|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On January 18 2018 03:08 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2018 02:47 KwarK wrote:On January 18 2018 02:34 ChristianS wrote:On January 18 2018 02:26 KwarK wrote:On January 18 2018 02:25 Mohdoo wrote:On January 18 2018 02:22 KwarK wrote:
In other news Trump's physical has reported that his old age growth spurt has made him a few inches taller, neatly bringing his BMI down from morbidly obese.
Sometimes I feel like this White House isn't really trying. I don't see why they are even doing this. All it does is add credibility to the theories going around. No matter how you slice it, those numbers are not accurate. They showed us they are willing to lie about his health. It's not even the same height they reported during the campaign. They're literally going with old age growth spurt. I'm confused. This is the September 2016 one, no? https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/09/16/us/politics/donald-trump-health.html?referer=And this is the most recent one: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-doctor-details-trump-healthFirst says 6'3", 236 pounds. Second says 6'3", 239 pounds. That doesn't mean they're not lying, but where's the height change stuff coming from? Edit: I can understand the impulse to distrust that release, considering all the weird superlatives and politically convenient predictions (and Trump's general lack of credibility). I just worry this stuff is going a little in this direction: http://www.thebeatlesneverexisted.com/Heights/ https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-drivers-license-height-232948 Wait so it does match what they said in the campaign, just not what his driver's license said? I'm just trying to figure out what the claim is. Who exactly is claiming it's an old age growth spurt? I've been variously described as 6'4" or 6'5" and I usually don't correct people either way. I think I'm somewhere between the two, but it doesn't seem like it matters that much. I could definitely see Trump being the kind of guy who would be very eager for the higher number though, especially if it kept him out of the "obese" category.
I don't know how much I'd trust a driver's license anyway. Mine says I'm 5'9". I haven't been 5'9" for probably close to 15 years.
|
On January 18 2018 03:27 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2018 03:08 ChristianS wrote:On January 18 2018 02:47 KwarK wrote:On January 18 2018 02:34 ChristianS wrote:On January 18 2018 02:26 KwarK wrote:On January 18 2018 02:25 Mohdoo wrote:On January 18 2018 02:22 KwarK wrote:
In other news Trump's physical has reported that his old age growth spurt has made him a few inches taller, neatly bringing his BMI down from morbidly obese.
Sometimes I feel like this White House isn't really trying. I don't see why they are even doing this. All it does is add credibility to the theories going around. No matter how you slice it, those numbers are not accurate. They showed us they are willing to lie about his health. It's not even the same height they reported during the campaign. They're literally going with old age growth spurt. I'm confused. This is the September 2016 one, no? https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/09/16/us/politics/donald-trump-health.html?referer=And this is the most recent one: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-doctor-details-trump-healthFirst says 6'3", 236 pounds. Second says 6'3", 239 pounds. That doesn't mean they're not lying, but where's the height change stuff coming from? Edit: I can understand the impulse to distrust that release, considering all the weird superlatives and politically convenient predictions (and Trump's general lack of credibility). I just worry this stuff is going a little in this direction: http://www.thebeatlesneverexisted.com/Heights/ https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-drivers-license-height-232948 Wait so it does match what they said in the campaign, just not what his driver's license said? I'm just trying to figure out what the claim is. Who exactly is claiming it's an old age growth spurt? I've been variously described as 6'4" or 6'5" and I usually don't correct people either way. I think I'm somewhere between the two, but it doesn't seem like it matters that much. I could definitely see Trump being the kind of guy who would be very eager for the higher number though, especially if it kept him out of the "obese" category. I don't know how much I'd trust a driver's license anyway. Mine says I'm 5'9". I haven't been 5'9" for probably close to 15 years.
50+ y old people don't grow, they shrink.
|
I think they just ask you for your height and weight on your driver's license, anyway, so it's basically complete gibberish (though I would put the odds of Trump understating his height at about a million to one). Not sure they even bother checking eye color. At least they didn't last time I got one.
|
On January 18 2018 02:42 Introvert wrote:
Did everyone miss the part where this doctor has been around for a while and isn't a lackey. He's also been vouched for by people in the previous admin.
Also Trump said he trusted the people in the meeting to come up with a good deal, but the one they came up with was garbage. Path to citizenship + chain migration for virtually no action on security (remember how excited people were in this thread?). I remember when the Democrats were in power I was told the minority party had to adjust expectations.
It is pretty hard to look at that situation and give Congress all the blame. If that was Trump's art of the deal between president and Congress, it was not impressive.
|
On January 18 2018 03:33 TheTenthDoc wrote:
I think they just ask you for your height and weight on your driver's license, anyway, so it's basically complete gibberish (though I would put the odds of Trump understating his height at about a million to one). Not sure they even bother checking eye color. At least they didn't last time I got one.
Yeah, I just had to get a new driver's license when I moved from one state to another. All they did was ask me my height and weight, and I honestly couldn't tell you right now if I'm 5'10, 5'11, 5'11.5, or what, so I just randomly threw out 5'11 and that is what is on my license now. I never weigh myself, so I just threw out a number for that too, I could have easily been off 10 pounds for all I know.
|
On January 18 2018 03:06 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2018 02:08 Plansix wrote:On January 18 2018 01:59 mozoku wrote:On January 18 2018 00:59 IyMoon wrote:On January 18 2018 00:57 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
So much for blaming Democrats.
Nah, this is still on the dems. How can you be expected to get your whole party to vote for something? Nah this is 100% on the dems /s I'm not sure how it makes more sense to blame a small faction of dissenting Republicans willing to shut down the government than the entire Democratic party. Is partisanship supposed to be a virtue now? What kind of mental gymnastics is this? I blame all congressmen voting to shut down our government and hurt the country. Last time that was the GOP. This time it's both parties, but mostly Dems. Hence they get a larger share of the blame in my book. I'll grant you that I don't believe the GOP would be any better if the situations were reversed, but that still doesn't make this a good look for the self-proclaimed "party of adults." Obviously this assumes the shutdown actually occurs, so I'll reserve judgment until that actually happens. The real person to blame is the President, who blindsided both parties by saying he would sign anything one day and then going on a racist rant when the deal was presented to him. The Democrats are being told by their voters not to give an inch after those comments and the Republicans are pushing for a harder line on immigration. He backed both sides into a corner where they cannot compromise by changing his mind. This is a case of Trump not understanding that politician’s word needs to be their bond. If they say they are going to do something, they need to do it. We joke about them being dishonest, but they can’t lie to each other. It doesn’t work with lawyers and it doesn’t work in politics. I would buy this if it wasn't Dems that leaked the upsetting comments in the first place. You don't get to blame "political pressure" when you intentionally manufactured that political pressure in the first place. In no functioning democracy should an (unpopular, no less) President's private language be affecting public policy. This was never a moral issue. I doubt there's a single Democrat alive that believes this incident is going to tone down Trump's rhetoric. If you can't stomach a racist's comments in a private conversation for the sake of not jeopardizing policy, you're not enough of an adult to be fit for office. The negative effects of that leak were blindingly obvious. I'm not absolving Trump of blame as there's no reason to use that language in professional environment, but the harm should be contained to the setting. It shouldn't be tangibly affecting the entire country. It's reminiscent of when sometimes the Chinese people get overeager in their anti-Japanese or anti-Korean sentiment and the CCP tries to tamp it down for diplomatic reasons. When that happens, I blame the CCP for whipping up latent anti-X sentiment with their propaganda for decades for their own benefit ("the real enemy isn't us, it's those Japs!"), not the people themselves.
The President's private language expressing his public policy opinion is certainly affecting public policy. By the way Republicans including Lindsey Graham confirmed publicly what was said and also, apparently, spread the word around immediately after the meeting. It was bound to come out when it's a meeting with Congressmen about very public legislation that's going forward. For you to brush it off as private language is part of a pattern of excusing Trump's conduct which far outweighs the reaction in significance.
|
idk, if you have enough Dems and Reps agreeing on a bill that would pass the sentate and congress, with both parties having gone through some form of compromise so that you got to those votes in the first place, and it still isn't enough because of Trump it's fairly easy to put the blame on Trump imo
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Republican in the U.S. Senate said on Wednesday he was waiting to find out what President Donald Trump would support in terms of immigration legislation before devoting floor time to any bill.
"“I‘m looking for something that President Trump supports and he has not yet indicated what measure he is willing to sign,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters. “As soon as we figure out what he is for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels.”
source: www.reuters.com
|
On January 18 2018 04:46 Toadesstern wrote:idk, if you have enough Dems and Reps agreeing on a bill that would pass the sentate and congress, with both parties having gone through some form of compromise so that you got to those votes in the first place, and it still isn't enough because of Trump it's fairly easy to put the blame on Trump imo Show nested quote +WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Republican in the U.S. Senate said on Wednesday he was waiting to find out what President Donald Trump would support in terms of immigration legislation before devoting floor time to any bill.
"“I‘m looking for something that President Trump supports and he has not yet indicated what measure he is willing to sign,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters. “As soon as we figure out what he is for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels.” source: www.reuters.com
I call that chicken shit attitude.
Put the bill on the floor, pass it and let Trump bear the burden of throwing it away. Assuming he's even willing to pull that trigger which i'm not sure on. Trump wants wins, give him a bill to sign.
(Plus he won't read it anyway).
|
On January 17 2018 09:25 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2018 09:23 Toadesstern wrote:On January 17 2018 09:11 zlefin wrote:On January 17 2018 09:04 Aveng3r wrote:
The argument that you should take "racist" statues down seems weird to me, even if they were put up for racist motives. Shouldn't the message now be: "This is a great reminder of how bad we screwed up and need to do better moving forward"? you can have that message without having the same statues. you could put up more positively oriented statues for instance. also the statues weren't designed (and crafted) to display that message, but to display a very different one, and that probably rather shows, at least in some of them. It's also a sore point because a lot of people don't admit the screwup was so bad/ongoing racial tensions. if there weren't those it'd all be less of an issue. and is it so unreasonable to remove statues that were put up unreasonably in the first place? but I think Danglars already admitted that he would be fine with adding a plaque to make absolutely sure it servers as a warning nowadays, even if it was put there for very different reasons. I'd be fine with that. Sure if you leave it like it is, without any context I'd rather have them seen taken down than left as is but proper context is probably even better and should be okay for both sides. you'd be ok with nazi statues having been left up with just a plaque?
I'd recommend you read Germany: Memories of a Nation, by Neil McGregor. Or listen to the BBC4 radio series, although after a brief glimpse I can only recommend the Episode about Barlach's Angel in this specific context. The book has the preface dedicated to the way Germany deals with monuments of the Nazi era and some of the generally warmongering ones. Unfortunately this wasn't produced for the BBC series.
e: Barlach's Angel isn't really the kind of monument you were asking for, but the gist of the matter how many of us consider monuments may become a little clearer. The episode about the Walhallah might be interesting as well
|
On January 18 2018 04:56 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2018 04:46 Toadesstern wrote:idk, if you have enough Dems and Reps agreeing on a bill that would pass the sentate and congress, with both parties having gone through some form of compromise so that you got to those votes in the first place, and it still isn't enough because of Trump it's fairly easy to put the blame on Trump imo WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Republican in the U.S. Senate said on Wednesday he was waiting to find out what President Donald Trump would support in terms of immigration legislation before devoting floor time to any bill.
"“I‘m looking for something that President Trump supports and he has not yet indicated what measure he is willing to sign,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters. “As soon as we figure out what he is for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels.” source: www.reuters.com I call that chicken shit attitude. Put the bill on the floor, pass it and let Trump bear the burden of throwing it away. Assuming he's even willing to pull that trigger which i'm not sure on. Trump wants wins, give him a bill to sign. (Plus he won't read it anyway).
That is just Mitch reminding the white house that the ball is in Trumps court at this time. If we get to Friday with no movement, you will see the Senate start to panic.
|
On January 18 2018 06:17 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2018 04:56 Gorsameth wrote:On January 18 2018 04:46 Toadesstern wrote:idk, if you have enough Dems and Reps agreeing on a bill that would pass the sentate and congress, with both parties having gone through some form of compromise so that you got to those votes in the first place, and it still isn't enough because of Trump it's fairly easy to put the blame on Trump imo WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Republican in the U.S. Senate said on Wednesday he was waiting to find out what President Donald Trump would support in terms of immigration legislation before devoting floor time to any bill.
"“I‘m looking for something that President Trump supports and he has not yet indicated what measure he is willing to sign,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters. “As soon as we figure out what he is for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels.” source: www.reuters.com I call that chicken shit attitude. Put the bill on the floor, pass it and let Trump bear the burden of throwing it away. Assuming he's even willing to pull that trigger which i'm not sure on. Trump wants wins, give him a bill to sign. (Plus he won't read it anyway). That is just Mitch reminding the white house that the ball is in Trumps court at this time. If we get to Friday with no movement, you will see the Senate start to panic.
while I would like to say the same I'd say it's him trying to protect Trump in some way.
Trump saying we won't sign a bipartisan deal is one thing.
Trump having it on his desk and not signing it is another.
If the thing never ends up on his desk even though there's enough support for it in both the Senate and Congress it's fairly easy to blame someone else.
|
On January 18 2018 06:26 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2018 06:17 Plansix wrote:On January 18 2018 04:56 Gorsameth wrote:On January 18 2018 04:46 Toadesstern wrote:idk, if you have enough Dems and Reps agreeing on a bill that would pass the sentate and congress, with both parties having gone through some form of compromise so that you got to those votes in the first place, and it still isn't enough because of Trump it's fairly easy to put the blame on Trump imo WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Republican in the U.S. Senate said on Wednesday he was waiting to find out what President Donald Trump would support in terms of immigration legislation before devoting floor time to any bill.
"“I‘m looking for something that President Trump supports and he has not yet indicated what measure he is willing to sign,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters. “As soon as we figure out what he is for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels.” source: www.reuters.com I call that chicken shit attitude. Put the bill on the floor, pass it and let Trump bear the burden of throwing it away. Assuming he's even willing to pull that trigger which i'm not sure on. Trump wants wins, give him a bill to sign. (Plus he won't read it anyway). That is just Mitch reminding the white house that the ball is in Trumps court at this time. If we get to Friday with no movement, you will see the Senate start to panic. while I would like to say the same I'd say it's him trying to protect Trump in some way. Trump saying we won't sign a bipartisan deal is one thing. Trump having it on his desk and not signing it is another. If the thing never ends up on his desk even though there's enough support for it in both the Senate and Congress it's fairly easy to blame someone else.
There is going to be some attempt to put a bill on trumps desk by friday. Congress is going to try its best to not be the bad guy here even though they will fuck it up
|
On January 18 2018 06:29 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2018 06:26 Toadesstern wrote:On January 18 2018 06:17 Plansix wrote:On January 18 2018 04:56 Gorsameth wrote:On January 18 2018 04:46 Toadesstern wrote:idk, if you have enough Dems and Reps agreeing on a bill that would pass the sentate and congress, with both parties having gone through some form of compromise so that you got to those votes in the first place, and it still isn't enough because of Trump it's fairly easy to put the blame on Trump imo WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Republican in the U.S. Senate said on Wednesday he was waiting to find out what President Donald Trump would support in terms of immigration legislation before devoting floor time to any bill.
"“I‘m looking for something that President Trump supports and he has not yet indicated what measure he is willing to sign,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters. “As soon as we figure out what he is for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels.” source: www.reuters.com I call that chicken shit attitude. Put the bill on the floor, pass it and let Trump bear the burden of throwing it away. Assuming he's even willing to pull that trigger which i'm not sure on. Trump wants wins, give him a bill to sign. (Plus he won't read it anyway). That is just Mitch reminding the white house that the ball is in Trumps court at this time. If we get to Friday with no movement, you will see the Senate start to panic. while I would like to say the same I'd say it's him trying to protect Trump in some way. Trump saying we won't sign a bipartisan deal is one thing. Trump having it on his desk and not signing it is another. If the thing never ends up on his desk even though there's enough support for it in both the Senate and Congress it's fairly easy to blame someone else. There is going to be some attempt to put a bill on trumps desk by friday. Congress is going to try its best to not be the bad guy here even though they will fuck it up
Freedom caucus like "wtf do you mean we'll still have brown people?? FIRM NO"
|
|
|
How can this be interpreted any other way than horrible? 
|
On January 18 2018 07:00 plated.rawr wrote:How can this be interpreted any other way than horrible?
Does she know the only reason he wasn't dating his daughter was because she was his daughter?
|
The funny thing is how his early 20s neckbeard base probably sees this as like "OMG CAN YOU SEE HOW HOT THE WOMEN HE BANGS ARE?? MAGA!!!!!!!" because banging a pornstar is some wild dream to them lol.
The people who voted for Trump knew all this. I really think focusing on these "scandals" are silly because everyone was operating under the assumption that he's a shitty dude. I bet if you asked every Trump voter if they think Trump has ever cheated on his current wife, 80% would say yes.
|
Who cares?
Let the evangelicals drown in it... Bring it up again and again.. Fuck them...
|
On January 18 2018 07:07 Velr wrote:
Who cares?
Let the evangelicals drown in it... Bring it up again and again.. Fuck them...
All the evangelicals care about is tough talk on abortion. 2016 showed them to be single issue voters.
|
Exclusive: Trump vows to campaign intensively for Republicans, may avoid primaries
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that he plans to devote much of his time this year to helping Republicans maintain control of the U.S. Congress, but suggested he may stay out of divisive intra-party primary fights.
“I am going to spend probably four or five days a week helping people because we need more Republicans,” the Republican president said in an interview with Reuters. “To get the real agenda through, we need more Republicans.”
[...]
source: www.reuters.com
Read up to that point and couldn't stop laughing... The guy is golfing something like 1/3 of his time... so basicly, 2-3days golf + 4-5 days being on tour to help get other Republicans get elected. Not a lot of week left to do actual President stuff then, is there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
