Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
zk
ParticipantWell, it’s gone now. I guess gofundme doesn’t take to jokes too well. As it should be.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]It’s probably a scam and someone will pocket the money.
But let him bulld the wall. Anyone who’s been on a hike across unimproved terrain knows that it’s much easier to cross where there are access roads and trails.
I would donate to charities who feed and help immigrants on their journeys.[/quote]
I don’t think it’s a scam so much as a joke. Not a joke as in a pathetic, silly thing that should be laughed at, but rather a joke as in an intentional attempt at humor (and a successful attempt, if you ask me). To make fun of the wall and its supporters and the idea that anyone believed Mexico would pay for it.
I don’t think there’ll be any money. Not enough to matter, anyway.
Participant[quote=spdrun]10 billion Zimbabwe dollars.[/quote]
You can’t donate 10 billion Zimbabwe dollars, because the minimum, it turns out, is a dollar (U.S.)
It wouldn’t let me donate less than a dollar, so I’m out.
Participant[quote=flu]Here’s a much better solution to pay for the wall….
https://www.gofundme.com/thewallforpopulists
[/quote]
Oh, that’s beautiful.
We should wager on how much they end up getting. Is there a minimum donation? I should donate 18 cents just to be the first one. I’ll see if it’s not too late when I get home.
$0.18 down, $11,999,999,999.82 to go!
ParticipantAnother day, another stupid action by trump.
He tweets:
“If Mexico is unwilling to pay for the badly needed wall, then it would be better to cancel the upcoming meeting.”
Why would he tweet something that has no upside but plenty of downside?
Is he too simple to understand a better way to go about it?
Is he not aware how it will be taken?
Does he just want to poke Nieto because he (trump) can’t resist poking someone?
I think it’s worse than those. I think he’s too lazy to put any effort into the situation. I’m going to put more effort into this post on my break at work than I think he has put into the United States’ relationship with Mexico.
He operates on impulse. There’s no plan. There’s no thought. There’s no weighing of factors. There’s no strategy. There’s no studying the information. There’s no effort at all.
Just an impulse and a tweet.
That’s no way to run a country. This presidency won’t end well.
January 26, 2017 at 10:12 AM in reply to: OT: PSA (from AN)… You will no longer need to go to South Coast Plaza for one of the best Taiwanese Eateries #805144ParticipantMy wife will be very happy to hear this. She loves that place!
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]If bust, then we’ll be rid of the Trumpadors. Win-win for America.
[/quote]
That depends on the magnitude of the bust.
If there’s, say, a trade war that causes an economic crash that will take a decade or more to fix, or, god forbid he goads North Korea into nuking us, or his inept administration can’t keep terrorists from nuking us, or we end up at war with China, (this list really could go on and on…so many bad scenarios) then it’s not a win-win.
Participant[quote=spdrun]
He won. He’s President. Why does he care?[/quote]
He cares (as much as he does) because he’s mentally ill. He cares because he’s a narcissist. Not a narcissist in the, “my sister talks about herself all the time; she’s a narcissist,” nor in the “Bob thinks he’s the greatest; he’s such a narcissist” sense. More in the medically diagnosable sense. Losing the popular vote does not result in the status/admiration that he needs. Losing the popular vote is probably impossible to take for him.
[quote=spdrun]
Honestly, his word salad, delusions, and paranoia smell of early stage senile dementia.[/quote]Yeah, they kinda do. But it seems to me he’s always been that way.
ParticipantI predict that trump’s narcissism will have much more serious consequences in the future than a desire to spend taxpayer money to boost his ego. I predict that, at some point, he’ll fly into a narcissistic rage when somebody or something or everybody or everything doesn’t agree with him. It might not be the end of civilization as we know it (although that could happen, too), but it will be bad.
ParticipantAnother day, another stupid move by trump.
He wants to waste taxpayer money to chase his fantasy that he won the popular vote? Any of you trump voters want him spending your money to do that?
ParticipantI didn’t see this coming, but I probably should have:
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15822X
Can’t have all that pesky information so readily available to the public.
Do any of you trump voters agree with this move? Can you explain why? Can you explain how this is good for the people in any way?
Oh wait, I forgot. Nobody here will admit they even voted for trump. Except maybe bg, and we haven’t heard from her since the election.
Didn’t trump say in his inauguration speech that, starting now, the power is being transferred to the people? This move proves that claim to be total BS.
January 23, 2017 at 7:31 PM in reply to: OT: So what exactly does the term “alternative facts” mean? #805073Participant…
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]Good point ZK. Trump’s talk doesn’t match his cabinet and perhaps the policies of his administration.
As far a Supreme Court picks, I’m ok with sending issues back to the states. States that pursue retrograde policies would lose population and business. People will vote with their feet. Plus on important issues, people need something to be passionate about and fight at the legislative level. I’m ok with the Supreme Court overturning Roe v wade and gay marriage. Congress and the states would fix it.[/quote]
You make an interesting point.
I don’t know about those states losing population and business, though. Some people might move to those states. And good for them, if that’s what they want. Sucks for the people that live there and don’t want those policies, but that’s no different from living in America and not wanting trump for president. Sucks, but we have to deal with it.
But I’m not sure that “sending issues back to the states” is the biggest difference between a conservative and a liberal judge.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]I can’t stand Trump, but one thing I’m rejoicing about is the destruction of Republican ideology.[/quote]
Much of trump’s administration and most of congress are very much in line with republican idology.
Combine that with this…———————–
Wayne Barrett, the legendary Village Voice muckraker who died on Thursday, at the age of seventy-one, had covered Trump for almost as long as anybody. (He published a book about him, in 1992.) “Donald just has no interest in information,” Barrett told Jennifer Gonnerman, shortly after the election. “He has no genuine interest in policy. He operates by impulse.”(from this article):
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/donald-trump-the-impulsive-demagogue-in-the-white-house
—————————–
…and I see tons of republican-ideology driven policy in our future. All trump really seems to care about is how he looks and that people love him. Scratch that. Not love him. Think he’s great. He’ll do whatever it takes to feed his ego. He’ll talk about how great he is, and how terrible anybody who insults him or points out his flaws is. He’ll work toward anything that he thinks will end up making him look good. He’ll yell and bluster and cry and insult. But when it comes to the hard work of understanding the details of and making decisions regarding policies on issues that aren’t headline-grabbing, he’ll leave that to his administration and to congress. And that’s why I predict we’ll see lots of republican-ideology driven policy in our future.
Which is even more of a shame than it would be if most of the people who voted for trump actually wanted it. I think most trump voters just hated Hillary and hated Obama and hated politicians and hated the status quo (and hated those things to the degree they did mostly due to misinformation they’d received). Or they wanted somebody who spoke their language and considered them important. (I think trump speaks their language, and he pretends to consider them important).
I think the percentage of Americans who actually want republican conservatism to take over is very small and shrinking (read – dying of old age). But we’re stuck with it for the next 4 years because trump doesn’t want to bother with details. And he doesn’t care enough about any issue that doesn’t aggrandize him to fight congress over it.
If he gets a couple supreme court picks, and he picks super-right judges, the effect could last for decades.
-
AuthorPosts
