Reviewers Recommend
- review by Captain Jack
Starring: Keisha Grey, Naomi Woods, Tiffany Watson, Elena Koshka, Olive Glass.
All smartbuydisc.rus > World News Nonsense > The 2016 Elections Thread > The 2016 Elections Thread (page 75)
Page 75 of 82 First < 50 63 65 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 > Last
AuthorPost

Senior Member

tGrump has no shortage of assholes.
6974 Posts
11/13
Posted - Dec 6 2016 : 11:23AM
None of that matters as long as there is the identity of R vs. D played as if it was a football game.
The goal of it has ceased to be working together to hammer out policies which benefit most of the people in the country, and has become to wear a team jersey and execute ploys by which you win.
The Rs join Trump, kiss the ring, and continue the game.
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 8 2016 : 9:10PM

Gen Election Coverage hRC.png

Member

588 Posts
6/14
Posted - Dec 9 2016 : 10:34AM
Trump hires Scott Pruitt. Oklahoma AG
A fucking climate change denier and wants to fight against the Clean Water Act.
We are more fucked than Sasha Grey in her heyday
 
All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
17059 Posts
9/07
Posted - Dec 9 2016 : 6:44PM
Sorry but this is nonsense. Trump has put the exact same GOP scum in power who have always been there and is peddling the exact same historically discredited GOP solution of trickle down economics. Trickle down economics is exactly what has got the US worker where they are today. If anyone actually thinks he is going to renegotiate NAFTA to benefit American workers they must of been born yesterday.
Trump will be the same old GOP but with even more corruption and a healthy sprinking of open racism.
Edited by - BlackSix on 12/9/2016 6:46:09 PM
to see fewer adsAdult DVD Talk is Sponsored by
email for advertising info
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 10 2016 : 1:02AM
From the NYT:
 
All-Star Member

4629 Posts
8/11
Posted - Dec 10 2016 : 1:51AM
^
So, Trump's running in 2020? We will give him a chance to change his mind. As for NYC, glad a place that elected Bill de Blasio mayor doesn't have the responsibility of choosing the POTUS.
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 10 2016 : 1:59AM
Same place that elected Rudy G. Just sayin'
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 10 2016 : 2:07AM
Yes, by all means, lets leave that decision up to the states that saw the and have the
I mean, you're in "Taxachusetts" right? Surely, there are days when you've asked yourself, "why can't we be Alabama?"
 
All-Star Member

4629 Posts
8/11
Posted - Dec 11 2016 : 1:48AM
^
Can't say I've ever wished to be in Alabama. Of course, I've never been to Alabama. I live in a part of MA which is a fair distance from the People's Republic of Cambridge. A nice mix of people and political viewpoints here, guess that's why I feel comfortable. I would like to think, collectively, the American people would make a wise decision in choosing a president. In light of what happened in 2016, can't really make that argument. Neither major party candidate was to my liking. Still, I'd be every bit as concerned if Bill de Blasio were elected POTUS. So I'm back to where I was in my previous post, glad we don't rely on the citizens of NYC to choose our president.
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 11 2016 : 10:09AM
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 11 2016 : 6:14PM

Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell are traitors to the United States.
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 11 2016 : 6:26PM
LOL. But you're still in MA. You're still benefiting from umpteen years of mostly Democratic governance in the state congress. You're still benefiting from years of a good economy that springs from MA being such an attractive place to find a diverse, educated population.
Something that's probably lacking in Alabama.
All NYC vs. Boston jokes aside, the two cities/states have more in common than differences. NYC is not uniformly liberal -- again, Rudy and Michael Bloomberg were mayor for 20 years -- but its miles away from the hyper-conservatism, still-not-over-Grant-burning-down-Atlanta-southern states.
And YET, all blue states, like MA are pretty much held hostage to the whims of those still-bitter Southern States, to the point where we now have an actual Russian mole preparing to take office. Whatever you may feel about de Blasio, I guarantee he would not have the assistance of Vladmir Putin in running for POTUS.
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 11 2016 : 9:36PM
Personally, I will have no choice but to abandon and boycott all NBC, MSNBC, CNBC “news” programming if this is allowed to stand!
I will be writing a scathing letter – a written and mailed physical letter – to NBC telling them so.
If my local NBC affiliate is an NBC O&O (i.e. owned and operated), I will also have no choice but to abandon and boycott their local “news” programming, as well.
This is not an idle gesture on my part, as NBC, and now MSNBC, have been among my primary televised news sources for fifty years.
The line has to be drawn somewhere.
This “normalization” of Donald Trump and his outrageous conflicts of interest must end. Now!
Offending parties – I’m looking at you NBC – must and will be held to account.
-- Goldstein
________________________________________
[link inactive:404 - Page not found]Tell NBC: Dump Trump
Variety reported on December 8 that Donald Trump will remain as executive producer of The Celebrity Apprentice when the show returns in 2017. This will mean that NBC will have a fiduciary relationship with the president of the United States, creating an unprecedented conflict of interest for the network.
Having Trump as an executive producer is intolerable.
NBC is now financially invested in Trump's reputation. The network will have an incentive to weigh aggressively reporting about Trump against what they may lose in revenue if Trump's reputation is damaged. Further, imagine the choices they will face if NBC has a blockbuster story about Trump. This is not inconceivable. Remember, NBC is the network that had the hot mic tape of Trump bragging about sexual assault -- but it was The Washington Post, not NBC News, that broke the story.
There is simply no way that citizens can trust the reporting of NBC News, CNBC, and MSNBC. Executives have put hard working reporters at these outlets in a completely untenable spot: No amount of disclosure is sufficient when the network is financially invested in the president.
NBC has already demonstrated that we cannot rely on their assurances. Trump's involvement flies in the face of previous statements from the network. In a June 2015 statement, NBC said they were ending their business relationship with Trump because his attacks on immigrants violated the network's belief that "respect and dignity for all people are the cornerstones of our values." At the time, the network reported this, saying "Trump ceased his involvement with the reality show during his presidential bid."
The solution is simple: NBC needs to dump Trump. As long as they have a fiduciary relationship with Trump, this is going to be an insurmountable problem.
________________________________________

NBC Will Have A Financial Relationship With President Trump As Long As Celebrity Apprentice Is On The Air
________________________________________

Edited by - Goldstein on 2/2/2017 5:17:57 PM

Senior Member

3890 Posts
2/03
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 12:29AM
This is complete nonsense: Obama was handed one of the *best* situations historically, though this wasn't obvious at first. The economy was coming out of a sharp recession and within six months began an uninterrupted 7.5 year expansion. Obama could not have asked for any better timing than what he got.
The economy today is actually somewhat fragile: we're due for a recession for several reasons (lots of alt-energy investments that didn't pay off, lots of massive investment revaluation in the oil sector, and it's just simply overdue), and the Fed is completely out of position to help (interest rates far too low this late in the economic cycle).
This is classic "Buy High, Sell Low" thinking. It's not a question of the past, recession or expansion, but of what the odds are of the future. Trump's situation re:economic outlook is not that terrible (think what Truman faced), but Obama's turns out to have been one of the best. A recession is inevitable and the only real question is if the Fed can get interest rates back to normal in time to help out when the recession does start. Thankfully Europe never seems to run out of crisis these days (to suppress inflation pressures).
PS. Hillary would have faced exactly the same problem Trump will face: this isn't a Trump vs. Clinton thing.
to see fewer adsAdult DVD Talk is Sponsored by
email for advertising info
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 1:59AM
I don't say this lightly...take it how y'all want...but I think there's a question being asked in the corridors of power in this nation right now....
What do the powers that be (The CIA, the military, et al.) do if they were to perceive that one of the biggest threats to America was it's own president??
 
All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
17059 Posts
9/07
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 3:19AM
Same BS the right has been peddling about FDR the last couple of decades.
Edited by - BlackSix on 12/12/2016 3:20:08 AM
 
All-Star Member

Your other left
28335 Posts
3/02
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 10:08AM
What they do is follow the Constitution. That's what the military swears to defend, after all. As for the CIA, it is supposed to be gathering and analyzing intelligence, not doing 'wet work'. Ergo, it should report its finding to the Congress. If the Congress ignores it then the CIA should give the relevant information to the press and let the American people exercise their Constitutional rights.
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 12:01PM
Kill him.
Then frame a patsy, like Lee Harvey Oswald, to take the fall.
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 12:06PM
E.C.O.M.C.O.N. (Emergency COMmunications CONtrol)

Member

432 Posts
3/15
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 4:32PM
Kill him and make him a martyr? No thank you.
Who is on your picture, anyway GoldStein? He looks familiar.
 
Golden Age Classic

13495 Posts
5/01
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 5:50PM
Golstein's avatar is Khizr Khan, the father of Humayun Khan, from the Democratic National Convention.
 
Golden Age Classic

13495 Posts
5/01
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 5:51PM
, if you haven't heard the speech, it is well worth listening to!
 
All-Star Member

I came to turn on everyone
1721 Posts
6/10
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 7:41PM
...or coup d'êtat/military junta, being the classic response in banana republics when autocratic despots are deposed. Or ...
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 7:43PM
, killed saving the lives of hundreds of fellow soldiers in Iraq and buried in Arlington National Cemetery.
Capt. Khan and was posthumously awarded a Purple Heart and Bronze Star.
to see fewer adsAdult DVD Talk is Sponsored by
email for advertising info
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 7:44PM

Senior Member

Nice & Juicy!
1523 Posts
9/09
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 7:49PM
I laugh at this because the response was so quick and to the point. However, I don't think we should make lite of the killing of American presidents regardless of what side we're on politically, should we?
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 7:58PM
^ I was making an observation to the quoted question, not making light of killing the president.
Specifically, how the same government agencies killed JFK and pinned it on Oswald.
Today, they'll shoot someone, name him the lone gunman and blame it on Islamic terrorism.

Senior Member

3890 Posts
2/03
Posted - Dec 12 2016 : 10:33PM

That was written to deal with situations like Wilson"s 1919 stroke. But civilians do this: not military.
Edited by - jrv on 12/12/2016 10:35:04 PM
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 13 2016 : 12:39AM
Well, you're right, but let's be honest, this is just matter of fact as we're talking here. I don't perceive any pleasure per se in Goldstein's answer.
Maybe I've just seen JFK too many times, but it's not a huge step to imagine, that there are discussions being held right now -- in darkened rooms -- about what to do about a President who's starting feuds with both the CIA and the Military-Industrial Complex, and who just might be bugfuck crazy. (In fact, it's not too hard to imagine that these sorts of discussions have already been held)
And it's worth remembering that a certain George H. W. Bush used to be the head of said CIA.
Not taking any joy in this, just sayin'...
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 13 2016 : 12:46AM
Kill him and make him a martyr? No thank you.
Click to expand
And let it be noted, that yes, since that wave of assassinations in the 60s (JFK, RFK, MLK, Malcolm X) it suddenly all stopped. (except for that brief period in the early 80s with the attempted assassinations of Reagan and the Pope, and the successful one of John Lennon)
And one has to imagine that, if you are going to take the conspiratorial view, the observation that all these men became bigger in death than they had been in life, can be seen as a factor in why the killings stopped.
But -- the men I've just mentioned are martyrs because they stood for something bigger than themselves.

Trump -- yes he serves a certain constituency that sees him as a messiah, sure. But overall, the perception of Trump is as a venal, power-hungry, cynical ass who stands for nothing but himself and the almighty dollar.
I am willing to be that "the powers that be" would be willing to risk a certain degree of martyrdom in this instance.
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 13 2016 : 1:59AM
Ok, so this was from Oct 4th:

An excerpt, but you're encouraged to go the link and check out the charts n' stuff:

Deep Throat.jpg

 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 13 2016 : 1:05PM
This isn't even "apples vs oranges" (more like apples vs raccoons).
Your response makes zero sense, as the question asked what the "(...CIA, the military, et al.) do" -- NOT what civilian government does and how the 25th Amendment would apply.
(Hint: the 25th Amendment doesn't deal with what you do with a batshit-crazy fully-alive president -- even if the CIA and the military-industrial complex wish to terminate him with extreme prejudice.)
To repeat: Smiler Grogan was not discussing the 25th Amendment, you are.

Member

504 Posts
10/06
Posted - Dec 13 2016 : 10:20PM
Based on the link, how do you come to that conclusion?
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 14 2016 : 11:27AM
Actually I'm mentally combining previous articles. It's not just that one, it's also:

and
So Mitch McConnell ignored CIA intel regarding foreign interference in an American Election, and went out of his way to make sure the public and the media didn’t have access to this information ahead of election day. This benefited his party, their chosen nominee, and his wife.

Member

504 Posts
10/06
Posted - Dec 14 2016 : 12:12PM
Nobody except that small subset of Congress knows what evidence was provided in that meeting. McConnell is a partisan hack, but are you really going to lob treason at him based off information provided by anonymous CIA sources? I don't trust our alphabet agencies further than I can throw them and still remain skeptical in lieu of public evidence of state sponsored hacking. Even Hayden is quoted saying: "This new “Russians did it to help Trump” story was murky, unofficial and tied to anonymous sources."
/>I don't mean to mis-characterize Hayden's opinion, as he believes that Russia is directly responsible (based off of no public evidence of course), but even he had reservations regarding the merits of this most recent WashPo article concerning that meeting. I wish all of the evidence would be brought to the public, but that will never happen. But McConnell is allowed his reservations regarding the veracity of the evidence, and if he feels the evidence is weak, why would he champion the release and dissemination of these "explosive allegations"? I just don't see how being a partisan hack is treason. If he actively sought to prevent the release of EVIDENCE then that would be another story.
And some of Trump's team may or may not have spoken with Russian officials before the election. Is this illegal if true?
I'm just trying to figure out if you were being purposely hyperbolic or if you've bought into the new McCarthyism as many others have.
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 14 2016 : 2:27PM
Yes I am.
I can do it based on knowing who and what McConnell is. He's partisan, but he's no hack. He has, admittedly, skillfully obstructed Obama's agenda ever since the Republicans won the majority back in 2010. Health care reform, financial regulation reform, the Supreme Court (along with dozens of other bench seatings which he's blocked) . He vowed in 2009, to make Obama a "one term president. " That didn't work, but he's been able to do everything else in his power to make the Senate -- and therefore, government -- weak and ineffectual.
I do not believe the man has any core principles except gaining and maintaining power for the Republican party, so deductive reasoning tells me that the CIA, in this case, is probably right. I believe that the CIA could show McConnell videotape of Trump eating a live baby and he'd roll his eyes and say "whatever. Still better than Hillary."
So you are correct, maybe there's not direct, explicit evidence of it. I'm not the attorney general or anything, so it's not like I have the power to bring him up on charges.
So let's just say I'm chalking it up to experience: usually, when I add 2 and 2 together, the answer -- 99.9% of the time -- is 4.
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 15 2016 : 1:57PM
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 15 2016 : 1:59PM
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 17 2016 : 1:08AM

And as if I needed more validation, Anyone that pisses of the Harpy must be doing something right.

Edited by - Smiler Grogan on 12/17/2016 1:08:37 AM

 
All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
17059 Posts
9/07
Posted - Dec 17 2016 : 10:20AM
One thing to remember is that all the Russians have is these old KGB tricks, they're economically impotent and know that in a real throw down with the US they wouldn't last the week.
Their soliders are used to killing helpless civilians and outmatched guerillas in Chechnya and Syria. The US definitely spends too much on its military but there no doubt that China and Russia are third or fourth rate in comparison. So all the tough guy swagger from Putin is a show for the fools back home, if the states actually took an aggressive step the Russians would probably piss themselves.
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 17 2016 : 4:54PM
The issue may soon become whether or not the United States can fight a limited local war against Russia or China -- or both -- without it escalating to the point of WWIII, or, God forbid, the nuclear apocalypse.
Sane men have avoided tempting fate for nearly 70 years: All U.S. presidents of both parties, and All Soviet/Russian leaders, as well.
Putin and Trump are not sane men.
NATO -- now at serious risk with a Trump Administration -- has handled the Russia (i.e. the Soviet Union) and its Eastern European client states, as it was designed to do. Does NATO fall apart under a Trump presidency?
China needs us more economically than we need them.
Without the United States to buy their products, their economy goes South very fast.
Asians, culturally, are not people you want to be trading insults with, Mr. Trump.
Perhaps you'd know this if you could be troubled to receive your national security briefings.
The White House transition process exists for a reason!
Surely, your big-oil man Sec. of State will know how to handle things.
Of course, the United States can kick either Russia's or China's ass -- and quickly -- in a conventional war.
Possibly, even both simultaneously.
But, this is a very dangerous game of Russian roulette to be playing, when the single bullet in the chamber is nuclear annihilation.
People, this can all go very bad, very quickly, and I am scared-to-death!

Senior Member

tGrump has no shortage of assholes.
6974 Posts
11/13
Posted - Dec 17 2016 : 5:16PM
So, what would be the best country to relocate to? New Zealand, maybe?

Senior Member

tGrump has no shortage of assholes.
6974 Posts
11/13
Posted - Dec 18 2016 : 2:03AM
2016 isn't over yet. It's not too late for
meteor.jpg

Senior Member

tGrump has no shortage of assholes.
6974 Posts
11/13
Posted - Dec 19 2016 : 2:15AM

 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13913 Posts
1/08
Posted - Dec 20 2016 : 2:07AM
A_Fan
Deactivated User

1212 Posts
9/16
Posted - Dec 20 2016 : 3:26AM
Why does this matter at this point? The way the electoral college system works.. you can win by narrow margins in some states, lose by big margins in other states (and big and small states can affect this in different ways).. and end up with less than the popular vote and more electoral votes.. it is what the system is designed to do (one of the reasons, there are others)... stop heavy population states from controlling an election if one candidate gets crushed by a huge margin in their state. That is why pure popular vote is a bad idea.... it would allow a situation where California and New York (for example) could have overwhelming margins for one candidate and crush the popular vote. I am quite sure if the electoral college was gone and it was only popular vote at large, there would be all sorts of screaming if the scenario happened were two or three dominate perfromances in large states won an election. You might here things like "small states don't matter, this is an outrage!!!".
He is the president as of next month so all these stats downplaying the win are not productive.

Edited by - A_Fan on 12/20/2016 3:27:32 AM


Senior Member

2939 Posts
2/15
Posted - Dec 20 2016 : 7:26AM
Funnily, the New Zealand Prime Minister resigned mid-term recently.
(/>
 
All-Star Member

Your other left
28335 Posts
3/02
Posted - Dec 20 2016 : 8:40AM
It only matters if you need more proof that the man is a boaster and a liar.

Senior Member

tGrump has no shortage of assholes.
6974 Posts
11/13
Posted - Dec 20 2016 : 8:40AM
A_Fan said:
It matters for a few reasons.
It seems to matter to Trump, who maintains falsely that it's one of the biggest wins ever. So I guess it must be okay to discuss it, even if you are saying true things.
The electoral college is a strange construct found nowhere else, and originally designed to appease 'smaller' states by giving them a bit more of a say.
I doubt it. In a democracy, states don't vote, people do. Without an electoral college, every vote counts. Your vote counts, even if you live in a blue state or a red state. The electoral college makes it so that the only votes that 'really' count are the ones in states that are not reliably either red or blue.
Without the electoral college, it is not true that any state doesn't count, only that every voter is equally important.
 
All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
6309 Posts
8/10
Posted - Dec 20 2016 : 9:46AM
Page 75 of 82 First < 50 63 65 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 > Last



Jump To:

Online porn video at mobile phone