The Trump Presidency

Assault rifle.

That is not self-defence.

Pr4wn wrote:Assault rifle.

That is not self-defence.

Is in 'Murica.

LionsV2 wrote:If you form a government then you've won the election that is the simple fact of how UK politics works; I don't see anyone suggesting that Angela Merkel hasn't ever won an election.

That is your definition of a victory but not the widely accepted definition by political reporters and historians who view victory as gaining a majority. History will look back at the 2017 General election as a loss for the tories.

Muscular-mouse wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:If you form a government then you've won the election that is the simple fact of how UK politics works; I don't see anyone suggesting that Angela Merkel hasn't ever won an election.

That is your definition of a victory but not the widely accepted definition by political reporters and historians who view victory as gaining a majority. History will look back at the 2017 General election as a loss for the tories.

*Googles '2017 election'*

navyblueshorts wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:...Robert E. Lee and every man that fought in the Civil War were great men and Americans. Every man on both sides. Although, by todays standards, the South fighting to preserve slavery was wrong, we cannot judge them by todays standards.

The men on both sides had their beliefs and fought for those beliefs. To their deaths if need be. This makes all of them great men and Americans.

Lee did not fight to preserve slavery. He fought for his State. No different than us fighting for our country today.......

That's probably one of the most important points. I'm not sure getting rid of these icons is dealing with the root problem, but an interesting point or two here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/15/the-president-of-the-united-states-is-now-a-neo-nazi-sympathiser

about why they might have been commissioned in the first place...

Strange and interesting article; it begins by speaking highly of Trump but ends by calling him a Nazi... He's right about them trying to change history and culture though, that can't be changed. I don't see why he's coming in for criticism on some of the things he's said.

navyblueshorts wrote:
So, you're suggesting that Southern slaves, loving their lot, masters and the South so much, all joined up of their own free will? Laughable. I'm not saying some didn't (I'm sure propaganda played its part then, as now) or that I know more about American race issues than this guy Williams, but to imply (as you did via that link) that significant (majority?) numbers did as was suggested is beyond credible.

It's fair to say that. My point was looking at historical symbols and screaming racism to suit an agenda, which is what liberals are doing. Not sure why they're not also taking down George Washington or Thomas Jefferson, fellow slave owners. I think that, and rather unfortunately that Lee is just beginning and the stupidity isn't going to end.

Going back to the protest about the Lee statue then, a group were permitted to be there. I'm not sure if this is specifically right wing, or the neo-Nazi, KKK, etc. and I don't actually see the right wing and the latter as one and the same. They should have been afforded their right but violent groups like BLM and ANTIFA turned up. ANTIFA dress covered in black from head to toe, and carry an arsenal themselves (they've used Molotov cocktails to get their peaceful message across!). They clashed and we all know what happened then. Trump was spot on to criticise all of them, I can't see why people are laying into him for doing that. I'm really surprised that after all that BLM and ANTIFA nobody dares to criticise them.

From the left wing Daily Telegraph today:

What is his history as a slave owner?

A career army officer, Lee didn't have much wealth, but he inherited a few slaves from his mother. Still, Lee married into one of the wealthiest slave-holding families in Virginia - the Custis family of Arlington and descendants of Martha Washington. When Lee's father-in-law died, he took leave from the US Army to run the struggling estate and met resistance from slaves expecting to be freed.
Documents show Lee was cruel to his slaves and encouraged his overseers to severely beat slaves captured after trying to escape.

Muscular-mouse wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:If you form a government then you've won the election that is the simple fact of how UK politics works; I don't see anyone suggesting that Angela Merkel hasn't ever won an election.

That is your definition of a victory but not the widely accepted definition by political reporters and historians who view victory as gaining a majority. History will look back at the 2017 General election as a loss for the tories.

You mean going into an election with a 24 point lead...A PM with a personal rating in the 50s expecting a three figure majority against a leader of the opposition that was a dead man walking....

and ending up losing your majority....Winning by just three points...Finishing with a PM with a personal rating in the 20s an opposition leader as safe as houses.... and having to bribe an Irish party to stay in power isn't a victory......

How could you come to that conclusion ??

Hero wrote:From the left wing Daily Telegraph today:

What is his history as a slave owner?

A career army officer, Lee didn't have much wealth, but he inherited a few slaves from his mother. Still, Lee married into one of the wealthiest slave-holding families in Virginia - the Custis family of Arlington and descendants of Martha Washington. When Lee's father-in-law died, he took leave from the US Army to run the struggling estate and met resistance from slaves expecting to be freed.
Documents show Lee was cruel to his slaves and encouraged his overseers to severely beat slaves captured after trying to escape.

The New York Post................"General Lee was no friend of slavery"

Easy to shop around............

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Hero wrote:From the left wing Daily Telegraph today:

What is his history as a slave owner?

A career army officer, Lee didn't have much wealth, but he inherited a few slaves from his mother. Still, Lee married into one of the wealthiest slave-holding families in Virginia - the Custis family of Arlington and descendants of Martha Washington. When Lee's father-in-law died, he took leave from the US Army to run the struggling estate and met resistance from slaves expecting to be freed.
Documents show Lee was cruel to his slaves and encouraged his overseers to severely beat slaves captured after trying to escape.

The New York Post................"General Lee was no friend of slavery"

Easy to shop around............

That's not addressing the question though if he was a slave owner himself which was raised. I'm not a friend of taxes but I pay them.

The civil war wasn't fought over slavery it was a side issue.............It was fought to keep the union intact....

Lincoln was pro slavery before he was President and later wrote during the war.."If I could save the Union without freeing a single save I would do it" 1862...

Davis and his mates wanted the South to have its own Government and laws.

Again though that's not addressing the point of if Lee owned slaves.

Hero wrote:Again though that's not addressing the point of if Lee owned slaves.

I never said Lee didn't own slaves...............My point is he didn't agree with it.......

I'm a keen environmentalist but we have three cars..........

If he didn't agree with it why then was he regarded as a particularly cruel slave owner who broke up families, and that he ordered troops to raid settlements in Pennsylvania to capture free blacks into enslavement?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Worth remembering Trump has 90 percent of the MSM against him...He also has 36m twitter followers...Be silly to come off twitter.

However someone regulating his output and telling him that Fox news isn't a great source of correct information is well worth pursuing.

Trump won because like Corbyn he circumvented a negative MSM.

Corbyn has 1.4m followers...May has 380,000..

Social media is the future as the establishment are finding out..

A problem entirely of his own doing via his words and actions throughout his campaign and thereafter. You're right re. Twitter though - it's pretty much all he now has.

All GOP Presidential runners have 90 percent of the media against them.

Liberal media support Liberals.

Maybe; I don't have a great feel for the US media really. Interesting though, as here 90% support the right. Trump's made it far worse than it otherwise would be for himself though.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Hero wrote:Again though that's not addressing the point of if Lee owned slaves.

I never said Lee didn't own slaves...............My point is he didn't agree with it.......

I'm a keen environmentalist but we have three cars..........

The issue is that he condemned slavery by saying it was evil but then in the same letter stated that slavery must continue and must not be abolished.

Hero wrote:If he didn't agree with it why then was he regarded as a particularly cruel slave owner who broke up families, and that he ordered troops to raid settlements in Pennsylvania to capture free blacks into enslavement?

I expect In the same way Corbyn is regarded as a Terrorist loving communist........

Muscular-mouse wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

Muscular-mouse wrote:He openly stated that black people were inferior to white people and they needed to continue to be slaves to make them civilised.

I think he's wrong but we'd need to extend the trial to see if this is possible.

extend what trial?

Get your Thesaurus out. Other similes for 'trial'?

Scottrf wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:Back to the original debate, going on a protest carrying assault rifles and wearing tactical military gear is not peaceful.

Self defence.

WUM!! Self-defence from whom? Other Nazis similarly armed???

Muscular-mouse wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Hero wrote:Again though that's not addressing the point of if Lee owned slaves.

I never said Lee didn't own slaves...............My point is he didn't agree with it.......

I'm a keen environmentalist but we have three cars..........

The issue is that he condemned slavery by saying it was evil but then in the same letter stated that slavery must continue and must not be abolished.

Not all slaves wanted to be free...............Many refused to leave their Masters plantation saying it was their home too....Many preferred the known to the unknown..

Slavery is abhorrent and the 13th amendment is a great thing but there are grey areas........

mikey_dragon wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:...Robert E. Lee and every man that fought in the Civil War were great men and Americans. Every man on both sides. Although, by todays standards, the South fighting to preserve slavery was wrong, we cannot judge them by todays standards.

The men on both sides had their beliefs and fought for those beliefs. To their deaths if need be. This makes all of them great men and Americans.

Lee did not fight to preserve slavery. He fought for his State. No different than us fighting for our country today.......

That's probably one of the most important points. I'm not sure getting rid of these icons is dealing with the root problem, but an interesting point or two here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/15/the-president-of-the-united-states-is-now-a-neo-nazi-sympathiser

about why they might have been commissioned in the first place...

Strange and interesting article; it begins by speaking highly of Trump but ends by calling him a Nazi... He's right about them trying to change history and culture though, that can't be changed. I don't see why he's coming in for criticism on some of the things he's said.

Every now and again, Trump does say something that many agree with, but it's tangled up with so much nonsense no-one notices. Whose fault is that? Trump's. He doesn't get it because all he's ever done is threaten to sue competitors and bully the 'little guy'. He can't do that here.

mikey_dragon wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:
So, you're suggesting that Southern slaves, loving their lot, masters and the South so much, all joined up of their own free will? Laughable. I'm not saying some didn't (I'm sure propaganda played its part then, as now) or that I know more about American race issues than this guy Williams, but to imply (as you did via that link) that significant (majority?) numbers did as was suggested is beyond credible.

It's fair to say that. My point was looking at historical symbols and screaming racism to suit an agenda, which is what liberals are doing. Not sure why they're not also taking down George Washington or Thomas Jefferson, fellow slave owners. I think that, and rather unfortunately that Lee is just beginning and the stupidity isn't going to end.

Going back to the protest about the Lee statue then, a group were permitted to be there. I'm not sure if this is specifically right wing, or the neo-Nazi, KKK, etc. and I don't actually see the right wing and the latter as one and the same. They should have been afforded their right but violent groups like BLM and ANTIFA turned up. ANTIFA dress covered in black from head to toe, and carry an arsenal themselves (they've used Molotov cocktails to get their peaceful message across!). They clashed and we all know what happened then. Trump was spot on to criticise all of them, I can't see why people are laying into him for doing that. I'm really surprised that after all that BLM and ANTIFA nobody dares to criticise them.

I agree with much of this. Get rid of Lee, get rid of them all. Probably better to leave them there and then actually educate about the history surrounding them. That history IS - removing the icons won't alter that.

Re. this BLM/ANTIFA, I seriously doubt they'd be there with their ordnance, shouting the odds themselves, but for the Nazis/KKK etc. Some 'free speech' should be confronted head-on and if the original Nazis have taught us anything, that ideology is probably one of these areas of 'free speech'.

Trump Logic: WWII wasn't just Hitler's fault. It was everyone else's fault as well for going over there and fighting Hitler.

Pr4wn wrote:Trump Logic: WWII wasn't just Hitler's fault. It was everyone else's fault as well for going over there and fighting Hitler.

Excellent point! Although it was clearly the WWI Allies' fault for the Versailles Treaty and therefore their fault that Hitler came to power and for what happened thereafter. Obviously...

Pr4wn wrote:Trump Logic: WWII wasn't just Hitler's fault. It was everyone else's fault as well for going over there and fighting Hitler.

In fairness to have a war you need two sides fighting eachother.....In fairness if Hitler had of taken over Europe then England wouldn't always be losing in penalty shootouts to Germany...

His latest tweet is staggeringly stupid.

Even more stupid is that he said the same thing whilst on the campaign trail yet said it worked for 25 years.

Disposable income is up since January..
Consumer spending is up..
Hundreds of thousands of new jobs created..
Wall Street is buzzing.

If this President could reconcile himself with the fact not every one is going to like him he'd be on Easy Street. Apart from Russia which doesn't particularly matter with a GOP owned Senate..

His political nous is making Gerald Ford look like a genius..

Enough said:

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pershing.asp

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Disposable income is up since January..
Consumer spending is up..
Hundreds of thousands of new jobs created..
Wall Street is buzzing.

If this President could reconcile himself with the fact not every one is going to like him he'd be on Easy Street.  Apart from Russia which doesn't particularly matter with a GOP owned Senate..

His political nous is making Gerald Ford look like a genius..

For political nous, read luck. Agree that he should just STFU and reap the benefits. He can't though, given his psychological issues....

Thought it was quite a cunning tweet - should get his voting demographic yeehawing again after what they'll see as their Charlottesville betrayal and his opponents' continual outrage has just become background noise.

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Disposable income is up since January..
Consumer spending is up..
Hundreds of thousands of new jobs created..
Wall Street is buzzing.

If this President could reconcile himself with the fact not every one is going to like him he'd be on Easy Street.  Apart from Russia which doesn't particularly matter with a GOP owned Senate..

His political nous is making Gerald Ford look like a genius..

For political nous, read luck. Agree that he should just STFU and reap the benefits. He can't though, given his psychological issues....

Don't under sell what an amazing feat it was for an outsider to beat both political machines and 90 percent of the MSM and become President..

People should really have more respect for a truly amazing figure. Ross Perot showed how hard it is for an outsider to resonate.

Unfortunately like Corbyn he is a campaigner not a governor.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Disposable income is up since January..
Consumer spending is up..
Hundreds of thousands of new jobs created..
Wall Street is buzzing.

If this President could reconcile himself with the fact not every one is going to like him he'd be on Easy Street.  Apart from Russia which doesn't particularly matter with a GOP owned Senate..

His political nous is making Gerald Ford look like a genius..

For political nous, read luck. Agree that he should just STFU and reap the benefits. He can't though, given his psychological issues....

Don't under sell what an amazing feat it was for an outsider to beat both political machines and 90 percent of the MSM and become President..

People should really have more respect for a truly amazing figure.  Ross Perot showed how hard it is for an outsider to resonate.

Unfortunately like Corbyn he is a campaigner not a governor.

He rode a wave. How much was down to him spotting it, I have no idea. How much was really down to those that wanted him in i.e. Mercer etc? Bernie was also incredibly popular wasn't he? Would have been intriguing if he hadn't got stiffed by the DNC.

He won because he's a huge personality and a legend in the business world...No one else would have lasted going populist or not

You make it sound like anyone could have done it.

Trump is a larger than life figure.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He won because he's a huge personality and a legend in the business world...No one else would have lasted going populist or not

You make it sound like anyone could have done it.

Trump is a larger than life figure.

No I didn't, but apparently it's convenient to ignore the idea that Mercer et al drove the social media campaign and targeting, that the general populace were generally fed up of Government as before (hence Sanders' relevance) and everyone was/is fed up of 'austerity' etc. I don't discount the personality (even though I think he's horrendous) or his business experience (whatever the reality of it).

I think the title of this thread should be changed, he is no longer a President in anything but title

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He won because he's a huge personality and a legend in the business world...No one else would have lasted going populist or not

You make it sound like anyone could have done it.

Trump is a larger than life figure.

No I didn't, but apparently it's convenient to ignore the idea that Mercer et al drove the social media campaign and targeting, that the general populace were generally fed up of Government as before (hence Sanders' relevance) and everyone was/is fed up of 'austerity' etc. I don't discount the personality (even though I think he's horrendous) or his business experience (whatever the reality of it).

Trump beat the Republican and Democrat machines..

Sanders is another hugely charismatic figure...He became an independent mayor and Senator through his personality and principles..and his civil rights campaigning..

No everyday person could do what Sanders did either.

I've figured out US foreign policy in the Pacific, they're going to keep driving their expensively equipped (with billion dollar navigation equipment and proximity warning devices) warships into merchant vessels until they hit a North Korean, one at which point they'll cry foul like they did to kick things off in Vietnam and start WW3. Simples. I sense another genius policy by Trump!

Might be better if you let other people do the figuring.

Gwlad wrote:I've figured out US foreign policy in the Pacific, they're going to keep driving their expensively equipped (with billion dollar navigation equipment and proximity warning devices) warships into merchant vessels until they hit a North Korean, one at which point they'll cry foul like they did to kick things off in Vietnam and start WW3. Simples. I sense another genius policy by Trump!

Joking about an incident in which 10 sailors are presumed dead is not funny.

Pr4wn wrote:

Gwlad wrote:I've figured out US foreign policy in the Pacific, they're going to keep driving their expensively equipped (with billion dollar navigation equipment and proximity warning devices) warships into merchant vessels until they hit a North Korean, one at which point they'll cry foul like they did to kick things off in Vietnam and start WW3. Simples. I sense another genius policy by Trump!

Joking about an incident in which 10 sailors are presumed dead is not funny.

Depends on the joke surely.

Pr4wn wrote:

Gwlad wrote:I've figured out US foreign policy in the Pacific, they're going to keep driving their expensively equipped (with billion dollar navigation equipment and proximity warning devices) warships into merchant vessels until they hit a North Korean, one at which point they'll cry foul like they did to kick things off in Vietnam and start WW3. Simples. I sense another genius policy by Trump!

Joking about an incident in which 10 sailors are presumed dead is not funny.

Who said I was joking. US lives aren't worth more than those of other nations.

Gwlad wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:

Gwlad wrote:I've figured out US foreign policy in the Pacific, they're going to keep driving their expensively equipped (with billion dollar navigation equipment and proximity warning devices) warships into merchant vessels until they hit a North Korean, one at which point they'll cry foul like they did to kick things off in Vietnam and start WW3. Simples. I sense another genius policy by Trump!

Joking about an incident in which 10 sailors are presumed dead is not funny.

Who said I was joking. US lives aren't worth more than those of other nations.

Ummm who said they were?

Pr4wn wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:

Gwlad wrote:I've figured out US foreign policy in the Pacific, they're going to keep driving their expensively equipped (with billion dollar navigation equipment and proximity warning devices) warships into merchant vessels until they hit a North Korean, one at which point they'll cry foul like they did to kick things off in Vietnam and start WW3. Simples. I sense another genius policy by Trump!

Joking about an incident in which 10 sailors are presumed dead is not funny.

Who said I was joking. US lives aren't worth more than those of other nations.

Ummm who said they were?

Umm who said I was joking.

If that's a serious response, you need help.

Pr4wn wrote:If that's a serious response, you need help.

Canadian wit, just knocks it out of the park every time

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Might be better if you let other people do the figuring.

From the guy who thinks Trump is a force of nature

Donald trump has fired steve bannon.

Gwlad wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:If that's a serious response, you need help.

Canadian wit, just knocks it out of the park every time

Seems to be just you that thinks you're funny.

Pr4wn wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:If that's a serious response, you need help.

Canadian wit, just knocks it out of the park every time

Seems to be just you that thinks you're funny.

Just move on guys before this topic gets locked

Gwlad wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Might be better if you let other people do the figuring.

From the guy who thinks Trump is a force of nature

He is...Whether you like him or not..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Might be better if you let other people do the figuring.

From the guy who thinks Trump is a force of nature

He is...Whether you like him or not..

If your head is surgically inserted up your own #$$ then I guess the 'nature' to which you're referring is brown and gaseous; so yes I agree in that particular environment he most definitely is a force of nature. But to most decent people, who have any sense of judgment, he is a complete idiot at best, or, more accurately a bigoted xenophobic racist sexist pig, illiterate, paranoid, ignorant, arrogant and maniacal.

I guess one judges him as wallowing somewhere on that spectrum; dependent on where ones own character lies and how one identifies with and in your case apparently admires his disgusting behavior.

I think he is a Class A #$%^&*