make zero sense. Why would they choose to go there?

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:39 pm
by Duck07
pudgejeff wrote:
Duck07 wrote:
pudgejeff wrote:
Duck07 wrote:Funny that all the people wanting to leave the U.S. want to go to Canda and not Mexico.

Not funny all the rioting going on and it's foundation of hatred for those they disagree with.
Why is it funny? Seems to make perfect sense to me, care to extrapolate on your thoughts?
One of the foundational tenets of Trump's plan is to build a wall with Mexico. So many of those people upset with him use that as one of their first critiques against him yet none of them want to go to the warm, tropical environment but the wet and frigid environment because it's more stable. I find that hilarious. If the choice was say Cuba or Canada, I'd know where I'd be going.

The appropriate response was that of Lin Manuel Marada: F that. I love this country...
You find it hilarious that the people that don't want build a wall to keep people trying to go from a struggling country ours would choose not to go to said country? You make zero sense. Why would they choose to go there?
Yes, I do find it funny that those people that threaten to leave the country don't want to go to Mexico but instead Canada. Maybe they don't want to worry about cartel violence, being kidnapped etc. yet enforcing immigration and border laws is a problem for them amongst the issues they have with trump. Yet if you go ask those same people about the heroin problem in this country they've all got bleeding hearts. Where do they think a lot of it is coming from?

I'm all for building a wall but that's for the future water wars that are coming.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:54 pm
by woundedknees
Duck07 wrote:
pudgejeff wrote:
Duck07 wrote:
pudgejeff wrote:
Duck07 wrote:Funny that all the people wanting to leave the U.S. want to go to Canda and not Mexico.

Not funny all the rioting going on and it's foundation of hatred for those they disagree with.
Why is it funny? Seems to make perfect sense to me, care to extrapolate on your thoughts?
One of the foundational tenets of Trump's plan is to build a wall with Mexico. So many of those people upset with him use that as one of their first critiques against him yet none of them want to go to the warm, tropical environment but the wet and frigid environment because it's more stable. I find that hilarious. If the choice was say Cuba or Canada, I'd know where I'd be going.

The appropriate response was that of Lin Manuel Marada: F that. I love this country...
You find it hilarious that the people that don't want build a wall to keep people trying to go from a struggling country ours would choose not to go to said country? You make zero sense. Why would they choose to go there?
Yes, I do find it funny that those people that threaten to leave the country don't want to go to Mexico but instead Canada. Maybe they don't want to worry about cartel violence, being kidnapped etc. yet enforcing immigration and border laws is a problem for them amongst the issues they have with trump. Yet if you go ask those same people about the heroin problem in this country they've all got bleeding hearts. Where do they think a lot of it is coming from?

I'm all for building a wall but that's for the future water wars that are coming.
Funny thing is, Canada has considerably stiffer immigration rules than the US, AND they enforce them.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 7:29 pm
by FlDuckFan
Duck07 wrote:I don't so no worries. That's an also more of a conjecture since neither had the nomination and we can't say what would have happened.

One thing I hope people will understand is a quote from Jimmy Carter about Trump and his ability to change his mind. If you can give him a good reason, he will change his thinking. An idea that might appeal to him as an example, while most of the left wants no part in fracking or oil drilling, the right is typically full steam ahead. When I say that I don't want to take any of our oil out until we can fly fighter jets with something other than oil and we should suck everyone else dry, most of the right starts to develop a different notion and if you present it to him like that, he's probably more understanding of the other aspects, like clean water.

I just heard a great piece on NPR where a female Muslim immigrant had to explain that she was more worried about actual Islamic extremism than rhetoric about Donald because she felt that the left's refusal to acknowledge the issue for fear of PC reprisal was getting in the way of finding the middle ground by refusing to call it a problem.

There's plenty of common ground to be had on many issues, we have to be patient and mature enough to fully listen to and understand the issues from the other side. It's good to learn to play Devil's Advocate to challenge yourself.


I'm glad someone pointed this out.... I think the biggest thing missing from most politicians is the ability to change on their stances when given more information and reasoning. I know I'm not right about everything and neither is anyone else. I hope Trump has that ability , he seems to.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:30 am
by StevensTechU
rentdodger1 wrote:
Yeah, all those disaffected middle age voters from the upper midwest/rural areas would be breaking the door down to vote for northeastern liberals :roll: . Pretty naive take.
Just to correct the record, Warren's career took her to Massachusetts, but she's actually from Oklahoma.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 9:49 am
by StevensTechU
Re: Wall, I actually found myself thinking about it this morning. My inclination is that building a wall between the United States and brown Mexico and not mostly-white Canada tells you a little bit about the underlying motivations. Can terrorists not travel north? In my opinion, immigrants are largely responsible for keeping this country's economic engine moving. How many new companies are started by, or old companies are re-born with at the helm, somebody who's family migrated to the United States in the last 3-4 decades? Want to know how you continue to out-perform China and India for decades to come? Poach their top talent by bringing them into the United States and exposing them to a place that they feel safe, welcome, and want to raise kids.

I thoroughly understand the reasons for creating stronger borders. I personally want stronger borders but more pathways to American citizenship, as explained above. I'd sum up my reasons for being anti-wall as 1) $20 billion doesn't show up out of thin air, and if I got to spend it, I'd start by reimbursing the soldiers and veterans in California who are getting f'd out of their reinlistment bonuses, and then move on to education, infrastructure, and other domestic needs instead of a wall. 2) There are major logistical issues in that it's going to be a major issue for people living near the border, and a lot of people are going to lose homes when the government exercises its "eminent domain" over their properties to put a big wall up. 3) Foreign diplomacy took a major step forward during the Obama administration, and this would begin a big step back. 4) A wall is ineffective, and the return on investment would be negative.

Edit: Just one other thing to note- the rates of "Unauthorized Immigration" are the lowest they've been in 30 years.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 10:21 am
by Phalanx
StevensTechU wrote:3) Foreign diplomacy took a major step forward during the Obama administration, and this would begin a big step back.
:lol:

I'm hoping you mean specifically with Mexico, rather than foreign diplomacy in general.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 10:24 am
by StevensTechU
Phalanx wrote:
StevensTechU wrote:3) Foreign diplomacy took a major step forward during the Obama administration, and this would begin a big step back.
:lol:

I'm hoping you mean specifically with Mexico, rather than foreign diplomacy in general.
No. I mean that if you talk to people from around the world, they tell you that for the first time in their lives they feel like the U.S. comes to the table on issues.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 11:00 am
by Phalanx
StevensTechU wrote:
No. I mean that if you talk to people from around the world, they tell you that for the first time in their lives they feel like the U.S. comes to the table on issues.
Right. As long as those people aren't from Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, Turkey, England, and Israel. Other than those, everything is just peachy. I'm sure the fact that he created ISIS and allowed them to march all over the Middle East will be forgotten. Doubtless Germany, Spain, and Brazil have also forgiven him after Wikileaks revealed he was spying on them as well. After all, Cuban cigars are legal again. That is HUGE.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 12:02 pm
by StevensTechU
Phalanx wrote:
StevensTechU wrote:
No. I mean that if you talk to people from around the world, they tell you that for the first time in their lives they feel like the U.S. comes to the table on issues.
Right. As long as those people aren't from Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, Turkey, England, and Israel. Other than those, everything is just peachy. I'm sure the fact that he created ISIS and allowed them to march all over the Middle East will be forgotten. Doubtless Germany has also forgiven him after Wikileaks revealed he was spying on them as well. After all, Cuban cigars are legal again. That is HUGE.
Great point. What a failure that this administration hasn't solved world peace.

I'm curious why you think English, Chinese, Afghanies, and Iraqies have more disdain for America currently than they had in 2007. The "Obama invented ISIS" trope kind of signals that you need to read less Breitbart.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 12:32 pm
by Phalanx
StevensTechU wrote:
Great point. What a failure that this administration hasn't solved world peace.

I'm curious why you think English, Chinese, Afghanies, and Iraqies have more disdain for America currently than they had in 2007.
Obama bombed seven countries. started and funded ISIS which is now spreading to Southeast Asia and northern Africa, and blew up secular governments in Libya, Egypt, and Syria, while attempting to do so in Turkey. So weird that this strategy didn't solve world peace. I can't understand it.

Telling British citizens that they would lose their 'special relationship' with the U.S. if they voted for Brexit was also a nice touch.

As for China, one could go on and on. The aggressive move away from the petrodollar, driving them into the arms of Russia, the Warships in the South China Sea, the U.S. bond sell-off...an then of course, there was this:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... val-at-g20


I'm not all that concerned with how an American president polls in other countries, but bombing them and systematically trying to create unrest in entire regions is not exactly what I would call a foreign policy triumph.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:44 pm
by StevensTechU
Phalanx wrote:
Obama bombed seven countries. started and funded ISIS which is now spreading to Southeast Asia and northern Africa, and blew up secular governments in Libya, Egypt, and Syria, while attempting to do so in Turkey. So weird that this strategy didn't solve world peace. I can't understand it.

Telling British citizens that they would lose their 'special relationship' with the U.S. if they voted for Brexit was also a nice touch.

As for China, one could go on and on. The aggressive move away from the petrodollar, driving them into the arms of Russia, the Warships in the South China Sea, the U.S. bond sell-off...an then of course, there was this:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ ... val-at-g20

I'm not all that concerned with how an American president polls in other countries, but bombing them and systematically trying to create unrest in entire regions is not exactly what I would call a foreign policy triumph.
Oh yes, the "Obama founded ISIS" claim. If ever there was a signature to one reading ultra-right opinion outlet Breitbart, that's probably it. Well, that, or claiming birth control makes women fat, sex-craved and irrational. Lets consider what happened that led to the rise of ISIS, courtesy of FactCheck.org:

1- The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
2- The decisions by the U.S.-led provisional coalition government in 2003 to disband the Iraqi army and dissolve and ban the Baath Party, which drove Sunnis into militant groups.
3- The rule of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, whose Shia government further ostracized Sunnis. “By disbanding the army and making the Baath party illegal and putting in power a Shiite like Maliki, you alienated and radicalized the Sunnis, and gave rise to ISIS in the process,” Haykel told us.
4- The withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by Dec. 31, 2011 — a date set by an agreement with the Iraqi government that was signed by President Bush in 2008, and left unchanged by the Obama administration.
5- The weakening of the Iraqi army, which abandoned posts in 2014 rather than fight ISIS.
6- The Syrian civil war, which began in 2011. “This is really all about Syria,” Watts told us. “That provided the space for ISIS to rise.” The conflict inspired foreign fighters, and if it wasn’t ISIS moving into Syria, it would be some other jihadist group, he said.

I hate when facts get in the way of narratives, don't you?

Edit: full article for anybody who wants to read- http://www.factcheck.org/2016/08/trumps ... isis-link/

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 2:21 pm
by rentdodger1
Phalanx wrote:
rentdodger1 wrote:
Where am I whining? Just stating a fact. Cubs-Indians run analogy.......uh ok. Your the first I have seen compare the federal election to a 7 game World Series, can you link the ''many places" that reference was used?

Also the Electoral College amendment/alteration would require a little more than a "discussion" and participant agreement.

The result has little impact one way or another for me, how about you if Trump doesn't deliver?

What I am concerned about is the opportunity to succeed that a majority of the young people(many on this board) will get going forward. We baby boomers have had our chances and many blew it. It isn't me that cast the "whine-life is so unfair vote" and Trump will save us.

You also seem to conveniently leave out the "whiney" Trump narrative that the system was rigged(including the EC) against him before election was even held.

I am man enough to come back in a year if Trump is delivering on his promises to say I was wrong. How about you if Trump reneges on his promises of a chicken in every pot?

Trump's history sure doesn't indicate he is a man of his word.
Are you serious? I will guarantee you right now Trump will not deliver on his promises. First you have to identify which promises, since he was often on both sides of every issue. I was not a Trump supporter (although I am glad Hillary didn't win).

I think the world series thing is a good metaphor, I just wanted to make sure nobody thought i made it up since it has been circulating on social media. The point is, popular vote was never the goal, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to act like this election should have been decided that way.
Sorry to interrupt the mouse wheel back and forth between you and STU but I don't live on message boards and this is the last word for me and I'm out on the politics:

So you ask if I'm serious and then like a parrot make my point that Trump won't deliver on his promises....ok great we agree.

Even the self-described constitutional federalist Newt Gingrich would have rolled his eyes at your " EC candidate discussion and participation agreement" before the election.

Come up with your own metaphors, the one you trumpeted is pretty baseless.

Hope you put as much passion into your job and life as you do with winning at message board politics.

Sorry, got to run.........late for my all important frozen turkey bowling lesson.

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 2:56 pm
by Phalanx
StevensTechU wrote:
Oh yes, the "Obama founded ISIS" claim. If ever there was a signature to one reading ultra-right opinion outlet Breitbart, that's probably it. Well, that, or claiming birth control makes women fat, sex-craved and irrational. Lets consider what happened that led to the rise of ISIS, courtesy of FactCheck.org:

1- The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
2- The decisions by the U.S.-led provisional coalition government in 2003 to disband the Iraqi army and dissolve and ban the Baath Party, which drove Sunnis into militant groups.
3- The rule of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, whose Shia government further ostracized Sunnis. “By disbanding the army and making the Baath party illegal and putting in power a Shiite like Maliki, you alienated and radicalized the Sunnis, and gave rise to ISIS in the process,” Haykel told us.
4- The withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by Dec. 31, 2011 — a date set by an agreement with the Iraqi government that was signed by President Bush in 2008, and left unchanged by the Obama administration.
5- The weakening of the Iraqi army, which abandoned posts in 2014 rather than fight ISIS.
6- The Syrian civil war, which began in 2011. “This is really all about Syria,” Watts told us. “That provided the space for ISIS to rise.” The conflict inspired foreign fighters, and if it wasn’t ISIS moving into Syria, it would be some other jihadist group, he said.

I hate when facts get in the way of narratives, don't you?
At this point, anyone who doesn't know that the CIA and MI6, after Assad had in 2009 nixed a long-held goal of a Gulf-to-Europe pipeline through Syria that would vastly decrease European dependence on Russian and Iranian natural gas and oil, and after Obama's attempts to convince Congress to support an attack on Assad over trumped-up sarin gas charges failed, took a small band of anti-Assad rebels in Syria that included elements of Al Qaeda, provided them with funding, arms, and training and then sat back and allowed them free reign in Iraq and Syria until they became the world organization they are today is either completely ignorant of foreign affairs, or dedicated to carrying water for the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton. I have never read Breitbart on the matter, but I am sure they were late to the party as most of the media was.
You will likely not read any of this, but I will provide it anyway in case anyone is interested. Most of these articles have links to other articles that also include primary documents and testimony from witnesses. At a minimum, you are now without excuse for your ignorance, and you can take your place with the folks who still believe there were WMD's in Iraq.

https://levantreport.com/2014/09/13/isi ... e-to-date/

https://levantreport.com/2015/05/19/201 ... an-regime/

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-2 ... dent-assad

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... syria-iraq

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m- ... e-rat-line

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -pipelines

Re: Election 2016

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 3:32 pm
by StevensTechU
Anything offered by legitimate news sources, I'm more than happy to read. Like how you posted a source showing tax receipts going up nominally and I looked it over and pointed out you provided proof they're going down as a percentage of our incomes. I'll read over at least the two articles here by The Guardian.