The President Trump Megathread

mibro

NES Member
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
12,238
Likes
9,064
Location
Mass.
They may think it will be good for them until hillary seizes power with a compliant justice system that won't procecute any corruption. All her cronies are in place and ready to go after whom ever she wants, paid with millions in bribes and willing to end our costitutional rights..
I agree with you 100%. But the left has always been about short term gain and to hell with the long term consequences. It's the mentality of armed robbery.
 

namedpipes

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
May 7, 2008
Messages
32,530
Likes
15,251
Location
PREM
... Everyone loved George Washington because he was a good person and he was, eventually, a winner.
Did the over 300 slaves he owned love him as well?

Everyone has their skeletons in the closet.


Bill Clinton isn't running for president.
Depending on how you count, either Bill is running now for his third term as president, or Cankles is.
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
10,527
Likes
6,476
Did the over 300 slaves he owned love him as well?

Everyone has their skeletons in the closet.




Depending on how you count, either Bill is running now for his third term as president, or Cankles is.
300 is that all

http://newobserveronline.com/hidden-facts-about-slavery-in-america/

Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. Black Duke University professor John Hope Franklin recorded that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city.

So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people. In his essay, " 'The Known World' of Free Black Slaveholders," Thomas J. Pressly, using Woodson's statistics, calculated that 54 (or about 1 percent) of these black slave owners in 1830 owned between 20 and 84 slaves; 172 (about 4 percent) owned between 10 to 19 slaves; and 3,550 (about 94 percent) each owned between 1 and 9 slaves. Crucially, 42 percent owned just one slave.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
3,406
Likes
819
Location
Help I'm steppin' into the twilight zone
The site actually considers the global scale, not just the scale in the US, so the "far left" is probably left of where we think the left is :).
OK, Hitlery might be right of Merkel, not saying much.

Mr. Trump wants far more than to enforce immigration laws. He wants to build a huge wall (and there's no way Mexico is paying for it), deport 11 million people (which will mean significant increase in ICE at a significant cost) and to ban people of religions he doesn't agree with.
Mrs. Clinton, on the other hand, has actually voted for the wall (a fence, but along the same border). Whatever her dreams my be, her record shows that she has supported building a fence in the past. I have no idea what either of them will do in the future.
I think a lot of the build a wall deal is symbolic for strict enforcement of immigration. I don't expect him to actually build a wall. Probably in some areas, in others a fence or maybe even just increased ICE personnel. More ICE personnel is a drop in the bucket compared to the drain on our entitlement system illegal immigrants are. Not to mention the violence, lawlessness, etc some of them bring with them. Hitlery might have voted for a fence in the past but she wants open borders now.

Neither discuss balancing the budget or the deficit.
Neither of them do anything about "entitlements" (social security, etc.) which, if not addressed will fail (but probably not under their reign, so not their problem...).
Getting the illegal immigrants out will help a lot with getting a handle on the entitlements but it won't solve it all by itself. Hitlery has said she is in favor of more handouts, that will not make it better. I have not heard Trump's views on entitlements other than general statements about getting legal Americans working again, which will help a lot too.

Mr. Trump has stated that he is in favor of single payer, which is to the left of Mrs. Clinton's keeping the ACA (which I agree is a disaster, but so is single payer).
I have not heard him say he wants a single payer system. That would be anti-competition and he has said he wants to increase competition by allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines. That does not sound like single payer to me.

Mr. Trump claims he wants to reduce government, but many of his policies contradict this. As mentioned above, he wants to increase ICE. He wants to increase DHS. He's in favor of spying. He's a fan of "stop and frisk".
I will agree that Mr. Trump has said he's going to get rid of "Waste, fraud, and abuse", but has provided no specifics on that. He has mentioned cuts to the Dept. of Education and the EPA, so there is some possibility.
I don't agree with all of his policies and I do not agree with stop and frisk at all, nor do I agree with any restriction on free speech. In this respect I agree with you, he is too much like Hitlery.

This I disagree with. She clearly has policy and position on Foreign policy, which is exactly what excludes her from ever getting my vote. Everyone talks about the 4 people at Bengahzi, but that's a detail. Her foreign policy is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people and the overthrow of multiple governments. On matters of foreign policy she is extremely hawkish (which is generally characterized as "right", with some obvious left examples as well).
Her stated policies are all garbage but she has also been quoted as having one set of public policies different policies in private. i.e. she has no real policy, she will change it depending on the audience and who the highest bidder is. Her only set policy is that her policies are for sale.

I agree, she's a terrible person.
That said, Mr. Trump says things like “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me, If I say do it, they’re going to do it.” when discussing ordering people to commit war crimes, so...


You needn't convince me to not vote for Mrs. Clinton. It will never happen.

We've discussed some differences, now some similarities...

Both are anti-trade. Both support "protectionism" on trade (tarrifs, penalties, etc.).
I have not heard Hitlery talk about doing anything to try to get jobs to stay in America. With her globalist attitude I find it hard to believe she is really concerned about American jobs leaving. In fact she probably will encourage it since it will line the pockets of her cronies and her.

Both are completely without any detailed policy stance on what to do with our involvement in the Middle East.
Not true. She has stated she wants to get tough on Russian involvement including a no fly zone in Syria which really could lead to nuclear war. Trump is willing to work with Russia to fight ISIS rather than start WWIII. As you stated she is a war monger.

Both are in favor of "curtailing" the 1st amendment when it doesn't fit their needs.
I agree with you here as I stated earlier but at least Trump has stated his support for the second amendment which is a huge key. Hitlery wants Australian style confiscation.

Both are in favor of the expansion of spying on all of us.
Not sure on this so I will concede this point.

Both are in favor of less state rights and more federal control, whether we're talking about insurance or crime, and everything in between.
So that makes them both politicians.

Both think that the biggest problem with our govenrnent is that they aren't in charge of it.
LOL, well that's true but I don't really see that as any different from any other candidate.

Unfortunately Mr. Trump is also a very bad candidate. Almost anyone else would easily win against Mrs. Clinton if running on the R ticket.
True but any other candidate would have been just another establishment stooge like George Bush Sr. and Jr. Trump will screw some things up, I don't pretend he won't but we need to break the establishment hold and he does have a chance to do that. Hitlery will plunge us deeper into establishment control, maybe to the point we can never come back from it. That is the biggest and most important difference.

Anyway, I'm out of time but good posts by you, good discussion!
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Messages
5,122
Likes
1,604
The site actually considers the global scale, not just the scale in the US, so the "far left" is probably left of where we think the left is :).


Mr. Trump wants far more than to enforce immigration laws. He wants to build a huge wall (and there's no way Mexico is paying for it), deport 11 million people (which will mean significant increase in ICE at a significant cost) and to ban people of religions he doesn't agree with.
Mrs. Clinton, on the other hand, has actually voted for the wall (a fence, but along the same border). Whatever her dreams my be, her record shows that she has supported building a fence in the past. I have no idea what either of them will do in the future.

Neither discuss balancing the budget or the deficit.
Neither of them do anything about "entitlements" (social security, etc.) which, if not addressed will fail (but probably not under their reign, so not their problem...).

Mr. Trump has stated that he is in favor of single payer, which is to the left of Mrs. Clinton's keeping the ACA (which I agree is a disaster, but so is single payer).

Mr. Trump claims he wants to reduce government, but many of his policies contradict this. As mentioned above, he wants to increase ICE. He wants to increase DHS. He's in favor of spying. He's a fan of "stop and frisk".
I will agree that Mr. Trump has said he's going to get rid of "Waste, fraud, and abuse", but has provided no specifics on that. He has mentioned cuts to the Dept. of Education and the EPA, so there is some possibility.

This I disagree with. She clearly has policy and position on Foreign policy, which is exactly what excludes her from ever getting my vote. Everyone talks about the 4 people at Bengahzi, but that's a detail. Her foreign policy is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people and the overthrow of multiple governments. On matters of foreign policy she is extremely hawkish (which is generally characterized as "right", with some obvious left examples as well).

I agree, she's a terrible person.
That said, Mr. Trump says things like “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me, If I say do it, they’re going to do it.” when discussing ordering people to commit war crimes, so...


You needn't convince me to not vote for Mrs. Clinton. It will never happen.

We've discussed some differences, now some similarities...

Both are anti-trade. Both support "protectionism" on trade (tarrifs, penalties, etc.).
Both are completely without any detailed policy stance on what to do with our involvement in the Middle East.
Both are in favor of "curtailing" the 1st amendment when it doesn't fit their needs.
Both are in favor of the expansion of spying on all of us.
Both are in favor of less state rights and more federal control, whether we're talking about insurance or crime, and everything in between.
Both think that the biggest problem with our govenrnent is that they aren't in charge of it.

Unfortunately Mr. Trump is also a very bad candidate. Almost anyone else would easily win against Mrs. Clinton if running on the R ticket.

If he builds the wall, I 100% believe Mexico will pay for it. I'm not so naive to think they'll go on TV with a huge novelty check for the full amount - but I think that's what people seem to envision. Tariffs could cover the cost within the first couple years tops.

- - - Updated - - -

They may think it will be good for them until hillary seizes power with a compliant justice system that won't procecute any corruption. All her cronies are in place and ready to go after whom ever she wants, paid with millions in bribes and willing to end our costitutional rights..
The revenge she would unleash if she took the throne would be epic and make her previously exposed corruption look like child's play.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
1,104
Likes
226
Location
Chichester, NH
OK, Hitlery might be right of Merkel, not saying much.

I have not heard him say he wants a single payer system. That would be anti-competition and he has said he wants to increase competition by allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines. That does not sound like single payer to me.
1999 interview with Larry King
"If you can’t take care of your sick in the country, forget it, it’s all over. ... I believe in universal healthcare."

In his 2000 Book, the America We Deserve he also made a strong pitch for Universal Healthcare.

(Fairly recently...) 60 Minutes Interview:
TRUMP: “Everybody's got to be covered. This is an un-Republican thing for me to say because a lot of times they say, 'No, no, the lower 25 percent that can't afford private. But—'”
PELLEY: “Universal health care.”
TRUMP: “I am going to take care of everybody. I don't care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody's going to be taken care of much better than they're taken care of now.”
PELLEY: “The uninsured person is going to be taken care of. How? How?”
TRUMP: “They're going to be taken care of. I would make a deal with existing hospitals to take care of people. And, you know what, if this is probably—”
PELLEY: “Make a deal? Who pays for it?”
TRUMP: —the government's gonna pay for it. But we're going to save so much money on the other side. But for the most it's going to be a private plan and people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans with lots of different competition with lots of competitors with great companies and they can have their doctors, they can have plans, they can have everything."

And First republican presidential debate:
"As far as single payer, it works in Canada. It works incredibly well in Scotland. It could have worked in a different age, which is the age you’re talking about here."
(And I don't really even understand what the end of this means, but the way he structures sentences, sometimes it's impossible to know what he means).
"What I’d like to see is a private system without the artificial lines around every state …..Get rid of the artificial lines and you will have yourself great plans. And then we have to take care of the people that can’t take care of themselves. And I will do that through a different system."
("different system" = Single Payer :))
Not true. She has stated she wants to get tough on Russian involvement including a no fly zone in Syria which really could lead to nuclear war. Trump is willing to work with Russia to fight ISIS rather than start WWIII. As you stated she is a war monger.
Fair point. I had forgotten (or perhaps blocked out) her "no fly zone" BS. She is terrifying on foreign policy, but I've already commented on that :).

Anyway, I'm out of time but good posts by you, good discussion!
Agreed and the same to you!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
1,104
Likes
226
Location
Chichester, NH
If he builds the wall, I 100% believe Mexico will pay for it. I'm not so naive to think they'll go on TV with a huge novelty check for the full amount - but I think that's what people seem to envision. Tariffs could cover the cost within the first couple years tops.
A tariff on imported Mexican goods doesn't meant that Mexico is paying for it. It means that we are paying for it.

If we charge an additional $25 for every box that crosses the border, the US customer is paying $25 more for each box that crosses the border. The US customers of Mexican companies would be paying for the wall.
 

Spanz

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
30,763
Likes
16,422
If he builds the wall, I 100% believe Mexico will pay for it. I'm not so naive to think they'll go on TV with a huge novelty check for the full amount - but I think that's what people seem to envision. Tariffs could cover the cost within the first couple years tops.
.
easily. the nafta deal means Mexico (and Canada) can dump crap in the USA, but for some reason, Mexico and Canada can still tariff our stuff going across their borders. So **** them and the horse they rode in on....when Mexico sends stuff manufactured there that used to be made here, just slap a 50% tariff on it. If they bitch, make it 60%
 

Spanz

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
30,763
Likes
16,422
A tariff on imported Mexican goods doesn't meant that Mexico is paying for it. It means that we are paying for it.
.
not necessarily. say you tariff only fungible goods. Like if we can get air conditioners from Korea, China, India....then Mexico can not up their sales price to cover the tariff, since Home Depot will just buy samsung or LG ones instead and keep the price low.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
10,995
Likes
417
Location
Vermont, a Free State
I rarely agree with Michael Moore but here is spot on:
I've seen that. Moore is a fan of Bernie, and truth be known, what Trump wants to do is closer to what Bernie wants than Hillary is.

I'll add that it appears he's been right most, if not all, of the POTUS elections over the past 20+ years, and he sees Trump winning. And, others with this level record see the same thing. The infotainment industry is obviously biased, and has been wrong more than a few times.

Ha ha ha ha

Democrats ask judge to sanction Republicans over Trump

The stench of desperation...
Pretty funny when there's a few suits out there right now accusing them of election fraud, complete with evidence. I think this is more of a deflection tactic hoping to draw attention from their own documented election fraud. Dumb and clueless is no way to go through life, and if they didn't know that, they're about to find out.

Actually Hitlery wants Obamacare to FAIL and then she can put in her single payer system which is even WORSE than Obamacare
I think you'll find the reason for Obamacare even existing was to fail, so it could be replaced with single payer. And, single payer would have way too much political baggage to go with passing it then. Now, they plan on justifying it to fix Obamacare. The only people that are duped by this are the same people that will vote for them, no matter what.

The revenge she would unleash if she took the throne would be epic and make her previously exposed corruption look like child's play.
If she somehow gets in office, she will either be assassinated or we'll see a civil war/revolution or both within 2 years. More like within 6 months, of course. I won't be the one that assassinates here, nor do I know who, but somebody will probably feel desperate enough.

And, she will certainly start her revenge against anybody that has ever wronged her. That won't be pretty, and probably won't be bloodless.

not necessarily. say you tariff only fungible goods. Like if we can get air conditioners from Korea, China, India....then Mexico can not up their sales price to cover the tariff, since Home Depot will just buy samsung or LG ones instead and keep the price low.
Americans may actually be footing the money, but it will be coming out of the manufacturer's profits.

We all know how supply and demand pricing works. If they try jacking the price up by simply adding the tariff to the current retail price, they probably won't be selling many. Then, they will drop the price accordingly, to be competitive enough to sell.
 

CaseHardened

Banned
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Messages
3,664
Likes
571
Did the over 300 slaves he owned love him as well?
I do not know.

But many dark people were already slaves in Africa before they were sold to Americans.

Often by Arabs - who TODAY own dark slaves.

I realize part of slavery is lack of choice, but if these unfortunate people had a choice, I wonder how many would have returned to the slavery in Africa in place of the slavery they knew under Washington.

History does tell us few wished to leave America for Liberia when they were given the choice as free people.

And judging by Liberia today, they were wise to remain.
 

Pilgrim

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
16,012
Likes
1,233
Location
RETIRED, at home or wherever I want to be
I hate this 'early voting'. This is fraud in action. Hillary could be caught on live TV, dining on roast baby, then stabbing a black pregnant woman in the stomach, while screaming 'death to Israel' and 'Alluah Akbar' (however that's spelled), and she could still win the election because so many of the people have voted before election day.

Early voting has to be the invention of a Democrap.
 
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
8,325
Likes
3,335
Location
Milky Way
I hate this 'early voting'. This is fraud in action. Hillary could be caught on live TV, dining on roast baby, then stabbing a black pregnant woman in the stomach, while screaming 'death to Israel' and 'Alluah Akbar' (however that's spelled), and she could still win the election because so many of the people have voted before election day.

Early voting has to be the invention of a Democrap.
Agree! Some of the pundits are already making predictions based on whether a Dem or Rep ballot was requested.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
1,400
Likes
605
White Knight destroys Trump's star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, and admits to it to TMZ. http://www.tmz.com/2016/10/26/donald-trump-star-vandal-interview-james-otis/

http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=45427
[h=1]Homeless Trump supporter guards Donald Trump's star on Hollywood Blvd[/h]
Days after Donald Trump's Hollywood Walk of Fame star was vandalized, a homeless Trump supporter now guards Trump's star on Hollywood Blvd against social justice warriors.
(more signs in link)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top Bottom