Are people losing there minds - Trump Presidency

[Aardvark154]

Wall for Mexico.
Banning Muslims.

So do you have a right to live in Germany? How about you said I'm not really violent, but I'm part of a group which doesn't believe in German values.

 

[Butler1000]

I doubt they will be able to sustain the "anger". The fundraisers will try but soon real life will take over. Work, family will start to take precedence. The supreme court nomination will be gotten rid of early.

And other things in the world will occur. That is what usually defines a lot of a presidency. How they react to crisis. Bloodshed and mayhem will stay on the mind far longer political appointments.

Honestly I doubt a case will even make its way to the Supreme Court about Abortion in his first term anyway.

 

[Butler1000]

He said no such thing. I just scanned the text of his speech again and I see no such statement at all. It's not there.

During the campaign he pledged to nominate only pro life justices and he provided the list from which he would choose. Many Christian pro lifers who otherwise despise Trump voted for him just for that reason. There's an open seat and his nominee to fill it is going to be pro life.

So yes he is working to take away the right to an abortion.

Best thing for the Dems to do is start organizing a better grassroots to take back state level seats. Losing 1000 of them in the last 8 years probably didn't help them at the federal level either.

I believe in abortion access as well. But democracy is in play here. That's US politics. State rights vs federal oversight. Come up with a law that will can't be overturned and the matter is solved.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Make America Strong Again, a lot of people liked the sound of that. Especially the lower classes. The middle and upper classes never thought Trump had a chance to win, many did not bother to even come out to vote. Even one year ago very few people thought that Trump even had a chance to be nominated the republican candidate to run for president.

Hillary's mistake was to try to show how unfit her opponent was rather than to convince the American public how qualified she was to take office.

Which was a next to impossible task for her. For while she and her supporters felt she was well qualified, huge segments of the electorate found her to be totally untrustworthy and to have a most unappealing personality. Even her supposed positives dredged up all sorts of unpleasantness for those who were not her die hard supporters.

It was I believe most would agree a race to the bottom in that race President Trump being a fresh face and having a message that I will turn things around was for many people the lesser of two evils.

Actually, I think people believed she was qualified in terms of experience.

Her real problem, I believe, was that she didn't give people in most of America a reason to vote for her. While Trump was promising to make America great again, Hillary's theme seemed to be "it's my turn."

The sense of entitlement actually worked against her, particularly when guys like Trump and Bernie Sanders (and many others on the left) were making an issue of Washington insiders and big-money consultants rigging the game in their favour.

 

[Frankfooter]

Actually, I think people believed she was qualified in terms of experience.

Her real problem, I believe, was that she didn't give people in most of America a reason to vote for her. While Trump was promising to make America great again, Hillary's theme seemed to be "it's my turn."

The sense of entitlement actually worked against her, particularly when guys like Trump and Bernie Sanders (and many others on the left) were making an issue of Washington insiders and big-money consultants rigging the game in their favour.

Clinton has lots of issues, true.
But she only lost because of Russian hacking of her emails.

 

[kono]

He said no such thing. I just scanned the text of his speech again and I see no such statement at all. It's not there.

During the campaign he pledged to nominate only pro life justices and he provided the list from which he would choose. Many Christian pro lifers who otherwise despise Trump voted for him just for that reason. There's an open seat and his nominee to fill it is going to be pro life.

So yes he is working to take away the right to an abortion.

Ok, Mr Fuji what else does your crystal ball say.. You're really a piece of work I tell ya. No wonder people on Terb get frustrated with you The fact of the mater he did say it. I watched his speech live unedited. Agree to disagree

Wall for Mexico.

I'm talking about women's rights here.

I never understood the big problem with the wall? You can't just let people cross over to the US through unprotected boarders. There are a lot of REAL threats to be concerned about. Drug cartels so violent they've decapitated police officers in broad day light.
This wall would allow them to screen EVERYONE coming into the US. What's wrong with that? "I say no to that".... "People should be allowed to sneak into the US undetected with good or bad intentions (guns, drugs, human trafficking)". To me it's more common sense then anything on the wall talk.

 

[MattRoxx]

I never understood the big problem with the wall? You can't just let people cross over to the US through unprotected boarders. There are a lot of REAL threats to be concerned about. Drug cartels so violent they've decapitated police officers in broad day light.
This wall would allow them to screen EVERYONE coming into the US. What's wrong with that? "I say no to that".... "People should be allowed to sneak into the US undetected with good or bad intentions (guns, drugs, human trafficking)". To me it's more common sense then anything on the wall talk.

Wow. The wall was election rhetoric, and you fell for it.

A Wall Alone Can’t Secure the Border, No Matter Who Pays for Ithttps://www.wired.com/2017/01/wall-alone-cant-secure-border-no-matter-pays/

...But regardless of how you feel about Trump’s plans to secure the border, experts agree on at least one thing: He’s doing it wrong.

A wall helps to an extent. But it’s limited at best, impractical at worst, and impressively expensive. While focusing so narrowly on a physical barrier may have been politically expedient, it belies the technological innovations and staffing solutions that have actually worked for US Customs and Border Protection.

Not-So-Great Wall
As it turns out, there’s no universal solution to securing the southwest border, or any border for that matter. For starters, topographical constraints on the 2,000-mile US-Mexico border make it difficult to erect any physical structure all the way across. Trump himself acknowledges that his wall would cover more like half the total distance. Then there’s the cost. The US has already spent $7 billion on 700 miles of border fencing in recent years. Replacing or augmenting that existing divide with a literal wall would cost as much as $25 billion, according to an estimate last summer by AllianceBernstein analysts.

“The really key part is that a wall or a fence or any type of physical barrier only works in conjunction with other tools,” says Christopher Wilson, the deputy director of the Mexico Institute at the Wilson Center who specializes in border and immigration issues. “It’s a nice one-liner and it sells well as a sort of silver bullet solution to our complex border problems, but it doesn’t work that way. In reality if you don’t have someone behind the wall then people just climb over it or cut through it or do whatever they need to do to avoid it.” And if building thousands of miles of wall sounds expensive, imagine what it would cost to staff a comprehensive, 24-hour patrol.

In fact, replacing fencing—which border patrol officers can see through—with a presumably opaque, concrete wall makes the all-important surveillance aspect harder, not easier. As David Bier, an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, noted in November, “At a basic level, a wall or fence can never stop illegal immigration because a wall or fence cannot apprehend anyone.”
...
“The concept of a wall as a solution to border security problems is very much based on an antiquated notion of what a border is,” the Wilson Center’s Wilson says. “A wall is a huge symbol of division between our two countries, and that’s dangerous at a time when we need to engage Mexico as a partner in our border security more than ever.”

 

[fuji]

Ok, Mr Fuji what else does your crystal ball say..

Don't get lippy, you were the one who got caught making false claims. You said that Trump expressed support for a woman's right to choose in the inaugural speech so I went and googled for the full text of the speech: he said no such thing.

He did campaign on a promise to appoint judges who would overturn Roe v Wade, and he provided to the pro life organizations the list of names from which he would nominate a judge so that they could verify his choices.

Unlike your made up claim I can prove that with references, and when he names a judge from that list you will be proven utterly wrong.

So now your primary claim has been refuted. You said no rights were being taken away, but rights are being taken away.

You're really a piece of work I tell ya. No wonder people on Terb get frustrated with you The fact of the mater he did say it. I watched his speech live unedited. Agree to disagree

Prove it. I'm not going to agree to disagree, the full text is online and the full unedited speech on YouTube.

Nothing stops you from finding the quote other than the simple fact that it never happened.

.
I never understood the big problem with the wall?

Of course you don't, you never spent the time to educate yourself about the issue. Hardly any Trump supporters do. So let me help you, it's simple really:

It will be fantastically expensive, Mexico isn't going to pay for it, and it will accomplish nothing.

We can look deeper into each of those points if you are unable to see why it will be so expensive, why Mexico will refuse to pay, and why it's not going to do anything that existing fencing doesn't already do.

 

[kono]

Wow. The wall was election rhetoric, and you fell for it.

You got me hook line and sinker....
Maybe you should read what I wrote again. I'll make it easy for you "This wall would allow them to screen ****EVERYONE**** coming into the US."
Wait a sec, isn't that how Canadians get into the US?

 

[kono]

Don't get lippy, you were the one who got caught making false claims. You said that Trump expressed support for a woman's right to choose in the inaugural speech so I went and googled for the full text of the speech: he said no such thing.

He did campaign on a promise to appoint judges who would overturn Roe v Wade, and he provided to the pro life organizations the list of names from which he would nominate a judge so that they could verify his choices.

Unlike your made up claim I can prove that with references, and when he names a judge from that list you will be proven utterly wrong.

So now your primary claim has been refuted. You said no rights were being taken away, but rights are being taken away.



Prove it. I'm not going to agree to disagree, the full text is online and the full unedited speech on YouTube.

Nothing stops you from finding the quote other than the simple fact that it never happened.



Of course you don't, you never spent the time to educate yourself about the issue. Hardly any Trump supporters do. So let me help you, it's simple really:

It will be fantastically expensive, Mexico isn't going to pay for it, and it will accomplish nothing.

We can look deeper into each of those points if you are unable to see why it will be so expensive, why Mexico will refuse to pay, and why it's not going to do anything that existing fencing doesn't already do.

He did say it in one of his recent speech. I thought it was his in inauguration speech. So I'll give you that one seeing as how I can't find it. I still stand by what I herd. I guess we'll see what actually happens over the course of these few months. If he does take away there right to chose, that would be a blow to women's rights for sure.

The wall - Fuji's getting lippy now, fair enough I completely deserved that one.
I'm not debating on how expensive it'll be or how they're going to get Mexico to pay for it.
I'm talking about (if and when they build it) they'll able to screen EVERYONE who steps foot into the US.

 

[fuji]

He did say it in one of his recent speech. I thought it was his in inauguration speech.

When he appoints a judge from the list of anti abortion judges he provided during the campaign you should log on to terb and agree that the Women's Marchers have a legitimate concern their rights are being taken away.

 

[Smallcock]

Wow. The wall was election rhetoric, and you fell for it.

Hey genius, Border Patrol supports TRUMP.

Quoting some half-wit journalist's opinions about border security doesn't quite cut it. Leave it to the experts - the people who are actually responsible for that security 24/7.

 

[Aardvark154]

Clinton has lots of issues, true.
But she only lost because of Russian hacking of her emails.

Actually most of her e-mails were released under court order right in the U.S.

 

[Frankfooter]

Actually most of her e-mails were released under court order right in the U.S.

Yes, redacted they were released.
As opposed to Trump's taxes, for instance, which he says he'll never release.

 

[Aardvark154]

Yes, redacted they were released.
As opposed to Trump's taxes, for instance, which he says he'll never release.

Pecular in both Canada and the United States I was under the peculiar impression that income tax information is confidential.

 

[oldjones]

Actually, I think people believed she was qualified in terms of experience.

Her real problem, I believe, was that she didn't give people in most of America a reason to vote for her. While Trump was promising to make America great again, Hillary's theme seemed to be "it's my turn."

The sense of entitlement actually worked against her, particularly when guys like Trump and Bernie Sanders (and many others on the left) were making an issue of Washington insiders and big-money consultants rigging the game in their favour.

Trouble with all that analysis is that she out-polled Trump.

 

[OnTheWayOut]

Clinton has lots of issues, true.
But she only lost because of Russian hacking of her emails.

ONLY???? Come on, we disagree a lot but you can't possibly believe that. There's dozens of reasons or more why she lost, that accusation is just one of them.

 

[OnTheWayOut]

Trouble with all that analysis is that she out-polled Trump.

When I was visiting PA recently I talked to a lot of folks who also voted for Trump. While it was not an advertised plan, a sort of grass roots movement was in place that when they got a call from a pollster, they either said they were voting for HRC or would not answer. In effect they helped skew the polls towards HRC, helping give her false confidence. While it wasn't a highly organized plan, it was shared by like minded people and it was not only in one state as the results would indicate. Which takes me back to October when I saw all those Trump signs (and only 1 HRC sign, except Hilary for Prison signs) and several here laughed at me. Ha!

 

[oldjones]

When I was visiting PA recently I talked to a lot of folks who also voted for Trump. While it was not an advertised plan, a sort of grass roots movement was in place that when they got a call from a pollster, they either said they were voting for HRC or would not answer. In effect they helped skew the polls towards HRC, helping give her false confidence. While it wasn't a highly organized plan, it was shared by like minded people and it was not only in one state as the results would indicate. Which takes me back to October when I saw all those Trump signs (and only 1 HRC sign, except Hilary for Prison signs) and several here laughed at me. Ha!

Are you still fixated on those meaningless telephone surveys slurp? They're useless except for pros to scam with, and they use huge helpings of salt themselves whenever they hafta swallow a new one.

She out-polled Trump in the one and only real poll. By three million real votes cast by real people who really showed up. That's why it's untrue to say most of America didn't buy her message.

 

[OnTheWayOut]

Are you still fixated on those meaningless telephone surveys slurp? They're useless except for pros to scam with, and they use huge helpings of salt themselves whenever they hafta swallow a new one.

She out-polled Trump in the one and only real poll. By three million real votes cast by real people who really showed up. That's why it's untrue to say most of America didn't buy her message.

Still fixated? This is the first I ever mentioned the phone surveys that I remember.

But Trump decisively out polled HRC in the ONLY poll that counts, the electoral college, 306-232. Not even close. Trump won 2,622 counties to Hilary's 490, a sound thrashing indeed!