America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 39,014 comments
  • 1,697,278 views
But Kennedy and Nixon.

I addressed Nixon briefly in my edit. Kennedy's presidency is a subject I'm not super familiar with, and need to dive more deeply into.

I know you're joking (I think), but for the sake of transparency and all that malarkey...
 
Let's be clear, Trump is an unethical, uncouth, loudmouth jerk billionaire playboy from New York City. He has bad habits. He shouldn't be President.
Yet, all that has nothing to do with impeachment and conviction in the Senate. It is not a question of law, but one of politics.
 
I addressed Nixon briefly in my edit. Kennedy's presidency is a subject I'm not super familiar with, and need to dive more deeply into.
Seems I got my reply in a little too early. I'd probably have chimed in the way I did regardless, but I didn't see that until you informed me of it.

I know you're joking (I think), but for the sake of transparency and all that malarkey...
Affirmative. The intent was to subtly point out a certain individual's propensity to use entirely too many words to say absolutely nothing. Maybe he should spend more time surveying the realm for oil and fencing topless with his big tits flopping around...or something like that; the stories do tend to run together.

Oh, and "malarkey" is one of my all-time favorite words.

:)
 
Kennedy was arguably a worse person, doing things so bad he got his head blown off for it
Blown head, whistle or job... A pattern is emerging in US presidency.

Let's be clear, Trump is an unethical, uncouth, loudmouth jerk billionaire playboy from New York City. He has bad habits. He shouldn't be President.
Yet, all that has nothing to do with impeachment and conviction in the Senate. It is not a question of law, but one of politics.
It's not the lack of ethic that will drag Trump on the impeachment road, but the actions that result of his lack of ethic.
And politic is not what initiates this: the Democrats, starting by Pelosi, know very well the political danger of this procedure. They process because Trump has gone so far that he let them no choice.
 
Let's be clear, Trump is an unethical, uncouth, loudmouth jerk billionaire playboy from New York City. He has bad habits. He shouldn't be President.
Yet, all that has nothing to do with impeachment and conviction in the Senate. It is not a question of law, but one of politics.

This is the most wantonly cynical thing I've ever seen. 👎
 
Kennedy was arguably a worse person, doing things so bad he got his head blown off for it, and the CIA just snickered. Nixon was only a 2nd rate burglar, not a serious crime, and yet he resigned as conviction for impeachment was a certainty. The point is, this impeachment process has nothing whatever to do with laws, ethics or justice. It is a political matter.

Im Not old enough to know enough about Kennedy. But Pleas elaborate on “arguably a worse person”. That’s something I cannot Fathom. There are not many worse democratically chosen leaders this bad.
 
Im Not old enough to know enough about Kennedy. But Pleas elaborate on “arguably a worse person”. That’s something I cannot Fathom. There are not many worse democratically chosen leaders this bad.
Ceasar was elected...
 
Im Not old enough to know enough about Kennedy. But Pleas elaborate on “arguably a worse person”. That’s something I cannot Fathom. There are not many worse democratically chosen leaders this bad.
As hinted by @Rallywagon, Kennedy may not have actually been elected democratically, but stole the election through voter fraud in Illinois and Texas. The agents of this fraud were said to be the mob in Chicago, and LBJ's oil connections in Texas. Kennedy subsequently alienated both of these constituencies and they turned on him. Kennedy infuriated the mob by allowing all their business properties, including lucrative casinos, in Havana to be taken over by Castro's revolution. Later, he set his bother, Bobby, the Attorney General, to investigate and prosecute the mob, infuriating them further. The Bay of Pigs invasion fiasco when the CIA mercenary army was slaughtered on the beaches due to denial of air cover by Kennedy, enraged the CIA immensely, and made them another of his enemies. Another sort of betrayal was to his wife, Jackie. Kennedy, despite being the first Catholic president, was a known philanderer and was widely believed to have cheated on his wife many, many times, possibly including Marilyn Monroe, a famous starlet of the day.

Bottom line, Kennedy betrayed his family, betrayed the oilmen and the mobsters who got him elected, and betrayed the CIA who's invasion of Cuba was killed in the crib. He was not loyal to the people who served him. In short, everybody and his brother had a reason to see him dead. The only folks who thought otherwise were believers in Camelot and schoolboys like me who cried when he was shot to death in Dallas.
 
Last edited:
@Dotini,
i'm, like i guess other persons from that forum who know you well, more and more reluctant to spend time to even check the validity of your claims. Anyway...

"The GOP’s failure to prove fraud doesn’t mean, of course, that the election was clean. That question remains unsolved and unsolvable. But what’s typically left out of the legend is that multiple election boards saw no reason to overturn the results. Neither did state or federal judges. Neither did an Illinois special prosecutor in 1961. And neither have academic inquiries into the Illinois case (both a 1961 study by three University of Chicago professors and more recent research by political scientist Edmund Kallina concluded that whatever fraud existed wasn’t substantial enough to alter the election)." (source)

I'll pass my turn on other claims, and the moral judgement about private life, or the funny wording about Cuba to put some revolution local consequences on the US president shoulders.
 
On what grounds?

The tweet (like so many others by Trump) is illiterate, nonsensical, false, juvenile & petty. In & of itself, it calls into question the fitness of the author for the highest office in the United States.
 
I don't know where all these leaks are coming from, especially because Trump told us he has the best people but...

Trump suggested shooting migrants in the legs

Trump reportedly asked about building alligator-filled border moat

He's a south park character come to life. That's the only possible explanation.
“Shooting migrants in the legs”. I can’t even say I’m surprised anymore. But a little something tells me that if these migrants were white and more “integrated”, he wouldn’t dare say such a thing... it’s as if Trump has given up on hiding his blatant xenophobia these days.
 
. it’s as if Trump has given up on hiding his blatant xenophobia these days.

I dunno - Trump never seems to have hidden his blatant xenophobia, given his initial "escalator speech" describing Mexicans as rapists & murderers. The thing is, at one time it was explained by people as being some kind of inspired, if repugnant, political strategy. Now, it increasingly just seems like the ravings of a mentally unstable, bigoted idiot.
 
Last edited:
I dunno - Trump never seems to have hidden his blatant xenophobia, given his initial "escalator speech" describing Mexicans as rapists & murderers. The thing is, at one time it was explained by people as being some kind of inspired, if repugnant, political strategy. Now, it increasingly just seems like the ravings of mentally unstable, bigoted idiot.
Fair. Shouldn't have said "these days" in the first place.
 
As hinted by @Rallywagon, Kennedy may not have actually been elected democratically...
Negative batman, I was actually hinting at some of the similarities between Ceaser and Trump. Spitting rhetoric that may very well instigate civil war and destroy the republic, that kinda stuff.
 
Trump sending this garbage:
1178989254309011456




Post-Fact world


Trump needs to be added to this song:
 
Another random USA cartograph I found interesting. It reflects some of the earlier maps I've found wherein there is umpteen times more federal land in the west than in the east, a partial explanation for the disproportion in zero-population census blocks between east/west.

BGRsyf0.jpg
 
I thought this map was illuminating. Also, as a bonus, it's rather cute.

2016_election_map.png


Really gives you a sense of how relatively few people live in the "north of Texas, west of Mississippi, East of coastal states" region of the US.
 
Yeah, unfortunately both of your neighbors voted for the other guy. :D

The map is truly a compelling visual argument for getting rid of the electoral college. If you believe in majority rule being part of the democratic process. You know, we the people and all that.

Or think of it this way. North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana and Wyoming, have as much combined power in the senate as NY, PA, NJ and CA. One can talk about "State's rights" all they want. Look at that sentence and look at the map and tell me how it makes any sense.
 
Why is south Texas staunchly modern Democrat? Is that purely down to a more moderate immigration stance given the obvious Mexican influence or is there something else to it?
 
Why is south Texas staunchly modern Democrat? Is that purely down to a more moderate immigration stance given the obvious Mexican influence or is there something else to it?

South Texas has a lot, a lot of hispanics. Texas will turn blue within 5 years, I can almost promise you. All of the big cities have already turned.
 
Why is south Texas staunchly modern Democrat? Is that purely down to a more moderate immigration stance given the obvious Mexican influence or is there something else to it?
The Rio Grande Valley is fairly densely populated, and as population density increases, so too does the likelihood that population will vote Democrat. This is why Republicans don't like the idea of the Electoral College being abolished. As alluded to by @samurai8juice a while back, the GOP has been "gaming the system" (cheating), and winning isn't strong motivation to not cheat.
 
However, I think the key to victory in Presidential elections going forward is the suburbs. Traditionally, the suburbs have been weighted somewhat towards the GOP ... but that was in the days when the GOP represented some version of sane conservatism. The 2018 mid-terms showed a strong swing in the suburbs towards the Democrats. I see the election of Trump in 2016 as something of a fluke - a confluence of a number of particular circumstances. I don't see that happening again in 2020, assuming the Democrats have reasonable candidate. The question is: who is that candidate?

Trump's main claim to "winning" has been a strong economy, something that has happened (IMO) not because of Trump, but in spite of Trump. If the economy falters in the next 12 months - Trump is toast.
 
Back