Trump: Worst President Ever? Topic

Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 7:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by toddcommish on 3/16/2017 7:07:00 PM (view original):
Posted by crazystengel on 3/16/2017 6:30:00 PM (view original):
Posted by toddcommish on 3/16/2017 6:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by crazystengel on 3/16/2017 4:19:00 PM (view original):
I don't get why Mike pretends to be ignorant. Weird shtick he's got going on here, but there's no point in debating someone like that. At least todd's not pretending.
Hey, waitaminnit...
Consider it a compliment -- you're sincere! I respect that. As opposed to a troll taking positions he knows are BS just to get reactions.
ICYMI, I didn't vote for Trump either. But I also think that the blatant media liberal slant help get him elected. A lot of non-BL/Bracco people (whether because they're well-informed or just pig-headed) don't like it when traditionally impartial sources overtly take political positions, and skew their "news" toward attack pieces.

BL calls it "journalism"

Trump didn't win because the media slants liberal. Trump won because 1) there are plenty of morons voting and 2) a lot of people on the left stayed home.

This election wasn't some sort of statement about American values or being fed up with the establishment, it was apathy. Enough people shrugged their shoulders on election day that the guy who lost the popular vote by several million was able to squeak by on a slim margin in a few states and land in the very famous White House.
Wow, you either deliberately misrepresent other people's words to fit your narrative... or



3/16/2017 7:23 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 7:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 7:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 7:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 7:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 6:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):
Posted by RCBracco on 3/16/2017 4:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 4:23:00 PM (view original):
So STFU. Because the next time you post something of value, will be the first time you posted something of value.
Another temper tantrum from the resident *******.
He's just mad that his "awesome" save-the-children question was so easily dismissed.
So Muslims aren't the ones committing terrorist acts? Weird. I guess there is a lot of "fake news" out there. Go Trump!!!
Some Muslims commit terrorist acts. Some non-Muslims commit terrorist acts.

Why won't you answer whether or not you would segregate all blacks to save your child?
Why won't you answer my question? Would you, or would you not, support Trump's extreme vetting of Muslims if it would save BL Jr from death?

It's a yes/no question. It's not tricky.
Because it's a stupid question. We don't know ahead of time that an attack will happen, that extra vetting would stop it, or that a specif person would be killed.
Do we know the faith of many of those committing terrorist acts?

Do you believe that ANYONE has the right to live in the US?
Sure. Christian and Muslim.

Not anyone. But I do believe that we don't decide based on religion.
3/16/2017 7:23 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 7:23:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 7:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 7:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 7:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 7:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 6:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 4:28:00 PM (view original):
Posted by RCBracco on 3/16/2017 4:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 4:23:00 PM (view original):
So STFU. Because the next time you post something of value, will be the first time you posted something of value.
Another temper tantrum from the resident *******.
He's just mad that his "awesome" save-the-children question was so easily dismissed.
So Muslims aren't the ones committing terrorist acts? Weird. I guess there is a lot of "fake news" out there. Go Trump!!!
Some Muslims commit terrorist acts. Some non-Muslims commit terrorist acts.

Why won't you answer whether or not you would segregate all blacks to save your child?
Why won't you answer my question? Would you, or would you not, support Trump's extreme vetting of Muslims if it would save BL Jr from death?

It's a yes/no question. It's not tricky.
Because it's a stupid question. We don't know ahead of time that an attack will happen, that extra vetting would stop it, or that a specif person would be killed.
Do we know the faith of many of those committing terrorist acts?

Do you believe that ANYONE has the right to live in the US?
Sure. Christian and Muslim.

Not anyone. But I do believe that we don't decide based on religion.
So you'd support extreme vetting of anyone wanting to visit/live in the US?
3/16/2017 7:29 PM
We already vet visitors and immigrants.
3/16/2017 7:31 PM
And you think it's sufficient?
3/16/2017 7:34 PM
Sure. No amount of vetting can stop all attacks.
3/16/2017 7:47 PM
If we could do better, should we?
3/16/2017 7:53 PM
OK, I'll stop dragging you where I want you to go and get to the point.

Gun control:
Me: We already vet potential gun owners.
You: Do you think it's sufficient?
Me: Sure. No amount of vetting will stop gun deaths.
You: If we could do better, should we?
Me: Of course(because that's the only ******* right answer as we should ALWAYS strive to protect American lives to the best of our ability).


Naturally, you would never say that last sentence. Because it ***** your agenda right up the ***.
3/16/2017 8:00 PM
The disagreement isn't whether or not we should do better if we can, the disagreement is does banning Muslims help us do better. I say no.
3/16/2017 8:04 PM
I'm not for banning Muslims. I'm not sure Trump is for banning Muslims(but I haven't read his tweets. I get my Trump news from moy). But I'm fine, and for, vetting the **** out of "high risk" individuals.

And, despite being a gun owner, I'm for vetting the **** out of anyone who tries to buy a gun. Even a run of the mill shotgun.
3/16/2017 8:07 PM

I am officially out of patience with the bullsh*t this cynical piece of garbage administration is trying to pass off as budget policy. One hundred percent done.

In six different places today I've seen Mick Mulvaney claim he's just protecting the precious pennies of coal miners, steelworkers, and single moms. We know that's a sack of lies. The only truth is that certain taxpayers are being protected from the terrible idea that they live in a damn society where people are in need. Those taxpayers are the Charlie and Dave Kochs of the world, the DeVos family, the Anschutz family, and a lot of oily billionaires down in Texas.

That's it. But watch Mulvaney explain that they need to cut Meals on Wheels, and after school programs because they simply cannot bear to take one penny out of that coal miner's pocket.

Bullsh*t times a million.

First we get this spin: There is "no evidence" that after school programs and school lunch programs actually help children learn. (They do, but go with the BS here) Also, as Digby said, school lunch programs feed hungry children. So that works, whether it helps them learn or not.

"We can't spend money on programs just because they sound good," Mulvaney says.

But we CAN spend money on a damn WALL we don't need? We can spend MILLIONS so Donald Trump and our First Lady don't have to live in the same house or ever talk to one another? Those are all just fine and dandy.

So a reporter dared to put Mulvaney's feet in the fire by asking him what he will tell the steel worker with an elderly parent who benefits from Meals on Wheels, or has kids in Head Start, or the single mom with kids in after-school programs so she can work.

Oh. My. God. I kept waiting for his head to spin off his shoulders from pure evil force.

"I think it's fairly compassionate to go to them and say, look, we're not going to ask you for your hard-earned money anymore, single mom of two in Detroit," Mulvaney oozed. "We're not going to do that anymore unless we can -- please let me finish. unless we can guarantee that money will be used in a proper function. That's about as compassionate as you can get."

Jeebus. That single mom of two in Detroit depends on Head Start to help her kids get a leg up for school. She probably also depends on the school lunch program to make sure they get a proper meal so they can actually focus on learning instead of their hunger. And it's even more likely that she depends upon Medicaid dollars to keep her and her family healthy.

Because that's what civilized societies do. They don't cast their sick and poor out into the cold. They help them find a place to be warm, to be safe, to raise their children, to aspire to a better life.

So to recap here. Mulvaney wants to ask taxpayers to pay for a BIG BEAUTIFUL WALL.

He wants us to pay for nukes.

He wants us to pay for wars and big warships.

He wants us to pay to house Melania Trump in New York where she barely functions as First Lady.

He wants us to pay for Donald Trump's weekly golf junkets to Mar-a-Lago.

But no food for seniors or hungry children.

And he calls that COMPASSIONATE?

3/16/2017 8:12 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 8:07:00 PM (view original):
I'm not for banning Muslims. I'm not sure Trump is for banning Muslims(but I haven't read his tweets. I get my Trump news from moy). But I'm fine, and for, vetting the **** out of "high risk" individuals.

And, despite being a gun owner, I'm for vetting the **** out of anyone who tries to buy a gun. Even a run of the mill shotgun.
Trump specifically called for a Muslim ban, signed an order banning Muslims, and had a policy advisor (Stephen Miller) give interviews saying it was a Muslim ban.
3/16/2017 8:18 PM
That aside, if we can make Americans safer, should we?
3/16/2017 8:26 PM
Aside? That's the point of the argument. Trump wants to ban Muslims.
3/16/2017 8:34 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 3/16/2017 8:18:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/16/2017 8:07:00 PM (view original):
I'm not for banning Muslims. I'm not sure Trump is for banning Muslims(but I haven't read his tweets. I get my Trump news from moy). But I'm fine, and for, vetting the **** out of "high risk" individuals.

And, despite being a gun owner, I'm for vetting the **** out of anyone who tries to buy a gun. Even a run of the mill shotgun.
Trump specifically called for a Muslim ban, signed an order banning Muslims, and had a policy advisor (Stephen Miller) give interviews saying it was a Muslim ban.
And yet TODAY its Muslims, not Jews and Catholics, that are blowing themselves up in public places which is why Trump is not trying to temporarily ban Jews and Catholics. It's called a business mind. Thank God!!!
3/16/2017 8:37 PM
◂ Prev 1...81|82|83|84|85...1096 Next ▸
Trump: Worst President Ever? Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.