- 29,997
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
America - The Official Thread
- Thread starter ///M-Spec
- 39,681 comments
- 1,790,165 views
- 5,051
- Netherlands
You are probably right. But no president does it as blatant as him:
"It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don't," Mr Trump said. "You can definitely do it with an Act of Congress. But now they're saying I can do it just with an executive order."
Even receiving backlash from within his party:
Is this really what the republican party or his followers want? Or is this just deflecting for his repeal and replace and mexican wall fails?
I am not so sure, he did appoint Kavanaugh into SCOTUS for such cases.
- 7,689
- Michigan
- Rallywgn81
What does it matter how blatant he is? In fact, I think it better that he is a blatant loud mouth. Sure does beat having back door meetings away from the ears and eyes of the general public. That's how America got stuck with a central bank... I mean, the fed reserve.
- 29,997
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
What makes you so sure the latter isn't as much the case as the former?
- 5,051
- Netherlands
It matters in the sense he is creating more division among the public.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
The interpretation of the various elements of the Constitution has been ongoing for more than 200 years. One only need look at the Second Amendment and all of the legislation that bumps up against it on a constant basis for proof of that. If you look at how the 14th Amendment is worded and then look at the debate that occurred in the legislature there is some room for interpretation. Likely he'll pass an executive order, someo8ne will file suit, probably the ACLU, then it will work its way through the courts and several years from now to the Supreme Court. That's how the system is supposed to work.
I think Harry Reid was right about this more than 20 years ago.
Last edited:
- 5,051
- Netherlands
I totally agree with the room for interpertation. I already made the point about the 2nd amendment being dated. Both parties and legal scholars should really look at the constitution and update its controversial parts to modern times in a bipartisan way. The problem is the current president is only polarizing the 2 parties even more, before even thinking about bipartisan solutions as an option.
I have no idea who Harry Reid is, but I agree that birthright citizenship is a strange idea. In our country you get the nationalit of one of your parents. (there is choice) Regardless where the baby is born. But the way Trump is lying about it, really disturbes me. He uses it to lie to the his following again, which is very wrong (right or left).
edit: added comment Harry Reid
Last edited:
- 7,689
- Michigan
- Rallywgn81
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
Screw y'all. Y'all know damn good and well I drive 10-15 hours a day and get my news from the radio. The last thing I want to do when I get home is scour the internet and TV looking for news when I listen to a 24/7 news channel on my radio all day. And you know damn good and well Tex that radio is my source. I have way more important crap to do than spend my life arguing with y'all over frivolous crap.
So welcome to my ignore list gentleman.
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
I have no problem with the radio part. I'm amused that, when asked to provide evidence that someone didn't do anything wrong, you used the word of said person.
Did you take Obama's word for it that nothing was covered up during the Benghazi situation? Did you take Hillary's word for it that her email server wasn't a security concern? I'm guessing you weren't old enough for Nixon, but do you think you would have just nodded and taken his word for it when he said "I am not a crook?"
On at least one of those, I know for sure you didn't.
So, you'll have to forgive me when I don't just take Kemp's word for it that nothing untoward is happening in Georgia's election, especially when there are several credible sources saying otherwise.
Whatever will I do?
- 5,051
- Netherlands
Chill out dude. He does have merit in criticising the source. I have also been guilty of not doing my due diligence or apparantly posting content that wasnt easily accesible as I thought it was. But you do have to admit that Kemp himself is an unreliable source. That is what we were saying. You are free to post what you want, but asked about it you do need to back it up with sources or data.
Even if you dont have the time to do due diligence, perhaps you should take the time before posting a reaction. I personally do appreciate your contributions in this thread, despite your busy schedule. Having opposing views is what makes it interesting.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,506
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
The party itself probably dislikes Trump since it paints all of them in the same light. However, Trump's voter base eats all of it up and they are the ones who typically do vote. It's pretty disappointing at the number of people who've come out of the woodwork since Trump's inauguration that are just the most repulsive people I've ever seen. This is not to say everyone who likes Trump is a hateful person, they aren't, but I just think hateful people tend to like Trump.
I don't think Trump is much for backdoor meddling. He's too proud and needs to toot his own horn all the time.
*Also I realize this post is a fine example of "phrasing"
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
They had political experts dissect and fact check his interview for 2 hours after it. They think I'm taking it straight from the horses mouth. I'm tired of them think I'm some dumbass that doesn't know what he's talking about. Neither one of them live here or know about our local news yet have the audacity to question me.
I'll get YOU some links whenever I get home.
Oh and they said about 45 minutes ago it's down to 3000 ballots.
- 5,051
- Netherlands
The party itself probably dislikes Trump since it paints all of them in the same light. However, Trump's voter base eats all of it up and they are the ones who typically do vote. It's pretty disappointing at the number of people who've come out of the woodwork since Trump's inauguration that are just the most repulsive people I've ever seen. This is not to say everyone who likes Trump is a hateful person, they aren't, but I just think hateful people tend to like Trump.
I don't think Trump is much for backdoor meddling. He's too proud and needs to toot his own horn all the time.
*Also I realize this post is a fine example of "phrasing"
Actually according to the data I posted earlier the republican party already has been shifting more to the right even before Trump.
https://voteview.com/parties/all
I personally believe Trump is more the product of the republican party and not the other way around. The way the democrats are criticising Trump is a direct result on how Obama was treated during his time in the whitehouse by the republican party. I did not follow US politics pre-Obama, so feel free to correct me if during Clinton or Bush the parties were less polarized.
Left and right media use a lot of these so called "political experts" and some of them or the source for the craziest conspiracy theories I have ever heard. The first thing Foxnews did after the bomb threats, was spread a "false flag consiracy theory that the democrats were responsible.
As for a souce in the change in the voter supression accusation, here you go:
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/414579-georgia-judge-rules-against-kemp-in-exact-match-voting-case"
edit: added comment about "political experts"
edit 2: added link to data
Last edited:
- 5,051
- Netherlands
double
- 29,997
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
...that he uses to tell people only what he wants them to know and how he wants them to know it. The only thing that would make me more sure of his involvement in secret deals is him tweeting that he isn't involved in them.
But then, you may very well be making facetious comments. Or not. Either way, I've established where I stand.
Well isn't that just...
...expected.
I don't know that. I know you've said it, though, and I believe you when you say it. Moreover, I don't have a problem with it. The problem I have is not being able to refer to it. I don't know how radio personalities came to know what they repeat to their audiences. Frankly I don't even know that Kemp said what he said beyond you saying that he said it, and you may very well be telling the truth, but that doesn't mean he is. Therein lies the problem: I can't refer to that source.
The whole point of citations is offering others the opportunity to refer to the source material. If they can't do that, why should they take it seriously?
Right, you just want to make claims and not be called on to substantiate them. Maybe you'd be better off making these claims in profile posts after disabling comments.
Unlike you ("Stop letting CNN brainwash y'all..."), I don't have a problem with where others get their information, I just want to be able to refer to that source and see how the information provided compares to other sources.
And if you weren't so abusive toward others regarding their sources, I might not think you capable of the deceit to which I alluded in the post that you quoted.
I don't know that, but as I said above, I know you've said it and I believe it to be the case.
Well clearly your thoughts and my own differ with regards to the frivolity of marginalizing citizens' votes. 53,000 is too many, 4,000 is too many and 3,000 [this is supposedly the new number, but I can't refer to the source] is too many. ONE marginalized vote, regardless of how it came to happen, is too many.
Well hey, you're two steps closer to that echo chamber you clearly so desire. I'm going to keep responding though, since you ignoring me doesn't actually prevent me from doing so.
This.
Respectfully, it seems we'll have to agree to disagree.
As little as I think of him, I do think him capable of not blurting out things he doesn't want people to know.
If the interview itself can't be referred to, is it likely the subsequent discussion can be? How is anyone who didn't listen to that radio station at that time supposed to know who those experts were and what they had to say?
Now you presume to know what I think? I actually say what I think--this has been pointed out as a flaw on numerous occasions in my life, but it's how I was raised--and I have never said that.
What does where anyone lives matter? It's happening in this country and that concerns me. What's happening in other countries concerns me too, even in instances where I don't speak the language.
I look forward to that. Presumably you'll be posting them here for all to read and not sending them in a private message. I find it peculiar that you're willing to provide said links now but not when you were initially solicited.
I absolutely agree that Trump is the product of something already present, but I'm not sure the Republican party should be singled out as the bearer of that burden.
And I think Trump is criticized because of his own words and actions, not because criticism constitutes retaliation.
This illustrates precisely why sources to which others can refer are so important.
If I were to talk about an interview with someone discussing what took place in the Trump administration, I'd expect others to want me to substantiate it. If that someone then turned out to be Michael Wolff, it would absolutely be subject to ridicule.
Yay.
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
I can't find a link that isn't similar to the one you posted @PocketZeven
That said the judge ordered the final 3000 to be counted with proof of ID.
Take what you want from my post.
That said the judge ordered the final 3000 to be counted with proof of ID.
Take what you want from my post.
- 5,051
- Netherlands
The data of Pewsearch that was posted earlier actually tells perhaps that story. While the political ideology in Congress has indeed been moving to the right, the political ideology of the overal public has actually been moving to the left. This will probably inevitably show in the results of the midterms. But It is interesting to see data where it seems that that congress does not accurately represent the political ideology among the general public.
http://www.people-press.org/2017/10/05/the-partisan-divide-on-political-values-grows-even-wider/
I wonder if the general public and especially moderate people actually realised that Obama was restricted as president, because congress was a majority republican.
To prevent confusion:
The voteview data measured the political ideology of US congress, the Pewsearch was measured the political ideology among the US public.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
There has been many, many, many Presidents that faced houses run by the opposition sometimes one, sometimes both, and they still managed to get a lot of things done. In large part it is the job of the President to bring the sides together, to find common ground, but Obama was unable to do that.
- 29,997
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Until a single polling methodology is agreed upon and implemented across the board without fail, and the public can be assured that absolutely no funny stuff is going on, I remain highly dubious of polling results intended to reflect the beliefs of the public. I think we're hardwired and/or trained from an early age to take data at face value and not believe that it can be manipulated or manipulative--and I believe polling entities take advantage of that. But hey, I'm a cynic.
Of course it's easy to take up such a position when supposed polled viewpoints run contrary to one's own, but I think the resolve necessary to do so when the supposed viewpoints run parallel to one's own. As a Democrat, I'd like to be able to place the blame on Republicans, but I genuinely believe the circumstances are far more nuanced than that.
That said, I appreciate the effort you made to provide a foundation for your opinion. I don't want the above to come off as me diminishing that.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Black unemployment falls to all time record lows but Democrats believing that racism holds back black people increases by 130%. If anything, it shows how out of touch with reality Democrats are.
Recent Rasmussen polls show Trump at 40% approval rating among potential black voters:
- 5,051
- Netherlands
Black unemployment falls to all time record lows but Democrats believing that racism holds back black people increases by 130%. If anything, it shows how out of touch with reality Democrats are.
Recent Rasmussen polls show Trump at 40% approval rating among potential black voters:
First, what does it have to do with democrats being out of touch? Are the democrats claiming black unemployment is high ? The racial wage gap is still there. How do you explain that?
Second, the black unemployment was dropping at the same rate it was dropping during Obama's era. I fail to see wich policy of Trump made it happen. He is taking credit for other peoples work. Like Obama recieved Blame for his predeseccors failings.
https://www.apnews.com/d7a35c3d0ad342ad8b3a041226f06746
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...ent-is-at-an-all-time-low-but-there-s-a-catch
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...-unemployment-rate-record-low-may-jobs-report
Third, I could not find other polls that corroborate Trump has 36% approval among black americans:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-trump-not-even-close/?utm_term=.3f58a66af9bf
https://www.naacp.org/latest/new-poll-nations-competitive-races-may-hinge-trumps-racism/
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-approval-rating-black-americans-1078598
I am not anti republican by the way. I just dislike Trump, no matter his political affiliation.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
36% or 40% is well within the margin of error so it really makes no difference. The point you are missing is that either of those numbers would be huge for a Republican President among black voters. Apparently, many of them are not buying into the, "REPUBLICANS ARE RACISS!!!", hysteria that Democrats have been slinging for 50 years.
- 5,051
- Netherlands
I dont think thats accurate. If you read the other sources they poll between around 15-20%. Thats a lot different then 40%.
Do they? Isnt that the narrative that Fox-news is claiming? There are certain individual republicans that are accused of racism, lately primarily Trump. But I dont think a majority of democrats claim a majority of republicans are racist
Last edited:
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
The poll I posted is a couple of days ago. Yours are way put of date.
I don't know what Fox News says you'll have to look that up yourself.
- 5,051
- Netherlands
I cant find the data on the rasmussen website. Could you provide a link?
- 4,464
- Azle, TX
- supermanfromazle
- SanjiHimura
You are not going to get it. It is locked behind a paywall.
However, if you look at the Real Clear Politics average, this result pops up:
Trump, for all of the bluster about losing the house, is still a rather popular president. Rasmussen backs that up with polling that compares Trump's popularity with Obama's (leading 51-48 within the margin of error admittedly). and if we throw out (the rather independent) wishy washy temperment, Trump STILL beats the RCP averages 37-40 (again within the margin of error.)
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
It would seem the American people are willing to tolerate (and reelect?) an aberrant President with a coarse personality in return for domestic prosperity and
- 3,308
- Kentucky
- Chrunch_Houston
Trump's policies are working, the economy is booming, I don't care if he is a jackass.
But I don't think he is. He just likes to troll.
But I don't think he is. He just likes to troll.
- 5,051
- Netherlands
I am sceptical that trump deserves full credit for the economy. If you look at the data it just seems inaccurate how much credit trump takes for someone else’s work.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...-checking-donald-trumps-points-about-economy/
https://www.npr.org/2018/09/12/6467...t-for-the-booming-u-s-economy?t=1541327524710
It is amazing how so many Americans still support someone who lies about simple and important and even everyday facts and truths and literally keeps misleading his following with blatant lies.
I have not been able to confirm the high approval rating among black Americans by other reports or polls. The only source repeating this claim is Breitbart, which is an even more misleading source then fox.
