Donald Trump and US politics

"

pneuma wrote:

Meanwhile, NYT says Democrats may have bitten off more than they can chew.
(n.b. yeah yeah, I know that the NYT has an extreme pro-Trump bias*)

If only they had waited for actual evidence before turning the dial up to 11?...

It just feels like everyone wants to "be a part of history" nowadays. I guess for a generation of people that feel impotent in the face of the 2008 bank bailouts, rising costs and the weakening of the USD, anything is better than just sitting around crying.

*

Kappa

Both sides have been screaming treason and impeachment at every scandal for longer then anyone in this thread has been alive. These things rarely hurt the side doing the accusing. If anything they usually help rally the base and force the opposition into defense and mistakes. Maybe it feels different because of the 24 hour news cycle.

Not sure you mean weakening USD? Its be surging for awhile now.

Impeachment, much like collusion, is a buzz-word used to stir up hope in the ignorant that their side can still win the 2016 election. =^[.]^=

"

Raycheetah wrote:

Impeachment, much like collusion, is a buzz-word used to stir up hope in the ignorant that their side can still win the 2016 election. =^[.]^=

yeah and instead of building up some strong arguments they are just continuing in their false narrative that everyone knows is just fake. They are literally giving 2020 election to Trump.

Like they could try to build up a solide and reasonable argument such as.... "the wall will cost too much and will never help" and then you support that with some graphics.

But no... they continue with their buzzword and Russianophobia stories.

Proving that the wall is a ridiculous idea has already been done multiple times, with projections and the likes. Yet, a huge amount of Trump supporters are dismissing it as "fake" and simply refuse to acknowledge the data. If these people are dismissing climate change with an alarmingly high amount of data that correlate the theory, do you think they will acknowledge the projection of the effects (or rather, lack of positives effects) that building a giant wall will do?

"

faerwin wrote:

Proving that the wall is a ridiculous idea has already been done multiple times, with projections and the likes. Yet, a huge amount of Trump supporters are dismissing it as "fake" and simply refuse to acknowledge the data. If these people are dismissing climate change with an alarmingly high amount of data that correlate the theory, do you think they will acknowledge the projection of the effects (or rather, lack of positives effects) that building a giant wall will do?

no actually the only argument I've heard so far was "it's racist".... I'm talking about a real argument to convince people. I'm not dismissing anything here, because no data has ever been provided.

We had the same discussion in Europe when the refugee crisis started. Leftists preached that walls and fences don't work and are racist. The Balkans didn't give a fuck and built fences. Refugee numbers plummeted.

"

soneka101 wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

1. There were numerous, bipartisan reasons to fire Comey. Read Rod Rosenstein's memo on the topic. (Rosenstein's salty that Trump made the memo public; he intended it to remain internal.)

Yeah... let's just pretend Trump didn't say what he did before. After all, it's not what Trump says that matters, is what is in his heart <3

Beyond hypocrisy. Trump's termination letter to Comey mentions the Rosenstein memo explicitly and includes it as an attachment. We have a very clear case of Trump pointing to the reasons for the firing, and yet you insist on ignoring those statements and parsing words from his campaign instead. What is in his heart, ha!

"

soneka101 wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

2. Firing Comey is not firing the FBI. They're​ a massive organization, personnel changes don't impact projects like that. It didn't kill any investigations, therefore, it was not obstruction of justice to fire Comey. (Firing a Special Prosecutor a la Nixon is different.)

Then he should have just fired Comey and replaced him with Devin Nunes, am I right? It's not like would change anything right?

Comey was replaced by the next in succession at the FBI; Trump didn't replace Comey, the system did. When Trump does replace him, the nominee will require Senate confirmation as most major appointments do. There isn't abuse here.

"

Xavderion wrote:

dude you should become his campaign manager for 2020

"

diablofdb wrote:

dude you should become his campaign manager for 2020

I didn't make this tbh