Let's drop the euphemisms: Donald Trump is a racist president
- Thread starter bver_hunter
- Start date
That isn't what he asked. You made a clear prediction. He asked you for a bet. Are you a wee bit unsure now?
Given my history betting with loony right wingers, with the moviefan climate bet that he lost and reneged on, I don't have a lot of trust that other loony right wingers would keep their word.
So I'd offer to put boober on the same bet with Phil, that Trump will be gone by the end of the year, but don't want to have to keep track of two bets or bet with high terms with two people I fully expect won't keep their words.
So will you take my bet or not? Simple yes or no, I don't care whoever else you have a bet with and what the terms are.
I'll bet you that Trump will be gone by the end of the year, winner picks the loser's signature picture of their choice for a month.
Those are the terms with Phil, I'm not taking a second bet with different terms.
But you seem so sure in your prediction? Why not go all in? Especially if you have convinced yourself of the outcome and with such conviction?
Is my bet too much of a stretch goal for you perhaps?
GOP Senator Defects, Sinks Trump Judicial Nominee With History of Racist Writing:
Ryan Bounds’ nomination to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was derailed on Thursday when South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott announced he could not support the nominee because of his history of racist writing.
Donald Trump nominated Bounds, who currently serves as an assistant U.S. attorney, to the 9th Circuit in September. A staunch conservative, immigration hardliner, and member of the Federalist Society, Bounds appeared to be coasting to an easy confirmation until the liberal group Alliance for Justice uncovered bigoted statements he made as a Stanford student in the 1990s. Among other inflammatory claims, Bounds wrote that:
• multicultural groups on campus “divide up by race for their feel-good ethnic hoedowns.”
• “race-focused groups” should be abolished, as the “existence of ethnic organizations is no inevitable prerequisite to maintaining a diverse community—white students, after all, seem to be doing all right without an Aryan Student Union.”
• “strident racial factions in the student body … seem always to contribute more to restricting consciousness, aggravating intolerance, and pigeonholing cultural identities than many a Nazi bookburning.”
• some campus communities think that the “opponent” is “the white male and his coterie of meanspirited lackeys: ‘oreos,’ ‘twinkies,’ ‘coconuts,’ and the like.”
• “Expelling students [found guilty of rape] is probably not going to contribute a great deal toward a rape victim’s recovery; there is no moral imperative to risk egregious error in doing so.”
Bounds did not disclose these past statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee. After they came to light, he apologized for his “obnoxious tone and misguided sentiments.” That, apparently, satisfied the committee’s Republicans, who approved his nomination on a party line vote. Ever since, the two Democratic senators from Bounds’ home state of Oregan have struggled to peel off the single Senate Republican necessary to sink his nomination. (With John McCain absent indefinitely, the chamber is divided 50–49.) On Wednesday, they succeeded, as Scott declared his opposition to Bounds. Sen. Marco Rubio quickly joined him, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell withdrew the nomination.
A handful of Republican senators, John Kennedy chief among them, have balked in the past over Trump’s more questionable nominees. Kennedy successfully tanked the nomination of Brett Talley (who appears to have defended the first KKK), Jeff Mateer (who called transgender children evidence of “Satan’s plan”), and Matthew Petersen (who flubbed a basic law quiz). But none of these nominees ever reached a floor vote, as an embarrassed White House quietly yanked their nominations before they reached that stage. Talley, Mateer, and Petersen were notable exceptions to Trump’s successful effort to stack the courts with dogmatic conservatives. Thanks to Republican cooperation, the president has already appointed 23 judges to the courts of appeals and 20 district court judges, far outpacing his predecessors.
Bounds is the first Trump judicial nominee to fail to get approval on the Senate floor, an outcome that will undoubtedly empower Democrats steeling themselves for the fight over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. But the reason for Bounds’ ouster is more telling than the ouster itself. Unless they can uncover flagrant racism in the nominee’s past, Senate Democrats shouldn’t expect an eleventh hour defection to save them from a Justice Kavanaugh.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-donald-trumps-nomination-of-ryan-bounds.html
Ryan Bounds’ nomination to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was derailed on Thursday when South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott announced he could not support the nominee because of his history of racist writing.
Donald Trump nominated Bounds, who currently serves as an assistant U.S. attorney, to the 9th Circuit in September. A staunch conservative, immigration hardliner, and member of the Federalist Society, Bounds appeared to be coasting to an easy confirmation until the liberal group Alliance for Justice uncovered bigoted statements he made as a Stanford student in the 1990s. Among other inflammatory claims, Bounds wrote that:
• multicultural groups on campus “divide up by race for their feel-good ethnic hoedowns.”
• “race-focused groups” should be abolished, as the “existence of ethnic organizations is no inevitable prerequisite to maintaining a diverse community—white students, after all, seem to be doing all right without an Aryan Student Union.”
• “strident racial factions in the student body … seem always to contribute more to restricting consciousness, aggravating intolerance, and pigeonholing cultural identities than many a Nazi bookburning.”
• some campus communities think that the “opponent” is “the white male and his coterie of meanspirited lackeys: ‘oreos,’ ‘twinkies,’ ‘coconuts,’ and the like.”
• “Expelling students [found guilty of rape] is probably not going to contribute a great deal toward a rape victim’s recovery; there is no moral imperative to risk egregious error in doing so.”
Bounds did not disclose these past statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee. After they came to light, he apologized for his “obnoxious tone and misguided sentiments.” That, apparently, satisfied the committee’s Republicans, who approved his nomination on a party line vote. Ever since, the two Democratic senators from Bounds’ home state of Oregan have struggled to peel off the single Senate Republican necessary to sink his nomination. (With John McCain absent indefinitely, the chamber is divided 50–49.) On Wednesday, they succeeded, as Scott declared his opposition to Bounds. Sen. Marco Rubio quickly joined him, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell withdrew the nomination.
A handful of Republican senators, John Kennedy chief among them, have balked in the past over Trump’s more questionable nominees. Kennedy successfully tanked the nomination of Brett Talley (who appears to have defended the first KKK), Jeff Mateer (who called transgender children evidence of “Satan’s plan”), and Matthew Petersen (who flubbed a basic law quiz). But none of these nominees ever reached a floor vote, as an embarrassed White House quietly yanked their nominations before they reached that stage. Talley, Mateer, and Petersen were notable exceptions to Trump’s successful effort to stack the courts with dogmatic conservatives. Thanks to Republican cooperation, the president has already appointed 23 judges to the courts of appeals and 20 district court judges, far outpacing his predecessors.
Bounds is the first Trump judicial nominee to fail to get approval on the Senate floor, an outcome that will undoubtedly empower Democrats steeling themselves for the fight over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. But the reason for Bounds’ ouster is more telling than the ouster itself. Unless they can uncover flagrant racism in the nominee’s past, Senate Democrats shouldn’t expect an eleventh hour defection to save them from a Justice Kavanaugh.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-donald-trumps-nomination-of-ryan-bounds.html
Because right wingers on this board aren't trustworthy.
I bet and beat moviefan but he refused to honour the terms of the bet.
I'm pretty sure you'll just whine and try to find some reason why you think you didn't lose as well.
The smaller terms just makes it that much more likely that you'd honour the bet.
(though I still doubt you would)
First off, I'm not moviefan and have no idea about whatever history you are referring to.
Can you stop your assumptions and predictions about what I will or won't do and while you're at it, stop painting everyone who doesn't share your views with the same brush?
Maybe for just a minute, stop being a fence-sitting leftist and either take my bet or don't.
Unlike you, I am fully confident he will remain POTUS until the end of the year and I'm not afraid to stand by that statement.
If you are so confident in your prediction then why not go all in?
Or are the larger terms something you wouldn't honour and you are deflecting that onto other people?
I told you, I don't trust the right wingers on this board, so why would I take a bet knowing that while I'd hold my end you probably wouldn't?
Why risk high terms with someone I don't trust to be honest?
You can take my bet or not.
Risk?
I thought you were certain he wouldn't make it to the end of the year based on how you spew your educated opinion?
Doesn't matter what the terms are...you seem convinced and spray these threads with your predictions.
So are you doubting yourself now?
Otherwise, what difference does it make what the terms are if you know you are right?
It's always about Hillary, right Boober?
No matter how much Trump fucks up, the Boober answer is "What about Hillary?" You're the king of whataboutee-diddle.
Tell you what, Jiffy. If you can get moviefan to admit he lost the climate change bet and to hold to the terms, I'll talk to boober.
Until then it just shows that betting with the righties here is untrustworthy.
