The Trump Presidency Discussion Thread (Non-Meme version)

#21

we pretty much are the alt-right by the definition of the alt-right. well-employed white men (i categorize as white even though i don’t necessarily identify as white… what nonsense)

also, to address the follow up question of the alt-right label of anti-Semitic and racist etc… i defer to Jared Kushner:

0 Likes

#22

Shhhhhhh! Be quiet. You’re messing with the medias rhetoric.

Trump could single-handedly cure cancer, end the war in the Middle East and achieve world peace with Russia and the media would spin it as him laying waste to pharmaceutical companies, putting hundreds of thousands of soldiers out of work and causing gas prices to rise.

Its going to be a long 4 years, but my body is ready.

0 Likes

#23

It is the left. The Hippocratic party. They tried to make a big deal of Trump’s foreign dealings as a business owner and all these things but refused to admit the “pay to play” or email issues that were public. A lot of people even believed they were fake emails.

Imagine if Trump lost and claimed Russian influence and recounts, the media would be all over him and bashing him for being crazy. It is hilarious to watch the epic disaster of the democrats and everything Obama stood for be undone.

  • Obamacare Failure
  • Drone Policy Failure
  • Trade policy Failure
  • Libya Failure
  • NSA Spying Failure
  • Guantanamo Failure
  • Russia Failure

      • Updated - - -

My recent favorite is that all the anti-GOP economists were calling for massive drops in the stock market if Trump won the election. Things like 20-30% losses. Now the markets are surging and those same people are saying “This is Obama’s economy.”

0 Likes

#24

Personally, I think everyone should be concerned about Russia meddling with the US election. Are you implying that people are over-reacting to the news from all of our intelligence agencies that SOMETHING happened?

Not so much with you, Jay, but this is the shit I don’t get. Why can’t people address the news without involving some dig at the ‘other side’. This is a NATIONAL concern.

0 Likes

#25

Eh, the CIA says “we think” was tampering. The FBI says there isn’t any evidence. They supposedly had evidence back in October, but didn’t say anything until Trump won, lol.

The irony is that the US has been meddling and interfering with elections in other countries for decades.

0 Likes

#26

since this thread is already derailed. My favorite recent thing is his claims of being a scratch golfer who has done things like getting the first hole in one on his new course. People just let him get away with this despite other players seeing his caddy drop balls on the fairway “It’s over here Mr. Trump”

0 Likes

#27

Are you referring to them as the “do no harm” party or did you mean “hypocritic”?

From what I recall reading, it was economists in general. Their projections were based on their analysis of his proposed economic policy and campaign rhetoric.

It’s difficult to say what his real impact on the economy would be until he actual implements his policy, but considering the way he’s already walking back on many of his campaign promises, the impact is likely going to mitigated since he’s not likely implement much of his campaign rhetoric.

Ultimately, we’ll all have to wait and see.

0 Likes

#28

That would only be irony if the CIA was up in arms about it. The citizens having a problem is completely justified.

There is evidence of tampering, but they haven’t pinned it on Russia. We don’t know how this effected the election yet, if at all, but I sure as shit want to know.E

Edit - Apparently they are being a little more direct with Russia’s involvement now. Eesh. The CIA thinks that they were, the FBI doesn’t think there is enough evidence.

0 Likes

#29

My problem with is is the media stirring up the angle of “we all need to be gravely concerned about Russia meddling in our election”, meanwhile it’s perfectly OK for foreign governments to contribute millions of dollars to Hillary? Those millions of dollars are just another way of meddling in our election, and they are far more effective than releasing some embarrassing emails.

And lets not forget this is nothing new. Remember when Boris Yeltsin was sitting at 5% in his re-election bid and then the US got involved? Of course you don’t, because the media wants you to think this Russian thing is a never before heard of occurrence.

http://theduran.com/power-of-projection-american-meddling-in-russian-election-in-1996/

0 Likes

#30

No, I don’t remember that because I was 12 and living in Canada.

If true, I would venture to guess this is unprecedented for a US election to be tampered with by foreign interests. Sounds pretty damn important to me, regardless of ‘media angles’. I don’t give a fuck about Hillary. She lost and will likely remain a loser in this.

0 Likes

#31

russia’s role in the election is being overblown.

if they could be proven to have hacked the DNC and proven to provide the emails to wikileaks that still wouldnt be that bad.

it would only be an issue if they made up the DNC emails or manipulated the content before it went public.

the content of the emails is what impacted the DNC and possibly the election…not the provision of the emails.

0 Likes

#32

this

0 Likes

#33

@bing Totally agree. DNC shot themselves in the foot with all of that. There’s still legitimacy behind questioning why DNC emails were leaked, but not RNC. (Not that it would have changed anything.)

I’m more concerned about whether or not there was a direct effect during election day.

0 Likes

#34

She lost, get over it.

Seriously though. I think the efficacy of one method or the other is subjective.

One is a method of influencing a candidate, the other has an impact on the election itself. Now, one has a more tangible impact going forward and the other is nothing more than a what if scenario. It’s just not relevant to the current discussion.

0 Likes

#35

$5 says they did all the shit they say they did surrounding leaks and such, but I’d bet a lot more that they didn’t hack counts etc that it sounds like the DNC suspects.

When are the Saudi’s going to ask for a refund is what I’m curious about.

0 Likes

#36

The recounts that have been done so far pretty much proved they didn’t hack the counts. They’ve been doing hand recounts and it’s a handful of votes being picked up for each side, exactly what you’d expect from machines counting paper ballots. If Russia had hacked machines we’d be seeing much larger discrepancies that benefited one side over the other.

So like Bing said, it’s overblown nonsense about some emails. Not emails hackers fabricated either, actual emails that showed how shady the DNC was. Re: the whole, “but they didn’t leak an RNC stuff”… Ever think maybe the RNC didn’t run as corrupt a campaign? The RNC didn’t have super delegates. The RNC didn’t rig their primary to make sure the establishment candidate won either. The RNC wasn’t happy about Trump but they let the system play out and he became the nominee. The DNC wasn’t happy about Bernie and did everything in their power to make sure Hillary was anointed.

0 Likes

#37

lol.

0 Likes

#38

You laugh, but if the RNC ran the same corrupt campaign during the primary as the DNC did either Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio would have been our nominee. That corruption by the DNC is exactly what got exposed in the hacked emails.

0 Likes

#39

Lol oops. Gotta love spell check. Hypocritic

Everyone knows they are both corrupt but we got to see first hand how bad and careless the DNC was and is. I also agree if the RNC was as corrupt, Trump would have been pushed out hard and we would see someone come up randomly.

0 Likes

#40

you’re saying that you don’t think the RNC did everything they could to avoid Trump?

0 Likes