You are not logged in. Please register or login.

#1531 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 501 weeks ago

Randall Flagg wrote:

Trump has created tens of thousands of jobs.

Sure he creates jobs, but he doesn't pay them anything.

I think we can put that myth to bed at this point. Sure he "created jobs" but he's a failure as a CEO, and the little guy suffers as a result, as did the shareholders. He's fantastic at branding, but that's it. Anybody who loses nearly 1 billion running a fucking casino isn't very good at business.

#1532 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 501 weeks ago

Randall Flagg wrote:

Half this country are a bunch of fuck ups that can't even earn enough income to pay federal taxes.

Like Trump?

#1533 Re: The Garden » The Rant Thread » 501 weeks ago

Neemo wrote:

So I've had my car less than 2 weeks and some fucking ASSHOLE hit me in a parking lot while I was getting groceries...no note or anything

Someone deserves a dick punch

We've had that happen to us, not once...but five times with our old Toyota. One time was our neighbor who did it and drove away, and still denied it when we called the police. The only reason we knew was because another neighbor told us. We were also hit in a school parking lot and the lady basically told my wife to go fuck herself before driving away (we got her tag on that one.) Another time the car was crunched while parked at a restaurant, and of course no note. I can't remember the others.

Nobody gives a shit anymore, sad but true. Get it fixed and move on, you'll be fine.

#1534 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 501 weeks ago

buzzsaw wrote:

I stayed off the site for weeks at a time and you guys created 120 pages of ridiculousness without me.  I'm not the problem. The problem is someone called you on the mess you've made and you don't like it. Too bad. I did nothing you guys weren't doing already short of spicing it up a bit to at least make it interesting versus the snooze fest of Hillary used tampon licking that was going on.

Help us understand. You were calling for the thread to be closed, but then immediately come to this one and shit all over it. If you wanted it closed then why are you right back in this one?

120 pages, and I'd bet zero interactions similar to when you're participating, ie rude, vile (tampon licking roll) and juvenile.

If you're so sure of yourself, please show everybody here I'm wrong. Stay away from this thread (only) until next Monday and we'll find out. If I'm wrong and the thread devolves into name calling and insults, then I'll leave and you'll never see me here again in a political thread. I'll put my money where my mouth is, will you?

#1535 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 501 weeks ago

buzzsaw wrote:

So you think it's okay to be a total douche bag as long as you're attacking a candidate?

In the other thread  you said we should lock it up and call it a day. Yet you're back here, and you haven't changed one bit.

The thread isn't the problem, the subject matter isn't the problem...you're the problem.

If you wanted the other thread locked up, and it was, then stay out of this one. Otherwise your request was all for naught.

I challenge you: Stay out of this thread for one week, and I bet it will remain civil. No insults, no rudeness, none of that. It won't happen.

Don't respond, just come back next Monday and I'll guarantee you I'm right.

#1536 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 502 weeks ago

Same thing every day huh? Anybody who supports this guy has clearly checked their morals at the door.

***

Yesterday was a magical day in politics if you're one of those people that recognizes the clear and present danger that Donald J. Trump represents for the American people. Here are some things that happened JUST YESTERDAY for Donald Trump's campaign:

It was discovered by the Washington Post that the Trump Foundation did not have the correct paperwork to legally be a charity and you know, raise money from people.
Newsweek reported that Trump's company secretly did business in Cuba in violation of the embargo.
The Los Angeles Times reported that Trump told managers at his California golf club to fire hostesses that Trump found unattractive.
In the middle night, reportedly against the wishes of his campaign managers, he went on a xenophobic, racist, and sexist tirade on Twitter.

THAT WAS ALL JUST YESTERDAY. And yet the beat goes on, because his campaign feels like Michael Myers at this point. So, imagine my delight when I saw these scathing anti-Trump ads. They are so affecting that part of me—albeit probably a delusional part of me—believes that maybe, just maybe they might actually be able to sway some hearts and minds. The ads tell different stories of Americans whom Trump refused to pay for work that they did:


http://www.gq.com/story/donald-trump-is … a-meltdown

#1537 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 502 weeks ago

buzzsaw wrote:

Because 200+ pages shows none of you are interested at all in anything other than trump sucks.  You repeat the same garbage over and over and gang up on anyone that dares to disagree. I completely get disliking trump. I do.  BUT if you're blasting him and following that with nothing about how bad Hillary is, you're just not interested in an honest discussion about the state of things. Why should I waste my time and energy on that?  Because you want me to?  No thanks.

Nobody here is under any obligation to present a balanced argument for you. You're welcome to use that as a dodge, but don't expect anybody to go along with it.

That said, plenty of left leaning posters have pointed out their grievances with Clinton.

Equating the two however is false equivalency. They are not even remotely the same.

You're immediate reaction to the USA Today article was to dismiss it and claim it was an establishment pushing back against and outsider. It appears you are a Trump apologist more than anything.

Trump is one of the most dangerous men to have ever run for POTUS in my lifetime. This is no exaggeration. The idea of him in the Oval Office is terrifying to many. Nobody is "repeating the same garbage" especially since he does something new almost every day. He leaves us with a never ending stream of antics to be concerned about.

#1538 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 502 weeks ago

Gary Johnson is also looking rather...clueless.

#1539 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 502 weeks ago

buzzsaw wrote:

The establishment is getting together to protect their interests.  None of this should surprise anyone.

Yes, it's a giant conspiracy. Couldn't have anything to do with what was laid out in that article, or what everybody has been posting here for the last few months.

monkeychow wrote:

Trump has nearly 4 billion USD....that makes him part of The Establishment in my book.

Absolutely. He's been woven into the American culture now for 30+ years. He brags about being part of the establishment, while selling himself as an outsider. Who could be so gullible to fall for that?

As I stated prior, this is unprecedented from both media and any political party (in my life anyway.)

#1540 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 502 weeks ago

Half a dozen conservative newspapers endorse Hillary, and now this. I expect to see more of this the closer we get to the election.

***

In the 34-year history of USA TODAY, the Editorial Board has never taken sides in the presidential race. Instead, we’ve expressed opinions about the major issues and haven’t presumed to tell our readers, who have a variety of priorities and values, which choice is best for them. Because every presidential race is different, we revisit our no-endorsement policy every four years. We’ve never seen reason to alter our approach. Until now.

This year, the choice isn’t between two capable major party nominees who happen to have significant ideological differences. This year, one of the candidates — Republican nominee Donald Trump — is, by unanimous consensus of the Editorial Board, unfit for the presidency.

From the day he declared his candidacy 15 months ago through this week’s first presidential debate, Trump has demonstrated repeatedly that he lacks the temperament, knowledge, steadiness and honesty that America needs from its presidents.

Whether through indifference or ignorance, Trump has betrayed fundamental commitments made by all presidents since the end of World War II. These commitments include unwavering support for NATO allies, steadfast opposition to Russian aggression, and the absolute certainty that the United States will make good on its debts. He has expressed troubling admiration for authoritarian leaders and scant regard for constitutional protections.

We’ve been highly critical of the GOP nominee in a number of previous editorials. With early voting already underway in several states and polls showing a close race, now is the time to spell out, in one place, the reasons Trump should not be president:

He is erratic. Trump has been on so many sides of so many issues that attempting to assess his policy positions is like shooting at a moving target. A list prepared by NBC details 124 shifts by Trump on 20 major issues since shortly before he entered the race. He simply spouts slogans and outcomes (he’d replace Obamacare with “something terrific”) without any credible explanations of how he’d achieve them.

He is ill-equipped to be commander in chief. Trump’s foreign policy pronouncements typically range from uninformed to incoherent. It’s not just Democrats who say this. Scores of Republican national security leaders have signed an extraordinary open letter calling Trump’s foreign policy vision “wildly inconsistent and unmoored in principle.” In a Wall Street Journal column this month, Robert Gates, the highly respected former Defense secretary who served presidents of both parties over a half-century, described Trump as “beyond repair.”

He traffics in prejudice. From the very beginning, Trump has built his campaign on appeals to bigotry and xenophobia, whipping up resentment against Mexicans, Muslims and migrants. His proposals for mass deportations and religious tests are unworkable and contrary to America’s ideals.

Trump has stirred racist sentiments in ways that can’t be erased by his belated and clumsy outreach to African Americans. His attacks on an Indiana-born federal judge of Mexican heritage fit “the textbook definition of a racist comment,” according to House Speaker Paul Ryan, the highest-ranking elected official in the Republican Party. And for five years, Trump fanned the absurd “birther” movement that falsely questioned the legitimacy of the nation’s first black president.

His business career is checkered. Trump has built his candidacy on his achievements as a real estate developer and entrepreneur. It’s a shaky scaffold, starting with a 1973 Justice Department suit against Trump and his father for systematically discriminating against blacks in housing rentals. (The Trumps fought the suit but later settled on terms that were viewed as a government victory.) Trump’s companies have had some spectacular financial successes, but this track record is marred by six bankruptcy filings, apparent misuse of the family’s charitable foundation, and allegations by Trump University customers of fraud. A series of investigative articles published by the USA TODAY Network found that Trump has been involved in thousands of lawsuits over the past three decades, including at least 60 that involved small businesses and contract employees who said they were stiffed. So much for being a champion of the little guy.

He isn’t leveling with the American people. Is Trump as rich as he says? No one knows, in part because, alone among major party presidential candidates for the past four decades, he refuses to release his tax returns. Nor do we know whether he has paid his fair share of taxes, or the extent of his foreign financial entanglements.

He speaks recklessly. In the days after the Republican convention, Trump invited Russian hackers to interfere with an American election by releasing Hillary Clinton’s emails, and he raised the prospect of “Second Amendment people” preventing the Democratic nominee from appointing liberal justices. It’s hard to imagine two more irresponsible statements from one presidential candidate.

He has coarsened the national dialogue. Did you ever imagine that a presidential candidate would discuss the size of his genitalia during a nationally televised Republican debate? Neither did we. Did you ever imagine a presidential candidate, one who avoided service in the military, would criticize Gold Star parents who lost a son in Iraq? Neither did we. Did you ever imagine you’d see a presidential candidate mock a disabled reporter? Neither did we. Trump’s inability or unwillingness to ignore criticism raises the specter of a president who, like Richard Nixon, would create enemies’ lists and be consumed with getting even with his critics.

He’s a serial liar. Although polls show that Clinton is considered less honest and trustworthy than Trump, it’s not even a close contest. Trump is in a league of his own when it comes to the quality and quantity of his misstatements. When confronted with a falsehood, such as his assertion that he was always against the Iraq War, Trump’s reaction is to use the Big Lie technique of repeating it so often that people begin to believe it.

We are not unmindful of the issues that Trump’s campaign has exploited: the disappearance of working-class jobs; excessive political correctness; the direction of the Supreme Court; urban unrest and street violence; the rise of the Islamic State terrorist group; gridlock in Washington and the influence of moneyed interests. All are legitimate sources of concern.

Nor does this editorial represent unqualified support for Hillary Clinton, who has her own flaws (though hers are far less likely to threaten national security or lead to a constitutional crisis). The Editorial Board does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement.

Some of us look at her command of the issues, resilience and long record of public service — as first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of State — and believe she’d serve the nation ably as its president.

Other board members have serious reservations about Clinton’s sense of entitlement, her lack of candor and her extreme carelessness in handling classified information.

Where does that leave us? Our bottom-line advice for voters is this: Stay true to your convictions. That might mean a vote for Clinton, the most plausible alternative to keep Trump out of the White House. Or it might mean a third-party candidate. Or a write-in. Or a focus on down-ballot candidates who will serve the nation honestly, try to heal its divisions, and work to solve its problems.

Whatever you do, however, resist the siren song of a dangerous demagogue. By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump.

USA TODAY's editorial opinions are decided by its Editorial Board, separate from the news staff. Most editorials are coupled with an opposing view — a unique USA TODAY feature.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2 … /91295020/

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB