[RESULTS ARE FINAL] 2016 Election for President of the United States | Donald Trump Victory

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

"Forcible gay conversion therapy". Now you're trolling.

And no, Trump is not a moderate. But a bunch of butt hurt Bernie Bros are so "down with the system" that they don't know the difference between an adopted platform --forced as it is-- and a polar opposite.

Not at all joking mate. That's literally how they described that phrase in the RNC platform during the DNC

 

[Dad]

Not at all joking mate. That's literally how they described that phrase in the RNC platform during the DNC

 

 

First, the video doesn't mention the phrase at all.  And while hilarious, you're of course going to find blind followers following Clinton's dumbass.  But the same experiment with Trump supporters occurred with Hitler quotes.  One of those is more terrifying to me.

 

"How the RNC described the phrase."

 

So, it really is trolling.  Anyone stupid enough to believe you can be converted to being gay needs to be sat in a corner to think about their life decisions.  That means both Clinton and Trump wads.  funk all of em.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

First, the video doesn't mention the phrase at all.  And while hilarious, you're of course going to find blind followers following Clinton's dumbass.  But the same experiment with Trump supporters occurred with Hitler quotes.  One of those is more terrifying to me.

 

"How the RNC described the phrase."

 

So, it really is trolling.  Anyone stupid enough to believe you can be converted to being gay needs to be sat in a corner to think about their life decisions.  That means both Clinton and Trump wads.  funk all of em.

I think you're misunderstanding me. The first line, after the "RNC" is the official wording

 

The part after the "DNC" is how the Dems interpreted it

I'm just saying the Dems are overplaying stuff

[Dad]

I think you're misunderstanding me. The first line, after the "RNC" is the official wording

 

The part after the "DNC" is how the Dems interpreted it

I'm just saying the Dems are overplaying stuff

 

Maybe you're misunderstanding me.  The phrase is stupid.  The people who described it are stupid.  And the people who were portrayed as having said it are stupid.  They're all stupid.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Khan outed to have been paid $ by Clinton foundation apperently

[Dad]

Well duh.  No man would get up there and out his dead son as a political trophy without a heavy handed reason.  That's not even news.

 

Now if you told me Trump suddenly understood science and actually learned to balance his own checkbook, or that Clinton found something to do other than to get her wallet, mouth, and campaign stuffed by people she can't pay back, I'd never believe you.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/former-modeling-agent-reveals-details-about-melania-trumps-visa/

 

So it was all dirt and mudslinging

 

Good to know

[Aerion Brightflame]

It was a question worth addressing. At the very least there's confirmation that Melina did in fact use a H-1B visa, which Trump has spoken against heavily. So somebody gonna bring that up again because it is still a bad position for him to be in. Simply not as untenable as it was before this information came to light. Oh and it's more evidence that his wife really needs to check what she's going to say before she says it. 

 

The best thing is I can cite more articles of questionable choices he's made at the drop of a hat. This is one, mostly because it has a burn from Hilary attached at the end:

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/290489-asked-about-female-cabinet-members-trump-proposes-ivanka#

 

The headline is misleading - Since Trump never says 'Oh I'll nominate Ivanka', instead that others would insist he name her, but it is the only name he gives despite insisting there are so many people qualified for the roles. He should at least be able to name someone other than his own daughter. Especially since his daughter legally can't have the position in the first place it serves to make him seem ill versed in the laws:

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3110

 

But really the article is only in here for the great Hilary tweet about the binder. First thing of her campaign I've read that made me laugh due to wit rather than having no other way to process. 

 

It's really a pretty minor thing (The not knowing the details of laws relevant to the office he is looking to inherent isn't because it fits with the idea of him having a god-awful attention span), but it's amusing. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Well the nominee isn't even supposed to say who he'd put into the cabinate. Like you can say, people LIKE Christie, but you can't say Christie

http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=31967

Debunking another BS story
And another one from "not a ransom" Obama

 

[spoiler=Possible NSFW]
http://nypost.com/2016/08/05/hostage-we-waited-for-2nd-plane-to-land-in-iran-before-leaving/

Sorry I can't find this in the MSM. They're somewhat bias and reluctant to aknowledge the truth

 

 

[Aerion Brightflame]

The fact that link has no less than 5 different links to Meliana Trumps nudes surely makes you question it's journalistic integrity. Admittedly it includes comments from both sides of the aisle so it's a little impartial but still. I did not expect to clink on a link on this forum and be faced with images of Meliana Trump's naked form. 

 

Besides, if Obama's comments about it being heavily pre-arranged are a lie, that should be easily verifiable. If it's true it's just coincidental timing, if it's false then that's a different story, it's the first real scandal (If you define it as such) that Obama brought to the office. Doesn't really mean much to the election especially given Obama's Approval ratings are at a high I think at 54%? Which is great, reflects the fact he's been a significantly better president than Bush was in at least terms of whom the man is. (Bush had a 22% approval rating at the end). 

[cr47t]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/05/donald-trumps-economic-team-the-ultra-rich-to-the-rescue/

[Aerion Brightflame]

Jesus he named a oil baron. He is really going to s*** on attempts to deal with climate change isn't he? An Oil Baron, two Bankers, a Reagan economist, and what looks like a trio of Hedge Fund managers. Well... The rich will have fun. 

 

Trumps big plan is just going to be a vague promise to bring back American manufacturing isn't it?
 

He's having the speech in Detroit, the city that is essentially the symbol of the decline of bluecollar work in the US. He will talk about how Great Detroit used to be, blame recent government ideas for it going wrong, make a promise that he will shift it around, bring the manufacturing back into the US, and talk about how great the US will once again become. Probably saying how he will make Detroit the heart of the production for the new Wall. 

 

I will be shocked if it is not some variation of this idea - It will probably be a little more insane, but I will still be shocked if it is not this. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

Jesus he named a oil baron. He is really going to s*** on attempts to deal with climate change isn't he? An Oil Baron, two Bankers, a Reagan economist, and what looks like a trio of Hedge Fund managers. Well... The rich will have fun.

 

Trumps big plan is just going to be a vague promise to bring back American manufacturing isn't it?

 

He's having the speech in Detroit, the city that is essentially the symbol of the decline of bluecollar work in the US. He will talk about how Great Detroit used to be, blame recent government ideas for it going wrong, make a promise that he will shift it around, bring the manufacturing back into the US, and talk about how great the US will once again become. Probably saying how he will make Detroit the heart of the production for the new Wall.

 

I will be shocked if it is not some variation of this idea - It will probably be a little more insane, but I will still be shocked if it is not this.

We want success on the ticket, people who have won and will now fight for us, not theorists. Actions speak louder than words

 

 

 

a neat little video on the god awful war on drugs. The European solution is kinda neat actually

 

 

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/06/us/politics/as-trump-rises-reformocons-see-chance-to-update-gops-economic-views.html?referer=https://www.google.com/

 

The revolution explained

[Aerion Brightflame]

We want success on the ticket, people who have won and will now fight for us, not theorists. Actions speak louder than words

 

Sorry why do we want Bankers and hedge fund managers on a team fighting for us? Those guys are the reason things are so dire right now in the first place. These are the sorts of people who should be in jail. Why do we want a Reagan era economist given that trickle down economics is an awful idea in reality that simply widens the wage gap? Why do we want an oil baron when climate change is a massive threat that we have to start dealing with? 

 

None of those professions give hope that they will work for the little guy. All of them have spent there careers shitting on the little guy. We are suddenly meant to buy that these millionares and billionares care about us? And not that they are going to advise Trump in such a way that only they get more benefit? 

 

Look at his tax plan and his environmental plan - His tax plan primarily gives high income (I.E. Trump and his financial advisors) a massive tax break, more than any other group of people. His environmental plan is the sort of thing an oil baron would do. 

 

I know you buy into Trumps idea, and I can understand being skepitcal about 'experts' but this is not the sort of cabinet that will fight for anyone making less than say a million a year. I would love to be proven wrong here, but this is like a conservative dream cabinet. If he wanted a ticket of 'successful people who will fight for us' go for economists with proven records - They are more likely to be objective than to service an agenda. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Who better to work the system for us than people who know how to twist it though Tom?

 

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news-stories/briefing-document/trading-away-health-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement-tpp#at_pco=smlwn-1.0&at_si=57a6878a3660edd1&at_ab=per-2&at_pos=0&at_tot=1

 

Anyway...more reasons not to TPP, it's old, but the wording it still w/ regards to the matter

[Aerion Brightflame]

People who care for there fellow humanity? Show me one reason why any of these people have any incentive to care for there fellow human and not for there own wealth? 

 

Having knowledge of the system is not enough, you need to have the right priorities. None of the professions I mentioned earlier showed any sign of having the right priorities for the average human being. Whereas an economist might because he doesn't have massive financial incentive to keep cheating people. 

 

It is quite frankly insane to expect people who've made a living from a system designed to cheat us regular folk to suddenly turn around and fix the system to work in our favour as opposed to furthering there own. They have no incentive to help us, no empathy for us, and I would doubt anything in any of there personal records to suggest they will help us. 

 

As for the healthcare thing - That screws your nation more than most. Given if such a provision existed in the trade deal to the EU, our healthcare systems would absorb the cost for us, or at a minor tax increase. You don't get that luxury - It's just adding more cost to what is already the most individually expensive healthcare system in the world (You pay more person per capita than any other developed nation and you don't get a quality comparable to what you are paying for). 

[Aerion Brightflame]

Well what do you know, the Meliana immigration story had some legs on it:

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/melania-marriage-green-card-4-years-wedding-trump-article-1.2741180

 

The issue is now that her attorney said that she received a green card 'based on marriage' in 2001... despite not actually getting married to Mr Trump until 2006. Which means one of several things: Either a, she was already married and got divorced, which should be a matter of public record and easily cleared up. B the attorney 'misspoke' which is probably the likely answer we will get if this story is true. Or C: Meliana did in fact commit fraud and she is liable to have her citizenship revoked (Because there is no statue of limitations on this stuff) and possibly be deported. 

 

EDIT: To add onto the sweet sweet news, you remember the economic advisers we've been talking about maybe a post ago. Well...

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trumps-economic-advisers-are-also-his-biggest-donors-226758

 

Yeah, the vast majority of them are gigantic donors to the Trump campaign. That's cronyism at it's finest. 

 

Also on the 'you need an inside track' there's more to the economics of running a nation than there is in running a business - working around federal budgets and instituing a correct tax policy, and balancing infrastructure spending. A selection of people who mostly have no experience with any of that is a bad call when running a nation. 

[Jord200]

I'm just here to throw this out there. I hear that the the US Nazi Party thinks Trump is ideal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Winter, your thoughts? 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'm just here to throw this out there. I hear that the the US Nazi Party thinks Trump is ideal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Winter, your thoughts?

 

Attention whores need something to spark Drama don't they? The man has Jewish grandchildren. Stop making a story out of nothing

 

 

@Tom he also said he would expand his team though. I'd honestly wait for Detriot before making any snappy judgments.

 

Some of them, like the Oil Barron and the Steel leader make sense when you consider that they've both spoken out against globalization and Trump is trying to bring Steel jobs back here and break our reliance on OPEC.

 

Melania doesn't even merit a response. It's the funking Daily News.nif the story was big the MSM would be floating it 24/7

[Aerion Brightflame]

He named 13 men, 5 of whom donated around 2 million to the campaign, 2 others have links to Trumps fundraising. Furthermore 2 of them are members of his own staff, and a further 2 have been long time republican financiers or aides. (These latter 2 are less relevant than the others)

 

So in all 11 of them are people whom either Trump is beholden too or the party is beholden too. 

 

Even if later choices are different to this, the immediate announcement (And hence we can assume the biggest and most important names) that's the overwhelming majority of Trump's initial financial advisers who are essentially crony's. 

 

Would you be brushing this issue aside if Hilary say nominated a group of financial advisors like this? People who seem to be there because of financial or personal arrangements rather than merit? 

[Dad]

He named 13 men, 5 of whom donated around 2 million to the campaign, 2 others have links to Trumps fundraising. Furthermore 2 of them are members of his own staff, and a further 2 have been long time republican financiers or aides. (These latter 2 are less relevant than the others)

 

So in all 11 of them are people whom either Trump is beholden too or the party is beholden too. 

 

Even if later choices are different to this, the immediate announcement (And hence we can assume the biggest and most important names) that's the overwhelming majority of Trump's initial financial advisers who are essentially crony's. 

 

Would you be brushing this issue aside if Hilary say nominated a group of financial advisors like this? People who seem to be there because of financial or personal arrangements rather than merit? 

 

Wasn't the Clinton Campaign already called out because of this?

[Aerion Brightflame]

Wasn't the Clinton Campaign already called out because of this?

The Email leak revealed donors being considered for key political positions in the event Clinton won I believe, which got a lot of people into an outrage. 

 

But I don't think Hilary has directly named a similar thing. 

 

It's just kinda sad really, especially given Trump's populist standpoint. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

Hmmm...New Washington Post / ABC News Poll has serious methodology issues -- asks for youngest person in house.

The Email leak revealed donors being considered for key political positions in the event Clinton won I believe, which got a lot of people into an outrage. 

 

But I don't think Hilary has directly named a similar thing. 

 

It's just kinda sad really, especially given Trump's populist standpoint. 

It's not that simple. So Trump has promised to create jobs, steel and oil are pretty big for that angle. So picking a CEO from a steel and oil giant isn't at all a poor idea. A lot of the bankers if you read up about them are pretty supporting of the anti-tpp type agenda. Not something you expect from a typical wallstreet person

[Aerion Brightflame]

And it just happened to be a coincidence that most of them were either donors or current staffers? Just a complete coincidence that 9 of Trumps choices (9 of the non economists) happened to be people whom have given him or the party either money or man hours? That the only people who could have given him such advise happen to be ones who he owes? And you don't need 3 Hedge fund managers, 2 CEO's and 2 bankers on top of a real estate agent to get these viewpoints. It's excessive. 

 

And whilst I'll concede having a CEO, or a Banker might help with some of these matters - The economy of a nation considers far more than generating jobs, and thus filling out your advisers with that many people without a formal understanding of economics on this scale? Seems pretty crazy. 

 

Seriously, even if the make-up of the cabinet itself is fine (I don't think it is. I think you want people who've worked economics at a federal level outside of the Reagan era more than businessmen.), the fact that 9 of them are people who Trump would owe significantly isn't ringing alarm bells to you? Isn't making you question the validity of these men? 
 

You also didn't answer my question - If this was reversed and Hilary named an equivalent group of people (So fufilling the same 'oh they know how to work the system' angle) would you be dismissing the idea they seem to have paid there way here instead of getting it on merit and qualification? You would be outraged that Hilary's nominee's are ones who just happen to be massive donors right? You got outraged when it came up in the DNC leaks iirc. So why, when Trump nominates such a set of advisors is there not the same outrage? 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

And it just happened to be a coincidence that most of them were either donors or current staffers? Just a complete coincidence that 9 of Trumps choices (9 of the non economists) happened to be people whom have given him or the party either money or man hours? That the only people who could have given him such advise happen to be ones who he owes? And you don't need 3 Hedge fund managers, 2 CEO's and 2 bankers on top of a real estate agent to get these viewpoints. It's excessive. 

 

And whilst I'll concede having a CEO, or a Banker might help with some of these matters - The economy of a nation considers far more than generating jobs, and thus filling out your advisers with that many people without a formal understanding of economics on this scale? Seems pretty crazy. 

 

Seriously, even if the make-up of the cabinet itself is fine (I don't think it is. I think you want people who've worked economics at a federal level outside of the Reagan era more than businessmen.), the fact that 9 of them are people who Trump would owe significantly isn't ringing alarm bells to you? Isn't making you question the validity of these men? 

 

You also didn't answer my question - If this was reversed and Hilary named an equivalent group of people (So fufilling the same 'oh they know how to work the system' angle) would you be dismissing the idea they seem to have paid there way here instead of getting it on merit and qualification? You would be outraged that Hilary's nominee's are ones who just happen to be massive donors right? You got outraged when it came up in the DNC leaks iirc. So why, when Trump nominates such a set of advisors is there not the same outrage? 

DNC was offering spots in an administration. Trump's not really doing that is he? It's not entirely similar. If Trump started saying give me money and I'll place you in government, then yes, I'd be upset.

 

Short answer: No you don't

 

Long answer:

 

Though I see your point (It does have a kitchen cabinet feel to it), I was more-so defending the Oil and Steel CEOs cuz those are fields that Trump has promised growth in, and having people who make growth happen there might be nice. It is overblown, and while I like the idea, I would have preferred more variance 

 

Trickle down economics does work actually. You see it on a more microscopic scale with smaller firms treating their employees better. It doesn't work because people lose empathy after a point and refuse to share. What needs to happen is less regulation and a higher wage rate. You can't expect it to trickle down if people close the pipe