I'll take what I can get
Trump General Discussion V
- Thread starter Diemen
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
The Trump-friendly, extreme right terrorist who attacked the mosque in Canada has killed more people than all refugees admitted to the US since 1975.
https://www.ft.com/content/a8798b58-e347-11e6-8405-9e5580d6e5fb
Also, this is what "flooded with refugees" looks like:
But, but, but they are so dangerous!!1!
This is not about security. It's about keeping people of color/non-Christians out of the country.
https://www.ft.com/content/a8798b58-e347-11e6-8405-9e5580d6e5fb
Also, this is what "flooded with refugees" looks like:
But, but, but they are so dangerous!!1!
This is not about security. It's about keeping people of color/non-Christians out of the country.
Last edited:
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
It's a good thing, but FADA and SCOTUS nominee are coming, so there will be lots of ways to punish the gays for existing.
End of the day this one is only replacing one conservative judge with another.
But somebody needs to put Bader-Ginsberg in a protective bubble for the next 4 years.
Salome
you are what you is
Yeah, it seems that the rumour Obama's 2014 executive order could be revoked was instigated by the Trump team to create this bit of "good news" so that we all have someting to celebrate while they will make decision after decision to the detriment of the LGBTQ community.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
Lord, yes.
gump, thanks for that graph. Would that we could show that to every single person who thinks this ban is a good idea until it finally sinks into their heads.
Donald Trump being able to shape the direction of the Court for a generation is terrifying.
Steve Bannon being able to shape the Court for a generation is something that simply can not be allowed to happen at all costs.
Steve Bannon being able to shape the Court for a generation is something that simply can not be allowed to happen at all costs.
I know that many people wish RBG would have retired during Obama's term, and there may be some merit to that, but the Republicans weren't even willing to confirm a bland centrist like Garland, so there is no way you'd have gotten a replacement for RBG who is of the same persuasion/viewpoint.
I don't understand why they have to appoint a new SCOTUS justice? There are only 45 months until the next presidential election, we should allow the people to be heard.
I don't understand why they have to appoint a new SCOTUS justice? There are only 45 months until the next presidential election, we should allow the people to be heard.
So in 10 days we've managed to piss off the parts of the Muslim world that were working with us, and also kill the 6 year old daughter of al-Awlaki
I can only see this as helpful
I can only see this as helpful
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
The Democrats have already said they don't want to fight Trump's first nominee because they have to fight his second nominee.
Burn down the Democratic Party and start over with leftists with conviction.
trojanchick99
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Well, good news, Senator Feinstein voted against Sessions.Haha, my bad, anyways. I haven't voted for her. She hasn't been up for election since I moved here. I got confused.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Yes, this. There's no law that says we have to have 9 justices. We once had 7.
What was important to McConnell was that the willmof the people be reflected in the new nominee, and given the 3m votes that Hillary won by, it's quite clear she was the people's choice.
This must be set aside until we can have a new election where POTUS has won the popular vote -- that's the true reflection of the will of the people, which is the standard here.
I know what you mean, but I think things might have been different replacing RBG than replacing Scalia. Replacing RBG with someone somewhat left-ish would not have fundamentally changed the makeup of the SCOTUS. However, replacing Scalia with a moderate would have. It would have left the court with four bona fide liberals, Kennedy (who has more and more sided with the liberals on things important to conservatives), Roberts (who occasionally throws a bone to the left to protect his legacy), Garland (who probably would have generally sided with the left), and only two bona fide conservatives. I think that explains why the GOP was willing to take a risky bet against confirming Garland in a way that they may not have with RBG.
and is also why they ultimately backed Trump - placing party before country.
To be fair, they do believe that their party's vision is best for the country.
fair enough.
i suppose they thought they could survive 4 years of his buffoonery if it got them SCOTUS
alas - they may be wrong.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
Most of what I saw from people on the right were people upset about his vulgarity. Rarely anything to do with his policy positions.
I do agree with that. Defending Trump is the epitome of spinelessness.
The refusal to consider Garland, however, is more understandable if I adopt a genuine belief that a left-leaning SCOTUS is bad for the US.
bono_212
Blue Crack Distributor
Seriously, this was actual fake news, and by getting worked up over it before there was confirmation it was real plays exactly into the game they Trump party has been playing all along. Now he gets to look moderate to those in the middle, and the people on the left get to be chicken littles who bought what that "fake news" peddling MSM was selling them.
It's NOT OK to just panic over every rumor you hear. Stick to the facts, this is true for BOTH sides.
You seriously aren't helping. How can anyone have a conversation if you're so shut off like this?
I don't think Tump has any policy positions of his own. I think he's an opportunist who's being used as a vessel by the far right to push their agenda.
If he thought he could become president by running as a liberal, he would have done that instead.
If he thought he could become president by running as a liberal, he would have done that instead.
TheFox
War Child
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2015
- Messages
- 767
OK, this is disturbing!
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/0...ck-on-saudi-frigate-meant-for-us-warship.html
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/0...ck-on-saudi-frigate-meant-for-us-warship.html
bono_212
Blue Crack Distributor
Stop. Reading. Fox. News. Seriously. You'll be happier you did. Those guys won't even take down the tweet saying that the Canadian attacker was Moroccan. You're letting yourself get caught up in fear-mongering.
dabiggestu2fan
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Lol I'm sure it's fake but lol
Legally I can kill him, Queen confirms
Legally I can kill him, Queen confirms
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
I'm talking specifically about Republican politicians. I hold them in much greater contempt than I do Republican voters. So I want that to be clear in case it was not. However, if you have a problem with me speaking frankly and dismissively about the GOP congress, I can't help you there.
bono_212
Blue Crack Distributor
No, we're good I was not clear with your meaning it seemed broader in scope. My mistake.
BoMac
Self-righteous bullshitter
Thread.
[TWEET]825397560126824448[/TWEET]
[TWEET]825397560126824448[/TWEET]
BoMac
Self-righteous bullshitter
Well that's a relief. Wait...what?!
DoD: Vehicles carring Trump flag in Louisville were not active military | Lexington Herald-Leader
DoD: Vehicles carring Trump flag in Louisville were not active military | Lexington Herald-Leader
Danny Boy
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Accusations of plagiarism against the education secretary nominee. Brilliant.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
