Author Topic: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...  (Read 19730 times)

DarkandStormy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Columbus
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #100 on: August 16, 2017, 11:51:07 AM »
So let's quit calling out racial groups. It only adds to the fire, there's no upside. Let it whither & die.

Let's bury our heads in the sand about white supremacists who want to "ethnically cleanse" the country of anyone isn't straight, white and preferably male?  Get a grip.

"Looking the other way" led to the rise of Nazis in the first place.

You can pretend it's not happening, but that doesn't make it true.  Time to face reality head on.
The Chase Trifecta:
Earn 50,000 Ultimate Rewards points with Chase Sapphire Preferred - $4k spending in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/6/2MOVOLZCEJ
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom Unlimited - only $500 spending needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/18/ENYF0FTS66
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom - only $500 spending needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/2/DBOP9XI9XT

Recommended Cell Servce - Google's Project FI: https://g.co/fi/r/THK0WX

kayvent

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 498
  • Location: Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #101 on: August 16, 2017, 01:18:16 PM »

I think you need to ground things to reality. It's seven months into the Trump administration. He's started zero wars thus far. Obama started one by this time. I think when you factor in the fact that one was a Peace Prize recipient, despite Trump's best efforts, he's doing better. In total, Obama started wars against five countries.

When Trump gets into his sixth war, I'll start caring about how he vocalizes his opinion towards other leaders. Until then, I'll treat it like everything else Trump says and does: a useless vapor in the wind.
Can you elaborate on this?

Before I answer, I have to mention my premises. The USA typically only considers itself in a war if there is a declaration of war from congress. Her citizenry also considers that treaties that were never ratified by the government are treaties she is a part of. These two things, working in tandem, means that sometimes another country considers themselves at war with the USA while the USA considers itself a neutral observer in a conflict (the most famous example of this is with Japan before the second world war).

Personally, I consider it an war of war if a nation drop bombs on another country or violate their sovereign borders. Or if they participate in black ops against another state. Or if they send troops to fight another country's soldiers. Or if they start assassinating private citizens of another country without permission. Or if a nation self-declares and the USA intervenes to try and destroy it1. Or if the USA topples an existing government. All those, I would consider acts of war and an informal declaration of it.

I'm not saying my definition is right, merely that it is different and thus my list would be larger than some. Without further ado: Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Syria, and the Islamic State In The Levant (ISIL). That last one is controversial1.

1 This makes my definition very liberal. If the USA would have lost the revolutionary war, Britain would not have called 1776 a war. It would have called it a failed rebellion. But, with hindsight and the Americans wining, we do call it a war between two nations. My reasons for calling ISIL a nation is complex and not fitting with this thread.

Dabnasty

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 207
  • Age: 28
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #102 on: August 16, 2017, 02:37:46 PM »

I think you need to ground things to reality. It's seven months into the Trump administration. He's started zero wars thus far. Obama started one by this time. I think when you factor in the fact that one was a Peace Prize recipient, despite Trump's best efforts, he's doing better. In total, Obama started wars against five countries.

When Trump gets into his sixth war, I'll start caring about how he vocalizes his opinion towards other leaders. Until then, I'll treat it like everything else Trump says and does: a useless vapor in the wind.
Can you elaborate on this?

Before I answer, I have to mention my premises. The USA typically only considers itself in a war if there is a declaration of war from congress. Her citizenry also considers that treaties that were never ratified by the government are treaties she is a part of. These two things, working in tandem, means that sometimes another country considers themselves at war with the USA while the USA considers itself a neutral observer in a conflict (the most famous example of this is with Japan before the second world war).

Personally, I consider it an war of war if a nation drop bombs on another country or violate their sovereign borders. Or if they participate in black ops against another state. Or if they send troops to fight another country's soldiers. Or if they start assassinating private citizens of another country without permission. Or if a nation self-declares and the USA intervenes to try and destroy it1. Or if the USA topples an existing government. All those, I would consider acts of war and an informal declaration of it.

I'm not saying my definition is right, merely that it is different and thus my list would be larger than some. Without further ado: Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Syria, and the Islamic State In The Levant (ISIL). That last one is controversial1.

1 This makes my definition very liberal. If the USA would have lost the revolutionary war, Britain would not have called 1776 a war. It would have called it a failed rebellion. But, with hindsight and the Americans wining, we do call it a war between two nations. My reasons for calling ISIL a nation is complex and not fitting with this thread.
Thank you for the explanation. I would tend to agree with your concept of being "at war" however based on this somewhat liberal definition wouldn't you agree that there is a spectrum of results that can come from war?

Even though we committed "acts of war" what were the repercussions? What were the opinions of the leaders of the countries we attacked? How about the citizens?

I see much more at stake with North Korea based on the strength of their military and the unpredictability of their leader.

Geoduck

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #103 on: August 16, 2017, 05:23:56 PM »
Given recent comments by our "leader" I'd hope for this to end sooner than later.

But really, is anyone surprised?

dividendman

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
  • Age: 35
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #104 on: August 16, 2017, 08:59:53 PM »
Sigh, when Steve Bannon says better things than the President you know we're in trouble:

Quote
“Ethno-nationalism – it’s losers. It’s a fringe element,” Bannon said. “I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more.”

He added, “These guys are a collection of clowns.”

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/16/politics/steve-bannon-interview-white-supremacy/index.html

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 492
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #105 on: August 16, 2017, 09:57:26 PM »
Sigh, when Steve Bannon says better things than the President you know we're in trouble:

Quote
“Ethno-nationalism – it’s losers. It’s a fringe element,” Bannon said. “I think the media plays it up too much, and we gotta help crush it, you know, uh, help crush it more.”

He added, “These guys are a collection of clowns.”

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/16/politics/steve-bannon-interview-white-supremacy/index.html
This is truly confusing. I haven't been following reality TV (i.e. the executive branch) well enough recently to even remotely grasp the political dynamics at play in Bannon's statements. Congratulations Trump et. al, you have overloaded everyone's OODA loop.

For those of us who never thought of Bannon as Goebbels, the content of his comment is not surprising; rather what is surprising is that he said it openly in an interview. Trump appreciates loyalty and (perhaps more importantly) not being outshone by his subordinates. Bannon is smart enough to know all of that so why would he cross that line?

Theory 1: Bannon didn't mean for it to be on the record (unlikely, he's better-hinged than the Mooch)

Theory 2: He wants to make the administration seem more competent by suggesting there is a broader strategy at play with the incessant Trump dog-whistling and cow-belling with respect to the (lack of) denunciation of hate groups (but this is too clever by half; if Bannon/Trump are playing 572 dimensional chess, no one else will given them credit for it, including Congressional Republicans whose support Trump needs to govern effectively)

Theory 3: He is trying to get fired (buy why?)

Theory 4: He is trying to run interference/distract the media to protect Trump (most plausible so far, even though he is contradicting Trump? Then again, Tillerson and Sessions are launching contradictions with impunity these days)

DarkandStormy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Columbus
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #106 on: August 17, 2017, 07:28:54 AM »
That said, where is the moral outrage when communist/collectivists show up? no ideology has exterminated more people on this planet than that one.

Feel free to provide links that show the last time a large group of communists/neo-communists (if that's a thing?) rallied together yelling racist phrases and claiming their race is superior, etc.  Oh and the last time they came together and one of their members committed an act of terrorism and killed someone.  Oh and the last time they beat someone with poles and clubs because of the color of his skin.

Seriously...there's no "moral outrage" because they don't do any of those things in 2017.
The Chase Trifecta:
Earn 50,000 Ultimate Rewards points with Chase Sapphire Preferred - $4k spending in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/6/2MOVOLZCEJ
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom Unlimited - only $500 spending needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/18/ENYF0FTS66
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom - only $500 spending needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/2/DBOP9XI9XT

Recommended Cell Servce - Google's Project FI: https://g.co/fi/r/THK0WX

Mississippi Mudstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1523
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Danielsville, GA
    • A Riving Home - Ramblings of a Recusant Woodworker
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #107 on: August 17, 2017, 08:06:34 AM »
Sigh, when Steve Bannon says better things than the President you know we're in trouble...

For those of us who never thought of Bannon as Goebbels, the content of his comment is not surprising; rather what is surprising is that he said it openly in an interview. Trump appreciates loyalty and (perhaps more importantly) not being outshone by his subordinates. Bannon is smart enough to know all of that so why would he cross that line?

My perspective: Steve Bannon called up Robert Kuttner from The American Prospect, a leftist publication, to discuss their similar views on international trade following an article from Kuttner that was critical of U.S. trade policy with China. Bannon felt obligated to insult the base that he helped coalesce (white nationalists) to ingratiate himself with Kuttner and to get his attention. Bannon's primary motivation seems to be his economic nationalism:

Quote from: Steve Bannon
To me, the economic war with China is everything. And we have to be maniacally focused on that. If we continue to lose it, we're five years away, I think, ten years at the most, of hitting an inflection point from which we'll never be able to recover.

Bannon is in search of allies on the left to strengthen his coalition. He certainly doesn't seem to be making many friends among his fellow White House aides and advisers. Maybe he simply forgot to tell Kuttner that the conversation was off the record, or (more likely, I think) he made a strategic calculation to get his views about China distributed to a wider audience. Surely he didn't assume that one friendly conversation with Kuttner would suddenly turn him into an advocate given his track record at Breitbart.
Never. Give up.

My Woodworking Blog

sequoia

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 290
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #108 on: August 17, 2017, 08:17:27 AM »

Theory 3: He is trying to get fired (buy why?)


Maybe he is tired working at the WH, so he thinks who give a **** anymore lol. He does not want to be known as the guy who quit so maybe getting fired is better alternative.

It has been a clown show, and I bet it reduce your overall age and quality of life working there.

DarkandStormy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Columbus
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #109 on: August 17, 2017, 08:25:21 AM »

Theory 3: He is trying to get fired (buy why?)


Maybe he is tired working at the WH, so he thinks who give a **** anymore lol. He does not want to be known as the guy who quit so maybe getting fired is better alternative.

It has been a clown show, and I bet it reduce your overall age and quality of life working there.

Bannon already looked like he only had one or two horcruxes left before he joined the WH.
The Chase Trifecta:
Earn 50,000 Ultimate Rewards points with Chase Sapphire Preferred - $4k spending in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/6/2MOVOLZCEJ
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom Unlimited - only $500 spending needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/18/ENYF0FTS66
Earn a $150 bonus with Chase Freedom - only $500 spending needed in 3 months.
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/2/DBOP9XI9XT

Recommended Cell Servce - Google's Project FI: https://g.co/fi/r/THK0WX

Glenstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1382
  • Age: 185
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2024 (maybe?)
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #110 on: August 17, 2017, 09:54:29 AM »

Theory 3: He is trying to get fired (buy why?)


Maybe he is tired working at the WH, so he thinks who give a **** anymore lol. He does not want to be known as the guy who quit so maybe getting fired is better alternative.

It has been a clown show, and I bet it reduce your overall age and quality of life working there.
Let's be honest. One of Bannon's long stated goals is to destroy the administrative state. The Trump Administration has been wildly successful at damaging institutions like the EPA, etc. I suspect that Bannon feels pretty pleased on the whole.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/23/politics/steve-bannon-world-view/

rocketpj

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 617
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #111 on: August 17, 2017, 10:06:22 AM »
Let me speculate about the best case scenario for a Full Trump Presidency.

Let's call him a full powered stress test for your constitution and democracy.  He has shown that he is quite willing to ignore every norm and use whatever means are available to further his own interests.  He will attack, demean and undermine every democratic norm, convention, system and barrier to protect himself.

So, chances are he will break anything that can be broken over the next 3.5 years (if he lasts that long), or possibly even 7.5 years.  At the end you can pretty much assume a small set of possible outcomes.
1.  Democracy is over and it is obvious, with at least 30% of the population in favour, 30% fighting it and demonized, and the rest terrified and/or looking for an exit.  This is the worst case.  Maybe elections are suspended or just so obviously rigged as to be pointless (where opposition is arrested, smeared and or harmed). 

2.  Democracy survives.  In this case, if current trends continue, so much damage will have been done domestically and abroad that there will be a huge appetite for reform.  International trade is in a tailspin, US markets are tanking, corporations are leaving, and unemployment is spiking.  Maybe the dollar is losing its position globally as well. 

In the second case, if the Democrats (or their replacements) can manage not to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, there might be a wholesale set of reforms to the current, broken political system.  Campaign finance reform, a reform of electoral redistricting processes, maybe some halfway intelligent banking regulation etc. etc.  That can be a huge discussion.

Any halfway stable system will continue to function until its weaknesses overwhelm it, or in the case of human systems people find and use the weaknesses to their own gain.  Trump isn't breaking the system, he is exploiting its weaknesses, which have been built and expanded upon by both parties for decades.

So I guess we'll see if this is just a test to see if your democracy is strong enough to survive an egregiously self aggrandizing moron.  Despite your national mythology, that is not yet certain.

kayvent

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 498
  • Location: Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #112 on: August 17, 2017, 05:00:43 PM »
That said, where is the moral outrage when communist/collectivists show up? no ideology has exterminated more people on this planet than that one.

Feel free to provide links that show the last time a large group of communists/neo-communists (if that's a thing?) rallied together yelling racist phrases and claiming their race is superior, etc.  Oh and the last time they came together and one of their members committed an act of terrorism and killed someone.  Oh and the last time they beat someone with poles and clubs because of the color of his skin.

Seriously...there's no "moral outrage" because they don't do any of those things in 2017.

Are you for real mate? Google "pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon". Or the Dallas cop shooting. Or the Milwaukee Rioters targetting white people in the streets to assault. Or Antifa beating people with bike locks, bats, and improvised flame throwers (though they're communists, not racists).
« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 05:22:51 PM by kayvent »

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1234
  • Age: 34
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #113 on: August 17, 2017, 06:10:09 PM »
That said, where is the moral outrage when communist/collectivists show up? no ideology has exterminated more people on this planet than that one.

Feel free to provide links that show the last time a large group of communists/neo-communists (if that's a thing?) rallied together yelling racist phrases and claiming their race is superior, etc.  Oh and the last time they came together and one of their members committed an act of terrorism and killed someone.  Oh and the last time they beat someone with poles and clubs because of the color of his skin.

Seriously...there's no "moral outrage" because they don't do any of those things in 2017.

Are you for real mate? Google "pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon". Or the Dallas cop shooting. Or the Milwaukee Rioters targetting white people in the streets to assault. Or Antifa beating people with bike locks, bats, and improvised flame throwers (though they're communists, not racists).

Agreed, there are definitely some on the left that do indefensible things in the name of (so they think) fighting bigotry and and inequality and hatred and intolerance.  Then there are people who fight for bigotry and inequality and hatred and intolerance. Oh, and some of them also cross the line into intentional violence or other illegal behavior. Interesting how so many  maintain that there is no effective difference between those two groups...

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3746
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #114 on: August 17, 2017, 06:16:26 PM »
I think one thing to always keep in mind is that the president of the USA is not a monarch. This lack of power gives me assurance. Say if Trump wants to do something batshit crazy, his inner circle can convince him otherwise. Or the senate could block it. Or the congress. Or the Supreme Court. Or the department being tasked could follow the order with negligence. Or the next general election.

Personally, I'm not convinced his inner circle can convince him otherwise.  Yes, he can be held in check through the "checks and balances" system but his spur-of-the-moment tweets are troublesome. 

Although not within his presidential powers, I would not be surprised to read a DJT tweet declaring war on North Korea or contemplating declaring war on North Korea or any other threatening remark.  That's the batshit crazy stuff that nightmares are made of.

Only congress can declare war.

Will North Korea care, if they see a tweet that says we've declared war?

kayvent

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 498
  • Location: Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #115 on: August 17, 2017, 06:26:11 PM »
That said, where is the moral outrage when communist/collectivists show up? no ideology has exterminated more people on this planet than that one.

Feel free to provide links that show the last time a large group of communists/neo-communists (if that's a thing?) rallied together yelling racist phrases and claiming their race is superior, etc.  Oh and the last time they came together and one of their members committed an act of terrorism and killed someone.  Oh and the last time they beat someone with poles and clubs because of the color of his skin.

Seriously...there's no "moral outrage" because they don't do any of those things in 2017.

Are you for real mate? Google "pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon". Or the Dallas cop shooting. Or the Milwaukee Rioters targetting white people in the streets to assault. Or Antifa beating people with bike locks, bats, and improvised flame throwers (though they're communists, not racists).

Agreed, there are definitely some on the left that do indefensible things in the name of (so they think) fighting bigotry and and inequality and hatred and intolerance.  Then there are people who fight for bigotry and inequality and hatred and intolerance. Oh, and some of them also cross the line into intentional violence or other illegal behavior. Interesting how so many  maintain that there is no effective difference between those two groups...

Shooting people for being white is not someone fighting bigotry re: Micah Johnson or Gavin Eugen.

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3746
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #116 on: August 17, 2017, 06:33:25 PM »
That said, where is the moral outrage when communist/collectivists show up? no ideology has exterminated more people on this planet than that one.

Feel free to provide links that show the last time a large group of communists/neo-communists (if that's a thing?) rallied together yelling racist phrases and claiming their race is superior, etc.  Oh and the last time they came together and one of their members committed an act of terrorism and killed someone.  Oh and the last time they beat someone with poles and clubs because of the color of his skin.

Seriously...there's no "moral outrage" because they don't do any of those things in 2017.

Are you for real mate? Google "pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon". Or the Dallas cop shooting. Or the Milwaukee Rioters targetting white people in the streets to assault. Or Antifa beating people with bike locks, bats, and improvised flame throwers (though they're communists, not racists).

Agreed, there are definitely some on the left that do indefensible things in the name of (so they think) fighting bigotry and and inequality and hatred and intolerance.  Then there are people who fight for bigotry and inequality and hatred and intolerance. Oh, and some of them also cross the line into intentional violence or other illegal behavior. Interesting how so many  maintain that there is no effective difference between those two groups...

Shooting people for being white is not someone fighting bigotry re: Micah Johnson or Gavin Eugen.

Two things.

1)

Gavin Eugen's suicide note explicitly stated that he felt his actions were necessary to promote change in policing:
Quote
Therefore I must bring the same destruction that bad cops continue to inflict upon my people, upon bad cops as well as good cops in hopes that the good cops (which are the majority) will be able to stand together to enact justice & punishment against bad cops b/c right now the police force & current judicial system is not doing so.

He was not "shooting people for being white."

2) What you're doing is minimalizing and normalizing Nazi behavior by drawing comparisons to extremists on the other side.  Whether you intend to or not, this comes across as "Nazis aren't that bad because there are other bad people too."

Think about that.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 06:35:36 PM by JLee »

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 492
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #117 on: August 17, 2017, 06:34:31 PM »
Sigh, when Steve Bannon says better things than the President you know we're in trouble...

For those of us who never thought of Bannon as Goebbels, the content of his comment is not surprising; rather what is surprising is that he said it openly in an interview. Trump appreciates loyalty and (perhaps more importantly) not being outshone by his subordinates. Bannon is smart enough to know all of that so why would he cross that line?

My perspective: Steve Bannon called up Robert Kuttner from The American Prospect, a leftist publication, to discuss their similar views on international trade following an article from Kuttner that was critical of U.S. trade policy with China. Bannon felt obligated to insult the base that he helped coalesce (white nationalists) to ingratiate himself with Kuttner and to get his attention. Bannon's primary motivation seems to be his economic nationalism:

Quote from: Steve Bannon
To me, the economic war with China is everything. And we have to be maniacally focused on that. If we continue to lose it, we're five years away, I think, ten years at the most, of hitting an inflection point from which we'll never be able to recover.

Bannon is in search of allies on the left to strengthen his coalition. He certainly doesn't seem to be making many friends among his fellow White House aides and advisers. Maybe he simply forgot to tell Kuttner that the conversation was off the record, or (more likely, I think) he made a strategic calculation to get his views about China distributed to a wider audience. Surely he didn't assume that one friendly conversation with Kuttner would suddenly turn him into an advocate given his track record at Breitbart.
Thanks for that background on Kuttner, like I mentioned, I can't keep up with the shitshow anymore. That makes sense as much as anything and maybe Bannon thinks Trump is so distracted by...well...everything that he can go rogue in pursuit of his objectives.

One more possibility?

kayvent

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 498
  • Location: Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #118 on: August 17, 2017, 07:52:30 PM »
That said, where is the moral outrage when communist/collectivists show up? no ideology has exterminated more people on this planet than that one.

Feel free to provide links that show the last time a large group of communists/neo-communists (if that's a thing?) rallied together yelling racist phrases and claiming their race is superior, etc.  Oh and the last time they came together and one of their members committed an act of terrorism and killed someone.  Oh and the last time they beat someone with poles and clubs because of the color of his skin.

Seriously...there's no "moral outrage" because they don't do any of those things in 2017.

Are you for real mate? Google "pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon". Or the Dallas cop shooting. Or the Milwaukee Rioters targetting white people in the streets to assault. Or Antifa beating people with bike locks, bats, and improvised flame throwers (though they're communists, not racists).

Agreed, there are definitely some on the left that do indefensible things in the name of (so they think) fighting bigotry and and inequality and hatred and intolerance.  Then there are people who fight for bigotry and inequality and hatred and intolerance. Oh, and some of them also cross the line into intentional violence or other illegal behavior. Interesting how so many  maintain that there is no effective difference between those two groups...

Shooting people for being white is not someone fighting bigotry re: Micah Johnson or Gavin Eugen.

Two things.

1)

Gavin Eugen's suicide note explicitly stated that he felt his actions were necessary to promote change in policing:
Quote
Therefore I must bring the same destruction that bad cops continue to inflict upon my people, upon bad cops as well as good cops in hopes that the good cops (which are the majority) will be able to stand together to enact justice & punishment against bad cops b/c right now the police force & current judicial system is not doing so.

He was not "shooting people for being white."

2) What you're doing is minimalizing and normalizing Nazi behavior by drawing comparisons to extremists on the other side.  Whether you intend to or not, this comes across as "Nazis aren't that bad because there are other bad people too."

Think about that.

To me, it sounds like you are the one diminishing violence.

1. Are you trying to say that Gavin Eugen going out to hunt police officers was justified because he thought killing them would promote change? I assume not but then I'm left wondering why you would even mention it. Also, he was a black separatist. That's why he thought he was justified in killing cops.

And another comment about the suicide note, you take the word of a murderer of cops to be genuine? As a bit of a life lesson, figuratively speaking when one guy is lying on the floor dead and another is standing, alive, with a gun in his hands, you shouldn't take the latter's words afterwards as gospel. You get grotesque distortions of the truth from them. (Think of the Martin/Zimmerman incident. I sure hope you wouldn't trust Zimmerman's recollection of the facts or his justification that he derived after the murder).

2. Did I say "it's ok when far-left individuals to assault people without merit"? Did I, similar to you just did, provide a rationale for why a Nazi wants to riot? Did I suggest like DarkandStormy that assault and battery is less bad if the people doing it think they are doing it for a good cause? No, it is bad to assault people who aren't assaulting you. Whether it is a white nationalists or Nazis or Communist doing it. I won't defend, like it sounds like some of you are doing, people attacking others first.

Besides being innately evil, what made the Nazis infamous is they actually annexed territories. Rounded up Jews. Gassed people with disabilities. That's why it was perfectly justifiable to make them a chapter in the history book. When a specific crowd of American Neo-Nazis contemplate rounding up black people to execute, drop a fucking daisy cutter on them! Had someone executed that Charlotteville driver in the street after killing that lady, I'd have ruled not guilty if I was put on a jury.

Assaulting or killing people who are not posing an imminent threat is wrong. Why you even think it is appropriate to mention that Eugen thought he had good reasons to do so is beyond me.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 07:54:01 PM by kayvent »

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3746
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #119 on: August 17, 2017, 09:08:38 PM »
That said, where is the moral outrage when communist/collectivists show up? no ideology has exterminated more people on this planet than that one.

Feel free to provide links that show the last time a large group of communists/neo-communists (if that's a thing?) rallied together yelling racist phrases and claiming their race is superior, etc.  Oh and the last time they came together and one of their members committed an act of terrorism and killed someone.  Oh and the last time they beat someone with poles and clubs because of the color of his skin.

Seriously...there's no "moral outrage" because they don't do any of those things in 2017.

Are you for real mate? Google "pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon". Or the Dallas cop shooting. Or the Milwaukee Rioters targetting white people in the streets to assault. Or Antifa beating people with bike locks, bats, and improvised flame throwers (though they're communists, not racists).

Agreed, there are definitely some on the left that do indefensible things in the name of (so they think) fighting bigotry and and inequality and hatred and intolerance.  Then there are people who fight for bigotry and inequality and hatred and intolerance. Oh, and some of them also cross the line into intentional violence or other illegal behavior. Interesting how so many  maintain that there is no effective difference between those two groups...

Shooting people for being white is not someone fighting bigotry re: Micah Johnson or Gavin Eugen.

Two things.

1)

Gavin Eugen's suicide note explicitly stated that he felt his actions were necessary to promote change in policing:
Quote
Therefore I must bring the same destruction that bad cops continue to inflict upon my people, upon bad cops as well as good cops in hopes that the good cops (which are the majority) will be able to stand together to enact justice & punishment against bad cops b/c right now the police force & current judicial system is not doing so.

He was not "shooting people for being white."

2) What you're doing is minimalizing and normalizing Nazi behavior by drawing comparisons to extremists on the other side.  Whether you intend to or not, this comes across as "Nazis aren't that bad because there are other bad people too."

Think about that.

To me, it sounds like you are the one diminishing violence.

1. Are you trying to say that Gavin Eugen going out to hunt police officers was justified because he thought killing them would promote change? I assume not but then I'm left wondering why you would even mention it. Also, he was a black separatist. That's why he thought he was justified in killing cops.

And another comment about the suicide note, you take the word of a murderer of cops to be genuine? As a bit of a life lesson, figuratively speaking when one guy is lying on the floor dead and another is standing, alive, with a gun in his hands, you shouldn't take the latter's words afterwards as gospel. You get grotesque distortions of the truth from them. (Think of the Martin/Zimmerman incident. I sure hope you wouldn't trust Zimmerman's recollection of the facts or his justification that he derived after the murder).

2. Did I say "it's ok when far-left individuals to assault people without merit"? Did I, similar to you just did, provide a rationale for why a Nazi wants to riot? Did I suggest like DarkandStormy that assault and battery is less bad if the people doing it think they are doing it for a good cause? No, it is bad to assault people who aren't assaulting you. Whether it is a white nationalists or Nazis or Communist doing it. I won't defend, like it sounds like some of you are doing, people attacking others first.

Besides being innately evil, what made the Nazis infamous is they actually annexed territories. Rounded up Jews. Gassed people with disabilities. That's why it was perfectly justifiable to make them a chapter in the history book. When a specific crowd of American Neo-Nazis contemplate rounding up black people to execute, drop a fucking daisy cutter on them! Had someone executed that Charlotteville driver in the street after killing that lady, I'd have ruled not guilty if I was put on a jury.

Assaulting or killing people who are not posing an imminent threat is wrong. Why you even think it is appropriate to mention that Eugen thought he had good reasons to do so is beyond me.

I wore a badge for years. I've stood at the funeral of a brother officer murdered in the line of duty.  These strike close to home for me - you can shove your "life lesson" elsewhere.

1) I was trying to say exactly what I said. Unless you have another source that claims Eugen was specifically targeting white people.  Evidence suggests he was targeting law enforcement - if you want to kill a bunch of white people, targeting ones with guns and radios is a bad plan.

Eugen was shooting people for being cops, not for being white.

2) Watch this.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 09:10:13 PM by JLee »

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3746
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #120 on: August 17, 2017, 09:58:31 PM »
Ok, I had to go back to this.

Quote from: kayvent
To me, it sounds like you are the one diminishing violence.

1. Are you trying to say that Gavin Eugen going out to hunt police officers was justified because he thought killing them would promote change?
No.

Quote
I assume not
okay...

Quote
but then I'm left wondering why you would even mention it.
because he specifically stated his intentions. They were not "kill white people", as your post suggested.

Quote
Also, he was a black separatist. That's why he thought he was justified in killing cops.
Irrelevant since the claim was "shooting people for being white" - not "thought he was justified in killing cops"

Quote
And another comment about the suicide note, you take the word of a murderer of cops to be genuine?

I take his actions to be genuine. He killed three police officers and wounded three more.

Quote
As a bit of a life lesson, figuratively speaking when one guy is lying on the floor dead and another is standing, alive, with a gun in his hands, you shouldn't take the latter's words afterwards as gospel. You get grotesque distortions of the truth from them. (Think of the Martin/Zimmerman incident. I sure hope you wouldn't trust Zimmerman's recollection of the facts or his justification that he derived after the murder).
Gavin Eugene Long is dead. Three officers are dead, at his hands. Who's this "standing, alive, with a gun in his hands" whose words we shouldn't take as gospel?  It looks to me like he did exactly what his letter said he would do. What's your dispute here?

Quote
2. Did I say "it's ok when far-left individuals to assault people without merit"? Did I, similar to you just did, provide a rationale for why a Nazi wants to riot? Did I suggest like DarkandStormy that assault and battery is less bad if the people doing it think they are doing it for a good cause? No,
ok?

Quote
it is bad to assault people who aren't assaulting you. Whether it is a white nationalists or Nazis or Communist doing it. I won't defend, like it sounds like some of you are doing, people attacking others first.
I'm not sure who you're talking to here, because I certainly did not defend anyone attacking anyone else.

Quote
Besides being innately evil, what made the Nazis infamous is they actually annexed territories. Rounded up Jews. Gassed people with disabilities. That's why it was perfectly justifiable to make them a chapter in the history book. When a specific crowd of American Neo-Nazis contemplate rounding up black people to execute, drop a fucking daisy cutter on them!


In case you have not watched the Vice clip, I'll post some quotes here. These are high-level alt-right organizers at the Charlottesville protest.

Vice: We were asking whether white people were capable of violence.
Cantwell: I didn't say capable, of course we're capable, I'm carrying a pistol, I go to the gym all the time, I'm trying to make myself more capable of violence. I'm here to spread ideas and talk, in the hopes that somebody more capable will come along and do that. Someone like Donald Trump, who does not give his daughter to a Jew.
Vice: So Donald Trump but like more racist.
Cantwell: A lot more racist than Donald Trump. I don't think you could feel about race the way I do and watch that Kushner bastard walk around with that beautiful girl.

[...later...]

Other dude: And that's because this city is run by Jewish communists and criminal n*****s.
Vice: So you're the true non-violent protesters.
Cantwell: I'm not even saying we're non-violent. I'm saying that we did not aggress. We didn't initiate force against anybody. We are not non-violent. We'll fucking kill these people if we have to.

[...later...]

Vice: So what do you hope to get out of today, why, what does it mean to you?
Ray: Well, for one thing it means that we're showing to this parasitic class of anti-white vermin that this is our country, this country was built by our forefathers and was sustained by us, and will remain our country. I believe as you can see we are stepping off the internet in a big way. For instance, last night at the torch walk, there were hundreds and hundreds of us, people realize they're not atomized individuals, they're part of a larger whole, because we have been spreading our names, we have been organizing on the internet, so now they're coming out, and now as you can see we greatly outnumber the anti-white, anti-American filth, and, and some point, we will have enough power that we will clear them from the streets forever. That which is degenerate in white countries will be removed. [...] We're starting to unveil a little bit of our power level. You ain't seen nothin' yet.

[...later...]

Cantwell: I think that a lot more people are gonna die before we're done here, frankly.
Vice: Why?
Cantwell: Why, because people die every day, right? I mean.
Vice: Not, like, of a heart attack. I mean violent death.
Cantwell: Well, people die violent deaths all the time. Right, like this is part of the reason why we want an ethnostate, right. So, like, the blacks are killing each other in staggering numbers from coast to coast, we don't really wanna have a part of that anymore, and so the fact that they resist us when we say hey we want a homeland, is not shocking to me. These people want violence and the right is just meeting market demand.


Quote
Had someone executed that Charlotteville driver in the street after killing that lady, I'd have ruled not guilty if I was put on a jury.
Deadly force is justified when there's an imminent threat. Execution is not.

Quote
Assaulting or killing people who are not posing an imminent threat is wrong.
I agree. However, you literally just said that executing the Charlottesville driver would have been okay in your book.

Quote
Why you even think it is appropriate to mention that Eugen thought he had good reasons to do so is beyond me.
As noted earlier, because it disproves your claim that he was targeting white people.

kayvent

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 498
  • Location: Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #121 on: August 17, 2017, 10:05:42 PM »
If someone just killed a person and is running over numerous other people, they are being an imminent threat. I am shocked you'd not concur that someone killing a neo-nazi running over people would not be justified.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 10:08:23 PM by kayvent »

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3746
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #122 on: August 17, 2017, 10:08:56 PM »
If someone just killed a person and is running over numerous other people, they are being an imminent threat. I am shocked you'd not concur that someone killing a neo-nazi running over people would not be justified.

You have moved the goal posts by adding "and is running over numerous other people." Your initial statement specifically stated "executed that Charlotteville driver in the street after killing that lady" - adding further information changes the entire situation, and your alleged shock at my disagreement is based on false pretenses.

The term "execute" means something very specific.  You don't "execute" someone in self-defense.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 10:15:41 PM by JLee »

kayvent

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 498
  • Location: Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #123 on: August 17, 2017, 10:20:38 PM »
If someone just killed a person and is running over numerous other people, they are being an imminent threat. I am shocked you'd not concur that someone killing a neo-nazi running over people would not be justified.

You have moved the goal posts by adding "and is running over numerous other people." Your initial statement specifically stated "executed that Charlotteville driver in the street after killing that lady" - adding further information changes the entire situation, and your alleged shock at my disagreement is based on false pretenses.

The term "execute" means something very specific.  You don't "execute" someone in self-defense.

The lady wasn't the last person ran over. As per my use of the word "execute", I'd retract the use of that particular word. I meant to use it as "consciously kill a person" and was ignorant that it can/does have a narrower connotation.

JLee

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3746
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #124 on: August 17, 2017, 10:24:14 PM »
If someone just killed a person and is running over numerous other people, they are being an imminent threat. I am shocked you'd not concur that someone killing a neo-nazi running over people would not be justified.

You have moved the goal posts by adding "and is running over numerous other people." Your initial statement specifically stated "executed that Charlotteville driver in the street after killing that lady" - adding further information changes the entire situation, and your alleged shock at my disagreement is based on false pretenses.

The term "execute" means something very specific.  You don't "execute" someone in self-defense.

The lady wasn't the last person ran over. As per my use of the word "execute", I'd retract the use of that particular word. I meant to use it as "consciously kill a person" and was ignorant that it can/does have a narrower connotation.

In that case, our disagreements are likely due to phrasing/semantics and not due to differences in the underlying thought processes. I expect we are generally on the same page.

[MOD NOTE:  This exchange got flagged to me, but it's not clear to me what the two of you are arguing over.  It also seems to me, as you've finally concluded, you aren't actually disagreeing with each other.  Possibly, you've just become confused because you're not particularly concise with the communication skills.

That said, this discussion seems to be over ... and also a bit off topic.  Let's get back on to the (admittedly also off-topic) topic of discussion.

Thanks,
Toque.]
« Last Edit: August 18, 2017, 06:46:35 AM by FrugalToque »

whatupjeffy

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #125 on: August 18, 2017, 12:51:43 AM »
he provokes N.Korea and as my friend recently said, there would be a big "Anti-US" demonstration soon in S.Korea

dividendman

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
  • Age: 35
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #126 on: August 18, 2017, 09:59:40 AM »
he provokes N.Korea and as my friend recently said, there would be a big "Anti-US" demonstration soon in S.Korea

Well, if South Korea becomes anti-US too, maybe they'll unite and then the treat will be solved that way! haha.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1428
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #127 on: August 18, 2017, 12:06:12 PM »

Theory 3: He is trying to get fired (buy why?)


Maybe he is tired working at the WH, so he thinks who give a **** anymore lol. He does not want to be known as the guy who quit so maybe getting fired is better alternative.

It has been a clown show, and I bet it reduce your overall age and quality of life working there.

Bannon already looked like he only had one or two horcruxes left before he joined the WH.

Now that was some impressive speculating! 

Quote
WASHINGTON – Steve Bannon is leaving his post as senior adviser on Friday, according to the White House, ending a turbulent tenure for the hardline immigration and economic nationalist who clashed other advisers since the beginning of President Trump's term.

"White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and Steve Bannon have mutually agreed today would be Steve's last day. We are grateful for his service and wish him the best," said a statement from White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders.


Pretty much spot on, now I just wonder what the fallout is with CEO's, staff, and 'fellow' Republicans distancing themselves from the President.  Even the mother of the victim of the Charlottesville incident does not want to talk to President Trump.
Quote
(Susan) Bro said she initially missed calls from the president, the first of which "looked like it actually came during the funeral" on Wednesday.

That day, Trump tweeted, "Memorial service today for beautiful and incredible Heather Heyer, a truly special young woman. She will be long remembered by all!"

Bro said that she received "three more frantic messages from press secretaries throughout the day and I didn't know why." She said she did not immediately respond because she was recovering from the funeral and focused on setting up her daughter's foundation.

It wasn't until Thursday, Bro said, that she heard Trump's comments that appear to equate the actions of the protesters and the white supremacist demonstrators.

"I'm not talking to the president now. I'm sorry. After what he said about my child," Bro said during the interview. "I saw an actual clip of him at a press conference equating the protesters like Miss Heyer with the KKK and the white supremacists. ... I'm not forgiving for that."
Transitioning to FIRE'd albeit somewhat cautiously...


Gondolin

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 397
  • Location: Northern VA
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #129 on: August 18, 2017, 01:55:52 PM »
Quote
Bannon has been fired

Bannon was never cut out to govern or play politics. Now he can go back to doing what he is good at - railing from the outside at the corrupt Washington elite. I find it 6 months before he's denouncing trump for betraying his "drain the swamp" constituency.
"There cannot be two skies"

sequoia

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 290
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #130 on: August 18, 2017, 02:01:28 PM »
We should have a new thread "So Let's Speculate about who is going to get fired next..."

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1233
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #131 on: August 18, 2017, 02:22:52 PM »
We should have a new thread "So Let's Speculate about who is going to get fired next..."
Who is still left?  He is running out of people.

dividendman

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
  • Age: 35
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #132 on: August 18, 2017, 02:51:34 PM »
We should have a new thread "So Let's Speculate about who is going to get fired next..."
Who is still left?  He is running out of people.

Well, he could pick David Duke for chief strategist.

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1407
  • Location: MA
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #133 on: August 19, 2017, 06:09:26 AM »
I would not put that past him.

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8792
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #134 on: August 19, 2017, 11:29:44 AM »
We should have a new thread "So Let's Speculate about who is going to get fired next..."
Who is still left?  He is running out of people.

Well, he could pick David Duke for chief strategist.

It would be a logical choice after Bannon.

sequoia

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 290
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #135 on: August 29, 2017, 09:35:32 PM »
He made sure that everyone knows who is FLOTUS today - incase she was mistaken as one of the suffering peasants in Houston...
« Last Edit: August 29, 2017, 09:37:29 PM by sequoia »

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1233
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #136 on: August 29, 2017, 11:50:15 PM »
He made sure that everyone knows who is FLOTUS today - incase she was mistaken as one of the suffering peasants in Houston...
She needs a hat to remind her that she really is FLOTUS, we can't believe it either.

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #137 on: August 30, 2017, 11:53:37 AM »
I wasn't particularly impressed by some media's coverage of FLOTUS shoes. Who the fuck cares what she is wearing! People are literally drowning in Texas. With that said, I find this particularly spot on for the situation now with Trump being in Texas.


GenXbiker

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 330
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #138 on: August 30, 2017, 01:07:26 PM »

Who cares what hats they are wearing?  People are always looking for something negative to say about their president.

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 145
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #139 on: August 30, 2017, 01:08:54 PM »

Who cares what hats they are wearing?  People are always looking for something negative to say about their president.

Indeed.  See the post directly above yours.

Dabnasty

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 207
  • Age: 28
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #140 on: August 30, 2017, 01:27:24 PM »

Who cares what hats they are wearing?  People are always looking for something negative to say about their president.

Indeed.  See the post directly above yours.
Perfect timing.

Also the issue with the hat isn't that he's wearing it, it's that his campaign is selling it. For $40. And he wore multiple colors of the same hat in a short period as if he's modeling it.

Edit: The first comments were making fun of the FLOTUS hat, not his USA hat. I didn't put that together when I responded but the point remains, it's marketing. That's all he knows how to do.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2017, 02:15:24 PM by Dabnasty »

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2410
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #141 on: August 30, 2017, 01:29:32 PM »

Who cares what hats they are wearing?  People are always looking for something negative to say about their president.

Indeed.  See the post directly above yours.
Perfect timing.

Also the issue with the hat isn't that he's wearing it, it's that his campaign is selling it. For $40. And he wore multiple colors of the same hat in a short period as if he's modeling it.


It almost makes one think he cares more about making money and his image than he does about the people of Houston.

Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

infogoon

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 804
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #142 on: August 30, 2017, 02:39:16 PM »
It almost makes one think he cares more about making money and his image than he does about the people of Houston.

Grifters gonna grift.

At least now he's moved on to vague complaints about tax rates, while the rain is still falling.

Cache Stash

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 142
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #143 on: August 30, 2017, 02:41:12 PM »
This forum looks like it has been around awhile.  Is there an equivalent Obama thread?



infogoon

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 804
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #144 on: August 30, 2017, 02:48:12 PM »
This forum looks like it has been around awhile.  Is there an equivalent Obama thread?

Search box is at the top of the page. Happy hunting!

Cache Stash

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 142
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #145 on: August 30, 2017, 04:49:17 PM »
This forum looks like it has been around awhile.  Is there an equivalent Obama thread?

Search box is at the top of the page. Happy hunting!

Did that.  Only thread that comes up is this thread.  I think you're being disingenuous



Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1234
  • Age: 34
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #146 on: August 30, 2017, 05:10:17 PM »
This forum looks like it has been around awhile.  Is there an equivalent Obama thread?

Search box is at the top of the page. Happy hunting!

Did that.  Only thread that comes up is this thread.  I think you're being disingenuous

Indeed, we ARE the deep state. Tread lightly :O

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #147 on: August 30, 2017, 06:13:22 PM »
This forum looks like it has been around awhile.  Is there an equivalent Obama thread?

Search box is at the top of the page. Happy hunting!

Did that.  Only thread that comes up is this thread.  I think you're being disingenuous

Obama was elected in 2008. MMM has only been around since 2011. You can do the Math I am sure ( :

Cache Stash

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 142
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #148 on: August 30, 2017, 06:14:30 PM »
This forum looks like it has been around awhile.  Is there an equivalent Obama thread?

Search box is at the top of the page. Happy hunting!

Did that.  Only thread that comes up is this thread.  I think you're being disingenuous

Indeed, we ARE the deep state. Tread lightly :O

What does "Tread Lightly mean?"



Cache Stash

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 142
Re: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...
« Reply #149 on: August 30, 2017, 06:15:14 PM »
This forum looks like it has been around awhile.  Is there an equivalent Obama thread?

Search box is at the top of the page. Happy hunting!

Did that.  Only thread that comes up is this thread.  I think you're being disingenuous

Obama was elected in 2008. MMM has only been around since 2011. You can do the Math I am sure ( :

So the forum just ignored the other five years?  Just asking,