Trump protestors

[iNow]

Okay, so you've answered your own question. Please confirm understanding.

[tar]

iNow,

 

Perhaps your argument is that it appeared that all the leaders in the free world were afraid that Trump would win, and wanted Hilary.

 

Regards, TAR

[iNow]

No, that is not my argument. I'm sorry that you didn't understand.

 

RangerX: I don't live in the US

You: Then why do you care

Me: Our actions impact the entire world

You: Are you saying leaders are afraid of Trump

Me: Oh, FFS... never mind

[tar]

In any case the leaders of the free world did not laugh at Trump, after the election. They sought an audience with him.

iNow,

 

My point is that regardless of whether you like Trump or think he is dangerous, the time for debate is over. He will be the leader of the free world in Jan. Protest is somewhat mistimed.

 

Regards, TAR

[Delta1212]

In any case the leaders of the free world did not laugh at Trump, after the election. They sought an audience with him.

Well no shit. He's the President of the United States and they're not idiots. You don't publically laugh at him. You publically flatter him, because that's how you get what you want from him.

[CharonY]

Interestingly basically none of the years you listed are supported by reality. If you throw away toxic stuff you are in for a fine, not jail time. And if we did not penalize that you would complain about not having any potable water. Drugs on the countryside are mostly a prescription drug or meth (sold and bought predominantly by whites). Social security is to a big part a demographic issue, as the worker-to-beneficiary ratio is dropping. No political side can change that. As far as I can tell Trump did not address the issue at all. Do you have any shred of evidence that the 1% Muslims in the USA are in any way affecting your way of life? It seems to me that you are doing it to yourself by fearing them.

Whether people look for you for guidance should be entirely independent on your skin colour or age, but based on what you say, what you do and how you behave towards others. How is the government taking over households? By making a point that women can and should also be breadwinners?

 

A different point regarding job, low-level blue collar jobs are a huge issue as in the modern economy they are likely not able to sustain a family. There needs to be a change in the system, in order to prepare the youth for a changing world. And this is something that pretty much no one really hast touched yet, probably because there are no simple solutions. It makes sense that working class families (regardless of colour) feel like losers of the economy, because they are. Unfortunately, they do have a point that both sides have ignored them to a bit. Unfortunately Trump acknowledged specifically white males using the lowest common denominator. Disdain for those that are worse or better off then them. Rather than having struggling low-income folks united, traditionally there is a split along ethnic lines, which I can only presume to be a part of a divide and conquer strategy.

[rangerx]

rangerx,

 

why is anything about the American political system then important to you, one way or the other

 

yes I forgot you don't have a president, but we are talking about the protestors, and you are arguing as if you are a protestor

 

Regards, TAR

 

American's once prided themselves on being a moral compass to the rest of the world. That went out the window when Trump was elected.

 

I have every right to civil protest in my country as you in yours. I respect the constitution and laws of all democratic countries.

 

However, you've been parroting "protestor" in a derogatory tone from the outset your contribution to this thread. That speaks more to your bigotry than my and your countrymen's political alignment.

[CharonY]

In any case the leaders of the free world did not laugh at Trump, after the election. They sought an audience with him.

iNow,

 

My point is that regardless of whether you like Trump or think he is dangerous, the time for debate is over. He will be the leader of the free world in Jan. Protest is somewhat mistimed.

 

Regards, TAR

 

They did make fun of him while he was running and at least Merkel (German chancellor) did offer uncharacteristic veiled criticism on Trump.

[tar]

Delta1212,

 

Well of course. And that is why people curried favor with a former president and a future president, by giving huge sums of money to Bill or Hillary or the Clinton foundation. Some of those donations have dried up all of a sudden.

 

But claims of Trump being unprepared and unfit and dangerous are part of the campaign and have not been verified by reality yet.

 

Regards, TAR

[swansont]

SwansonT,

 

I have had a problem on this board, arguing the position that people less capable than you have equal say, as Americans, as to how they want to see things go. In the context of Religion, it is argued that just because the majority of the planet is religious, does not mean they are right. Why then not also consider that the majority of the country might feel differently about things, than someone with critical thinking skills and high intelligence? My 90 10 rule, is undeniable in its logic. 90 percent of the population is not in the top 10 percent of the population, when you look at any characteristic measured on a scale from below average to average to above average. Intelligence, wealth, charisma, trustworthiness, strength, size, speed, or whatever measure you are looking at.

Hilary's central theme was we are stronger together, meaning that multiculturalism was superior to xenophobia. This is reasonable in many ways, but does not even consider that each race, creed, religion, is composed of its top 10 and its bottom 90 percent in whatever measure you wish to apply. And that if we are stronger together, that includes old white guys, that may be a little racist, xenophobic, misogynistic, selfish, and these people, like me are not enemies of the state, and in most cases are the backbone of society. Whether I am seen as one of the 90 percent, or one of the 10 percent, in some or another measure.

 

What I mean by that, is that just because you voted democrat, does not make you right, or put you in the top 10 percent of every measure of great human being. You can not mathematically have, in your camp, only 10 percenters, AND constitute the majority of the population...well you can in the sense that if you take 60 percent of the population there is a good chance that just about everybody ranks in the top 10 percent of one characteristic or another, but the chances of all in your camp being good and all in the other camp being bad are not high, because goodness and evilness are not even being measured. Evilness is being erroneously charged by the other team.

 

 

 

Regardless of my ranking on the intelligence list, I can detect a red herring. Though the shift you've made here from what the argument was to what you've stated would give many people whiplash.

 

So much for your choice not long ago of the path of intellectual honesty.

 

One option here would have been to admit that you did not, in fact, defend Obama the same way you're defending Trump/Pence, because one tends (I think) to be more critical of the opposition arguments than ones you agree with. I know I've missed points in discussions because I was not as critical in reading things with which I agree than things I oppose, and only see them later on when someone else points them out. And then agree that in the grand scheme of things, booing is a pretty low-level sort of protest.

 

I have no idea if this is the case, but it's at least an example of an honest reply, instead of trying to rationalize being racist/xenophobic/misogynistic, and then trying to re-characterize and strawman my position and cast it in terms of your 90-10 rule.

[tar]

swansonT,

 

I am sorry I don't stick to one point at a time. I tend to argue a general theme. If the argument was that booing was a gentle form of disapproval that should not be considered un-American, and that people that booed were just admonishing Pence to have an inclusive administration, OK.

 

Regards, TAR

 

They did make fun of him while he was running and at least Merkel (German chancellor) did offer uncharacteristic veiled criticism on Trump.

 

I understand, but that was the election. Now that he will be President he is equal to Obama in power and influence, and as Obama had no experience as President, on the first day, so now is Trump in that situation. Merkel does not now have the luxury of speaking of him as Hilary's foe, he is now going to be the representative of the U.S. to the world, among the other roles of the POTUS.

 

And in this, my argument that we need to change tone toward Trump. He is not the clown that thinks he knows more than the Generals anymore. He is the guy that will know more than the generals, and tell them how to proceed.

 

I was using the squirrel and the oil as proxy situations to point out that there are ways you can get in trouble with the government, based on newly passed laws and regulations, that outlawed behavior that was normal, expected behavior earlier in my life. And this scared me, that I can now get in trouble for stuff that used to be accepted.

 

I understand the difficulty in retooling Americans to compete in an information age in some clean manner. That is why it might be alright, to in the interim, regain some of the manufacturing we exported to pollute other countries, and do it here, in as scrubbingly and clean a way as we can design.

 

Regards, TAR

[rangerx]

rangerx,

 

for understanding from whence you come, who is your leader?

of course I am iNow

 

One of my major reasons for disliking Hilary as a choice is Syria.

The president of the U.S. is the leader of the free world. Therefore if you are a citizen of a country considered to be part of the free world, then Trump is your leader, or will be if things proceed as outlined in our election laws.

 

That is none of your business. But I will tell you I vote for the man... never the party. Unlike America's political indoctrination to toe party lines at all costs.

 

And hogwash about the leader of the free world. Get over yourself. American exceptionalism is complete nonsense. The idea that the United States is uniquely virtuous may be comforting to Americans, but it is laughable in other countries, especially after the clown car, dog and pony show of an election the entire world recently witnessed. Not to mention the total, hypocrisy of demonizing of your previous president and a malicious, phony criminal prosecution of a recent candidate. Guilty until proven innocent or otherwise elected. Yep, that's how America works.

 

For shame.

[CharonY]

swansonT,

 

I am sorry I don't stick to one point at a time. I tend to argue a general theme. If the argument was that booing was a gentle form of disapproval that should not be considered un-American, and that people that booed were just admonishing Pence to have an inclusive administration, OK.

 

Regards, TAR

 

 

I understand, but that was the election. Now that he will be President he is equal to Obama in power and influence, and as Obama had no experience as President, on the first day, so now is Trump in that situation. Merkel does not now have the luxury of speaking of him as Hilary's foe, he is now going to be the representative of the U.S. to the world, among the other roles of the POTUS.N

 

Nope, it was in the traditional congratulatory speech where Merkel said that she was looking forward to continue working with the US contingent on “shared values of democracy, freedom and respect for the law and the dignity of man, independent of origin, skin colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or political views.”

 

The last bit is the unusual part as friendship was always assumed with the US, even in light of the Iraq issue.

Edited November 21, 2016 by CharonY

[tar]

it takes a lot of heat to smelt ore

battery power doesn't help and the heavy metals in batteries are not easy on the environment anyway

charonY,

 

Ok, Trump has some large amount of xenophobic speech to overcome on the world stage. But there is a certain ethnic nationalism that was expressed in the Brexit vote and a certain ethnic nationalism that the French started feeling after the Paris attack. I like Merkel a lot, and think a woman of her character could have easily won my vote here in the U.S. but she is up for reelection, and if the New Years stuff has turned some Germans away from happily accepting the Syrian refugees, she may have to loosen her principles a little to win that fourth term.

 

Regards, TAR

rangerx,

 

So we were a laughing stock anyway?

 

Regards, TAR

[CharonY]

it takes a lot of heat to smelt ore

battery power doesn't help and the heavy metals in batteries are not easy on the environment anyway

charonY,

 

Ok, Trump has some large amount of xenophobic speech to overcome on the world stage. But there is a certain ethnic nationalism that was expressed in the Brexit vote and a certain ethnic nationalism that the French started feeling after the Paris attack. I like Merkel a lot, and think a woman of her character could have easily won my vote here in the U.S. but she is up for reelection, and if the New Years stuff has turned some Germans away from happily accepting the Syrian refugees, she may have to loosen her principles a little to win that fourth term.

 

Regards, TAR

 

On danger of going off-topic, but that is precisely what is not happening. Most politicians have been trying to leverage the refugee crisis to stoke panic and it mostly benefited the populist-right. However, somewhat uncharacteristic (as Merkel is more known to be an opportunist rather than an ideologue) she pretty much stuck to her colours for the most part. So she is actually one of the few sticking to her principles (which still surprises me) and is not making concessions to the populists. While it will cost her votes, it sends a strong signal that she is catering to the center, which may stabilize her base somewhat.

[Ten oz]

Hillary Clinton currently has 1.7 million more votes than Trump and the number is still growing as states continue to finish counting all their mail in votes. Clinton is expected to finish with more than 2 million more votes than Trump. That is more votes than the entire population living in any of the following states: Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Rhode Island, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virgina, and Wyoming.

[waitforufo]

Hillary Clinton currently has 1.7 million more votes than Trump and the number is still growing as states continue to finish counting all their mail in votes. Clinton is expected to finish with more than 2 million more votes than Trump. That is more votes than the entire population living in any of the following states: Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Rhode Island, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virgina, and Wyoming.

So what? Two million votes in the wrong states. Is there a point to this post? Trump won. Get over it.

[Acme]

cross-post

...I was using the squirrel and the oil as proxy situations to point out that there are ways you can get in trouble with the government, based on newly passed laws and regulations, that outlawed behavior that was normal, expected behavior earlier in my life. And this scared me, that I can now get in trouble for stuff that used to be accepted. ...

Regards, TAR

It used to be normal accepted behavior to burn witches and own slaves -to mention a couple other proxy situations- so what is your point?

.. Trump won. Get over it.

Mitch McConnell and his ilk never got over Obama; isn't what's good for the goose, good for the gander? Edited November 22, 2016 by Acme

[MigL]

Welcome back Acme.

 

This is only an opinion so if any of you think it applies to you, chances are, it does.

Much has been made of the attacks B Obama had to endure during his two terms ( much of it from D Trump himself ) regarding his place of birth, his religion, etc.

.All while doing a more than respectable job of being President.

And a lot of the people who label themselves 'progressives' decried that as unfair and unjust attacks on his person, not his policies.

Well, here's your chance to prove you're better than those who label themselves as 'conservative', and you won't stoop to 'gutter' fighting.

 

Protest is a healthy thing in a democracy, so by all means, protest any of D Trump's policies you don't agree with.

But if you attack the President Elect personally ( no I don't like him either, but he's not my President ), you're no better than the Republicans were during the last 8 yrs.

And you've lost your moral high ground.

[John Cuthber]

So what? Two million votes in the wrong states. Is there a point to this post? Trump won. Get over it.

So, what you are saying is that the US has no democracy- but people shouldn't protest, they should " get over it"

How do you distinguish that from fascism?

[rangerx]

 

So we were a laughing stock anyway?

 

Regards, TAR

 

To varying degrees. Having been in the service and from a family with long standing service, one can appreciate America's contribution.

 

The issue myself and many of my countrymen have with that though, is any (even the slightest) dissent is viewed upon as ungratefulness, pacifism or any other derogatory label d'jour.

 

It's no secret America is deeply divided along party lines and no one takes responsibility for it, but to double down with intransigence, jingoism or protectionism.

 

If you think for one minute Tar, that abolishing pollution laws, stiffing trade partners and marginalizing citizen groups makes America great again, have at it. Just don't expect other countries to follow suit.

Edited November 22, 2016 by rangerx

[Ten oz]

So what? Two million votes in the wrong states. Is there a point to this post? Trump won. Get over it.

There is a degree at which you would feel differently. What if Clinton had 4 million more, 10 million more, 20 million more. At 2 million we are already in unprecedented terrority. No candidate for POTUS has every won 2 million more votes and lost. In 00' Al Gore won 500 thousand more votes. This (2 million) is 4 times greater. Would you accept another quadrupling to 8 million and still post "so what". And this issue isn't limited to the Executive Branch:

 

"Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan D.C. publication, said House Democrats out-drew their Republican counterparts by more than 1 million votes--1.37 million votes to be precise, Cook’s House editor, David Wasserman.

Between the two parties, Democrats won 50.59 percent of the vote while winning 46 percent of seats, leaving the Republicans with 234 seats and Democrats with 201.

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2013/nov/26/lloyd-doggett/democrats-outpolled-republicans-who-landed-33-seat/

 

Republicans are also win more seats in the legislative branch without the popular vote. We (USA) push democracy all out the world and yet here in our own country we are allowing a single political ideology to consolidate power without majority support. There is a point when it must change. You don't believe now is that time. When would the time be? How many votes would it take to perk your interest?

[swansont]

So what? Two million votes in the wrong states. Is there a point to this post? Trump won. Get over it.

 

 

 

 

NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO CRITICIZE THE GALAXY NOTE 7

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/now-is-not-the-time-to-criticize-the-galaxy-note-7

 

Here’s the thing though, we did choose, and you should all stop protesting against it. Yes, more of you voted for the iPhone, but you also seem to forget that the mail room staff liked how the Galaxy Note 7 has such fun games, and their votes count more. That’s the system that we have always used, that’s the system we will always use. Get used to it.

 

[Ten oz]

Welcome back Acme.

 

This is only an opinion so if any of you think it applies to you, chances are, it does.

Much has been made of the attacks B Obama had to endure during his two terms ( much of it from D Trump himself ) regarding his place of birth, his religion, etc.

.All while doing a more than respectable job of being President.

And a lot of the people who label themselves 'progressives' decried that as unfair and unjust attacks on his person, not his policies.

Well, here's your chance to prove you're better than those who label themselves as 'conservative', and you won't stoop to 'gutter' fighting.

 

Protest is a healthy thing in a democracy, so by all means, protest any of D Trump's policies you don't agree with.

But if you attack the President Elect personally ( no I don't like him either, but he's not my President ), you're no better than the Republicans were during the last 8 yrs.

And you've lost your moral high ground.

When Tea Party protest rose up all over and conservatives were out protesting Obama I don't recall Liberals arguing that they shouldn't protest. Hundreds of thousands of consewrvatives marched on the National Mall for the 9/12 Taxpayer's march. I recall liberals arguing that they shouldn't hold racist signs with pictures of a monkey's body with the Presidents face on it and what not but no one argued that they had no right to be out there. There is no double standard here. Protest in itself is not disrespectful and Obama endured far greater than what we are currently seeing.

[waitforufo]

Mitch McConnell and his ilk never got over Obama; isn't what's good for the goose, good for the gander?

I was commenting on the popular vote count. The popular vote count is irrelevant. Donald Trump was elected by the states, in accordance with the US constitution, to be the next president of the United States. That is what you need to get over. Protest and attempt to obstruct him all you want, just quit denying that Trump won.

 

I appreciate that you are simply in the bargaining stage of grief, but you are not going to win the bargain with irrelevant facts.

 

There is a degree at which you would feel differently. What if Clinton had 4 million more, 10 million more, 20 million more. At 2 million we are already in unprecedented terrority. No candidate for POTUS has every won 2 million more votes and lost. In 00' Al Gore won 500 thousand more votes. This (2 million) is 4 times greater. Would you accept another quadrupling to 8 million and still post "so what". And this issue isn't limited to the Executive Branch:

 

"Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan D.C. publication, said House Democrats out-drew their Republican counterparts by more than 1 million votes--1.37 million votes to be precise, Cook’s House editor, David Wasserman.

Between the two parties, Democrats won 50.59 percent of the vote while winning 46 percent of seats, leaving the Republicans with 234 seats and Democrats with 201.

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2013/nov/26/lloyd-doggett/democrats-outpolled-republicans-who-landed-33-seat/

 

Republicans are also win more seats in the legislative branch without the popular vote. We (USA) push democracy all out the world and yet here in our own country we are allowing a single political ideology to consolidate power without majority support. There is a point when it must change. You don't believe now is that time. When would the time be? How many votes would it take to perk your interest?

No, there is no degree at which I would feel differently. We must follow our constitution. The constitution defines methods to change or amend the constitution. The time to change or amend the constitution would be when the rules defined by the constitution are followed and the changes are approved by three fourths of the states. Not a moment before then.

 

Swansont, the iPhone won't be the president either.

Edited November 22, 2016 by waitforufo