America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 40,452 comments
  • 1,846,936 views
If SCOTUS invalidated an Obama-issued EO, then how on Earth does that constitute Trump undoing it? What was there for him to "correct?"

The remaining part. I feel this immigration deal is a dead horse tbh but all that Trump did was widen the scope against, Obama widened the scope for. It's not unconstitutional what he did and I can't really see it finding it's way back to the high court. It will be interesting to see if he is sincere about states rights as he claims. City rights? not a chance, these people are lost.

I'm not moving goalposts lol, I'm trying to have a conversation.
 
The remaining part.

The remaining part of what?

I think your typical lack of concrete facts is muddying the waters. I've been assuming that this...

Oh, who was it again that tried an EO over immigration and had The Supreme Court snuff him out?

...was in reference to DAPA, an immigration policy change announced by President Obama in November of 2014. As you are (or seem to be) pointing out, the courts struck that act down (it ultimately died in the SCOTUS case United States v. Texas in 2016). That ruling blocked the action entirely. That means there is nothing on the books from it. There is no "remaining part" for Trump to now be undoing with an EO of his own.

If you're referring to a different EO altogether, please be specific about which one.

Otherwise, please explain to me how Trump is now undoing something that doesn't even exist.

I feel this immigration deal is a dead horse tbh but all that Trump did was widen the scope against, Obama widened the scope for.

Again assuming that you're referring to DAPA, then Obama never widened the scope of anything.

I'm not moving goalposts lol, I'm trying to have a conversation.

As am I. And so far, I'm struggling to understand what you're talking about.
 
It appears Josh had it backwards, this is why people shouldn't assume things.

The day will come when being anti trump is no longer posh in social media, they'll move onto some other cause I'm sure of it. This thread will see a drop in Europeans posting and things will be calm once again.

Just my opinion of course
 
Trump backtracks on refugee deal with Australia:

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-01/white-house-backtracks-on-australia-refugee-deal/8228336

Bet Malcolm Turnbull is feeling pretty silly right now.

Do you guys need help handling the load? I mean I can read stories until the cows come home but you are there. It would not be hard for us to help I don't think, 12k? sounds alright to me. I don't really know about the deal from whenever it was proposed or accepted.
 
It appears Josh had it backwards, this is why people shouldn't assume things.

Trump to keep Obama executive order for LGBTQ workplace protections

http://www.king5.com/news/trump-to-...der-for-lgbtq-workplace-protections/394929616
I don't trust this administration at all (Harm the environment, education, healthcare, welfare, immigration, their position in the world, the economy), I'm expecting them to push an executive order on "religious liberty" at some point down the road.
 
In that case, mind replying to me?
Probably. You are full of bait imo, if you would like me to I'll simply say, husker is right and xylo is an imbecile. Sometimes it is you who doesn't actually want a conversation.

Besides, didn't I respond to that post already? Pretty sure I did.
 
You are full of bait imo

Asking you to address facts that contradict to your claims? To clear up your somewhat vague statements? How is that "bait?"

If you don't want to be engaged in serious conversation, you're in the wrong place.

if you would like me to I'll simply say, husker is right and xylo is an imbecile

No, I don't want that.

I want you to directly respond to the replies that I'm taking the time to offer. I want you to either acknowledge when you have gotten something wrong, or provide evidence of your own to support your own claims.

That's how this works.

Sometimes it is you who doesn't actually want a conversation.

How are you possibly arriving at that conclusion? I've asked clear, simple questions. So far, you seem utterly disinterested in answering them. So who is the one that doesn't want a conversation?

Besides, didn't I respond to that post already? Pretty sure I did.

You've posted three times since I replied to you, and none of them mentioned me, quoted me, or appear to be in any way related to what I said to you.

So, no, you did not.
 
I don't trust this administration at all (Harm the environment, education, healthcare, welfare, immigration, their position in the world, the economy), I'm expecting them to push an executive order on "religious liberty" at some point down the road.

Thankfully we have the COTUS to protect us, an EO on religious liberty would never stand.
 
Why on earth would you bring any sort of truth into the conversation?

Lol, it may seem like all checks and balances have been thrown out the window, but the one thing that stands true is the COTUS (well and the Judicial branch too). Trump is not all-powerful. The other pesky thing is, the American people expect results, if those expectations are not met then I fully expect the Democrats to gain back the Senate in 2018.
 
Lol, it may seem like all checks and balances have been thrown out the window, but the one thing that stands true is the COTUS (well and the Judicial branch too). Trump is not all-powerful. The other pesky thing is, the American people expect results, if those expectations are not met then I fully expect the Democrats to gain back the Senate in 2018.

I think people should be more careful what they ask for, the judicial branch in my lifetime has tried very hard to uphold the constitution, that is there job right?

It's not a good thing to have knowledge and not share it(I know you are not doing that btw), there are too many people who do not know how our system works or why it works so well. I'll give you an example that humors me for whatever reason.

It's a tangent but so what, maybe you'll like it. My brother in law is a super smart mechanical engineer, there is no reason to brag or exaggerate mind you, the kat is cutting edge. So one day I was in Phoenix with my sister just having a day like any other really, he decides he wants to buy a house right? He can do that because he has money and all that so, this kid of a real estate agent decides it's a good idea to explain to the man what a heat pump is and how it works. He calmly listens and says oh I see. I grabbed my sister and pulled her into the other room and asked her this "do you think the kid has any idea that Dale most likely created the heat pump?" :lol:

Anyway, that is something funny to me and I like to share stuff like that even if it seems off topic 👍

Oh and you are right I think, we like a balance of power right? No way in my eyes does the GOP keep the senate, I care more about the house anyway and lets just see about the Supreme right? Trump has a big say still, it's for a silly pun, his trump card.
 
Last edited:
I think people should be more careful what they ask for, the judicial branch in my lifetime has tried very hard to uphold the constitution, that is there job right?

It's not a good thing to have knowledge and not share it(I know you are not doing that btw), there are too many people who do not know how our system works or why it works so well. I'll give you an example that humors me for whatever reason.

It's a tangent but so what, maybe you'll like it. My brother in law is a super smart mechanical engineer, there is no reason to brag or exaggerate mind you, the kat is cutting edge. So one day I was in Phoenix with my sister just having a day like any other really, he decides he wants to buy a house right? He can do that because he has money and all that so, this kid of a real estate agent decides it's a good idea to explain to the man what a heat pump is and how it works. He calmly listens and says oh I see. I grabbed my sister and pulled her into the other room and asked her this "do you think the kid has any idea that Dale most likely created the heat pump?" :lol:

Anyway, that is something funny to me and I like to share stuff like that even if it seems off topic 👍

Oh and you are right I think, we like a balance of power right? No way in my eyes does the GOP keep the senate, I care more about the house anyway and lets just see about the Supreme right? Trump has a big say still, it's for a silly pun, his trump card.

Essentially yes, part of what the Judicial Branch's duties are to interpret law and how it applies to the COTUS as well as being the final stop at interpreting laws that were passed by the Executive branch and hearing Civil and criminal cases that were tied up in lower courts. As far as the GOP goes, with all of the promises made on the campaign trail, I have never seen a party or candidate more set up to 'fail' than Trump, and the Senate. If they can make good on half of those promises it will be a miracle.
 

Hasn't Saudi Arabia and Houthis been at war for sometime now? I know Saudi forces are supported by the US, but I think that attack was probably meant for Saudis and not the US. Plus, I'd imagine they'd know what a US warship looked like, especially since the news reports said it was a frigate and looking up the Saudi Royal Navy, it looks like those are French built ships.

Fox News isn't exactly the most trustworthy source either, it almost feels like they are trying to rile up the already riled up masses by going "looking over there, radial Islamist doing radial Islamist thing because they're radial Islamist"
 
Hasn't Saudi Arabia and Houthis been at war for sometime now? I know Saudi forces are supported by the US, but I think that attack was probably meant for Saudis and not the US. Plus, I'd imagine they'd know what a US warship looked like, especially since the news reports said it was a frigate and looking up the Saudi Royal Navy, it looks like those are French built ships.

Fox News isn't exactly the most trustworthy source either, it almost feels like they are trying to rile up the already riled up masses by going "looking over there, radial Islamist doing radial Islamist thing because they're radial Islamist"

Fox is horrible, it's not news it's an entertainment business. but getting back to the boat, is it possible the perps didn't know what to perp?

I don't think there is much difference between Saudi and U.S. to them tbh.
 
So I watched a docu on Trump and now I am a Trump expert lol, na I'm just clowning around. It should not be a secret that I like PBS for whatever reasons, it's kind of odd because they are liberal in nature. Anyway I figured some might get a kick out of this so...



Clint Eastwood, James Bond, and Hugh Hefner, No wonder I have a soft spot for him :lol:

I came here to say this California thing is getting pretty serious, I'm very interested in it for a few reasons. Of course I have my views on immigration, and also states rights. What a place to find myself so torn between two things, I believe there is a matter of national security which lies on the Fed so I think Trump wins this one, but we shall see.

The Senate Public Safety Committee considers SB54 Tuesday morning. The Judiciary Committee will also consider fast-tracked legislation that would spend state money, in an amount that has not been disclosed, to provide lawyers for people facing deportation.

I didn't quote the headline because I wanted to quote what I thought more provocative, or what seems more important to me.
 
Last edited:
Do you guys need help handling the load?
It's factional politics.

Turnbull comes from the left-leaning faction of the government. To become Prime Minister, he had to depose Tony Abbott, who came from the right. The right-leaning faction never liked this, but only tolerated it because Abbott was incredibly unpopular with the public and was almost certainly going to lose the next federal election by a landslide. Turnbull, at least, stands a chance. So the right-leaning faction put up with him, but undermine him at every opportunity, and will pounce the moment they sense weakness. Even if it costs them the election, they'll do it on principle. They've lost what little faith they had in Turnbull.

In Obama, Turnbull had someone he could work with. But Trump comes from the opposite end of the political spectrum, which makes Turnbull's job much harder at a time when he needs the deal to go ahead. If not, the right-leaning faction will crucify him. Especially when Pauline Hanson and the One Nation Party - our version of Trump - is looking strong in Queensland and Western Australia ahead of their state elections. If Turnbull can't work with Trump, the political right will argue that he can't handle One Nation at a time when One Nation could hold the balance of power in two key states.
 
It's factional politics.

Turnbull comes from the left-leaning faction of the government. To become Prime Minister, he had to depose Tony Abbott, who came from the right. The right-leaning faction never liked this, but only tolerated it because Abbott was incredibly unpopular with the public and was almost certainly going to lose the next federal election by a landslide. Turnbull, at least, stands a chance. So the right-leaning faction put up with him, but undermine him at every opportunity, and will pounce the moment they sense weakness. Even if it costs them the election, they'll do it on principle. They've lost what little faith they had in Turnbull.

In Obama, Turnbull had someone he could work with. But Trump comes from the opposite end of the political spectrum, which makes Turnbull's job much harder at a time when he needs the deal to go ahead. If not, the right-leaning faction will crucify him. Especially when Pauline Hanson and the One Nation Party - our version of Trump - is looking strong in Queensland and Western Australia ahead of their state elections. If Turnbull can't work with Trump, the political right will argue that he can't handle One Nation at a time when One Nation could hold the balance of power in two key states.

First off let me tell you I commend you as a people, I honestly do. I don't understand all of your politics because they are not my politics riight?

I hope it is not the case that these sorts of things cannot be resolved simply because hate Trump. Is it not true to say that Turnbull has some power and weight? Sometimes hard decisions are just that. I don't think any one of us on this board at least want the wrong things to happen.

Concerns sure, that is why I am here and it is also why I like you.
 
What I find so fascinating here is how many people are making comments suggesting people must obey Trump. Fall in with the party line or lose your job. Pledge allegiance to the new president. Etc etc.

Not only is it a pretty safe bet the people saying this certainly didn't take that approach with the last guy—no surprise there—but is that not the opposite attitude the country was founded on? Questioning authority, showing concern for how a government may negatively impact quality of life—these are important qualities in a supposed free country. There have been a lot of examples in history of environments where those critical of those in power were silenced. I can't think of many that had positive results in the long term.




Cant help but to say that these type of people are most likely comfortable to live in communist countries.
 
Cant help but to say that these type of people are most likely comfortable to live in communist countries.

I feel like that previous post was aimed at me, I could be wrong mind you. I can make that perfectly clear to you I think, nothing to do with any past posts right?

The americans that think about these things and make contributions etc. very much dislike communism. It is not so to say that other voices do not matter, everyone's voice matters and that should go without saying tbh. But we do not like communism one bit.
 
Is it not true to say that Turnbull has some power and weight?
He does, but his party is divided. Some support him, but others oppose him. In order to get anything done, he needs to appease all of the factions (and one of the leading criticisms of the Turnbull government is that it hasn't achieved anything). This gives the factions a lot of power, and they're not afraid to use it. Securing the deal with Obama was a feather in Turnbull's cap because it allowed him to end a controversial policy (keeping immigrants in offshore detention), but Trump's presence changes things. Any Republican candidate was going to require some finesse, but the right-leaning faction will be rubbing their hands in anticipation because Trump will be difficult to deal with by comparison, and that plays into their hands.

I don't understand all of your politics
Neither do we. We've had five Prime Ministers in the past eight years, but we only elected two of them.
 
He does, but his party is divided. Some support him, but others oppose him. In order to get anything done, he needs to appease all of the factions (and one of the leading criticisms of the Turnbull government is that it hasn't achieved anything). This gives the factions a lot of power, and they're not afraid to use it. Securing the deal with Obama was a feather in Turnbull's cap because it allowed him to end a controversial policy (keeping immigrants in offshore detention), but Trump's presence changes things. Any Republican candidate was going to require some finesse, but the right-leaning faction will be rubbing their hands in anticipation because Trump will be difficult to deal with by comparison, and that plays into their hands.


Neither do we. We've had five Prime Ministers in the past eight years, but we only elected two of them.
We did re-elect Julia Gillard though so that makes it 3 we elected technically.

Probably the reason why Australians pay more attention to American politics than ours is because American politics is easier to understand it actually feels like who wins the election actually matters as here in Australia both parties say they'll fix what the other party does wrong but then does the same 🤬 anyway.
 
I feel like that previous post was aimed at me, I could be wrong mind you. I can make that perfectly clear to you I think, nothing to do with any past posts right?

The americans that think about these things and make contributions etc. very much dislike communism. It is not so to say that other voices do not matter, everyone's voice matters and that should go without saying tbh. But we do not like communism one bit.
I'm not sure you have the mandate to speak for all of them.

Given that the US had a communist party for a long time I think it's safe to say that a number (be it a small minority) certainly did like communism more than a bit.

Cant help but to say that these type of people are most likely comfortable to live in communist countries.
Or authoritarian regimes of any type.

A monarchy would meet the same criteria.
 

Latest Posts

Back