Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Boges

The Left aren't taking the Trump Victory Well

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Slick said:

Discovering a friend is willing to tolerate blatant racism, misogyny or the acts of a sexual predator seems like reasonable grounds to distance one's self from them. The fact that Trump's words and actions didn't cause the vast majority of Americans to morally disqualify him as an option, shows that the country has a malignant tumor in need of removal. For many this level of vile hate cannot be tolerated, hence the protests.

Sure, I'd find it hard to have voted for Trump had I lived in the US, even though I'm Centre-Right. The truth is, Trump isn't all that Conservative.

But I've also been seeing people saying that not voting for Hillary is just as good as supporting Trump. That kind of bugs me. The USA has a Black and White choice when it comes to its elections. It makes it very difficult to know what to do when both the major candidates really don't speak to you. But you should have the freedom to abstain without being accused of supporting racism and misogyny. That philosophy is just as divisive as the politics of Trump. 

Many people who were inspired by Obama stayed home because Hilary didn't inspire them. If that meant that Trump gets the reins for four years, then so be it. The US has checks and balances in place to prevent Nazi Germany from breaking out. 

Edited by Boges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Boges said:

.... But you should have the freedom to abstain without being accused of supporting racism and misogyny. That philosophy is just as divisive as the politics of Trump. 

 

True...last night, two African American panelists resented CNN's Don Lemon's position that they helped to elect Trump because they had voted third party.   They were voters, not "black voters" beholden to the Democratic party line.

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Boges said:

The US has checks and balances in place to prevent Nazi Germany from breaking out. 

 

You mean like the Republican Senate not accepting Obama's Supreme court appointees for over a year? The checks and balances have been destroyed by the Tea Party infiltrators. Time to appoint a special prosecutor to jail them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

 The checks and balances have been destroyed by the Tea Party infiltrators. Time to appoint a special prosecutor to jail them.

Yes, I'm sure Trump will get right on that... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ?Impact said:

You mean like the Republican Senate not accepting Obama's Supreme court appointees for over a year? The checks and balances have been destroyed by the Tea Party infiltrators. Time to appoint a special prosecutor to jail them.

Yeah and Republicans failed to achieve a super majority in the Senate so those same obstructionist tactics can, and likely will be used by the Democrats. 

What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Boges said:

Yeah and Republicans failed to achieve a super majority in the Senate so those same obstructionist tactics can, and likely will be used by the Democrats. 

What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander. 

I doubt the Democrats could prevent a new Supreme Court justice from being appointed for the next 4 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bonam said:

I doubt the Democrats could prevent a new Supreme Court justice from being appointed for the next 4 years. 

But they can Filibuster approval of funding for a $30 billion wall. 

Also remember, many of the mainstream Republicans didn't support Trump. Many Republicans don't even recognize Trump as a Republican. So there's no guarantee they'll just rubber stamp his entire agenda. 

Edited by Boges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Boges said:

But they can Filibuster approval of funding for a $30 billion wall. 

Also remember, many of the mainstream Republicans didn't support Trump. Many Republicans don't even recognize Trump as a Republican. So there's no guarantee they'll just rubber stamp his entire agenda. 

$30 billion? That's just a rounding error compared to the money being thrown around in US budgets these days. Besides, can't he build the wall by executive order? You don't need legislation to build it... it's just a method of enforcing existing laws. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bonam said:

$30 billion? That's just a rounding error compared to the money being thrown around in US budgets these days. Besides, can't he build the wall by executive order? You don't need legislation to build it... it's just a method of enforcing existing laws. 

You need congress to pay for it. They control the purse-strings. 

But I guess Mexico is gonna pay for it so nevermind. :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Boges said:

You need congress to pay for it. They control the purse-strings. 

But I guess Mexico is gonna pay for it so nevermind. :huh:

 

If Canada is paying for a bridge....Mexico can pay for a wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boges said:

You need congress to pay for it. They control the purse-strings. 

The DHS budget is ~65 billion/year. Assuming the wall was to be built at a price of $30 billion over let's say, 8 years, that's $3.75 billion/year. The agency has broad leeway to use ~$45 billion of it's budget in a discretionary way, as it best sees fit to meet the goals set for it. Could Trump simply order that some of the existing funding be used to build a wall, as part of the department's normal operations under its existing goals and laws? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

If Canada is paying for a bridge....Mexico can pay for a wall.

Canada want's the bridge, and will collect toll revenue on it. Mexico doesn't want the wall, and there is nothing in it for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Canada want's the bridge, and will collect toll revenue on it. Mexico doesn't want the wall, and there is nothing in it for them.

 

I know...seems that Canadians and Mexicans always want to get into the United States. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

We don't know that it's people on the right doing this do we?  Also, If it is, it's a small minority of radicals that you'd find no matter what political party and no matter who won.

White people leaving White power/swastika graffiti, attacking and threatening Muslims and other non-whites with violence, rape and death while declaring the US is now Trump's Country, is a "small minority of radicals" and to be expected.   

A small minority of Muslim women who want to peacefully wear hijab and peacefully have private pool time are threatening the fabric of Canadian culture and are the first step to Sharia law and turning Canada into a violent, backwards nation; they must be stopped!   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, dialamah said:

 A small minority of Muslim women who want to peacefully wear hijab and peacefully have private pool time are threatening the fabric of Canadian culture and are the first step to Sharia law and turning Canada into a violent, backwards nation; they must be stopped!   

 

So can white males get some private pool time too ?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

So can white males get some private pool time too ?  

 

You are asking for racial segregation, in addition to gender segregation. If there was sufficient demand for gender segregation I don't see a problem, but why add racial segregation to the mix? We already have massive gender segregation in our society, along with some age related segregation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

You are asking for racial segregation, in addition to gender segregation. If there was sufficient demand for gender segregation I don't see a problem, but why add racial segregation to the mix? We already have massive gender segregation in our society, along with some age related segregation. 

 

Why not ?   If one form of segregation is permissible or even desired,  then anything goes.   That is where such logic leads.   That's why it shouldn't be allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Why not ?   If one form of segregation is permissible or even desired,  then anything goes.   That is where such logic leads.   That's why it shouldn't be allowed.

So you are saying that there should only be unisex washrooms/changerooms? Same with youth change rooms there are in some pools and fitness centres?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ?Impact said:

So you are saying that there should only be unisex washrooms/changerooms? Same with youth change rooms there are in some pools and fitness centres?

 

There are many unisex washrooms and changerooms already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

There are many unisex washrooms and changerooms already.

 

You Devil, you...

:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, dialamah said:

White people leaving White power/swastika graffiti, attacking and threatening Muslims and other non-whites with violence, rape and death while declaring the US is now Trump's Country, is a "small minority of radicals" and to be expected.   

A small minority of Muslim women who want to peacefully wear hijab and peacefully have private pool time are threatening the fabric of Canadian culture and are the first step to Sharia law and turning Canada into a violent, backwards nation; they must be stopped!   

 

"White people", eh? How can you tell? Also, can't 'white people' be Muslims?

And finally...why aren't you a bigot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

There are many unisex washrooms and changerooms already.

 

In North America? I have yet to encounter a public swimming pool with unisex only change rooms. Yes, other parts of the world have different cultures but we are talking about North America culture here. Family change rooms are not unisex only change rooms they are additional private change rooms at a facility. Perhaps there might be a few nudist resorts that have unisex change rooms, but that is not part of the mainstream North American society. What is often confused with unisex, is a larger room with multiple private cubicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

In North America? I have yet to encounter a public swimming pool with unisex only change rooms.

 

Haven't you ever been to a public beach ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...