Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

Samaris wrote: »

Because none of those were in any way affected by a natural disaster, ofc. Everyone knows that say, the Smithsonian and the premises of Head Start can levitate above weather systems when they happen.

There probably was pork in there, Celticfire, there always is. People make demands to be able to pass the basic structure. But to ascribe anything not immediately identifiable as pork is a bit much.

I'm giving you the reason why it was voted against.You had no idea so I'm enlightening you. I'm not going to debate whether $16bn ($11BN more than was asked for) for HUD is " Pork" padding, or any other of the myriad of spending asked for.
To try to pass it off as "NY is too rich" is a load of cobblers.

Small problem there, the Cruz press release isn't discussing that same bill but is instead related to a larger aid bill that was proposed later on. The bill 67 House Republicans and multiple Senators (including Cruz and Cornyn) voted against that was being referred to was only for $9bn and not $16bn to that, so the pork excuse doesn't fly (nor does it appear to have been used) on that one.

In fact, 36 of 45 Republican Senators voted against that $9bn bill - https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00004 .

VinLieger wrote: »

What motivation does he have to still insist the central park 5 are guilty after being found without any shadow of a doubt completely innocent of all charges..........

Trump was loud at the time in calling for the death penalty, so it is difficult for him to believe now that they were innocent. That is how most people tend to think, unfortunately. Its basic human psychology. Once you have "skin in the game" you have a bias.
However, as the guy who was later proven to be the rapist was also black, I don't see this as being a racist issue. If the proven rapist had been white, and Trump was still saying "the black guys did it" that might be construed as racist. Trump apparently believes that all 6 were involved, but that is not, in itself, a racist belief. Its just Trump being reluctant to backtrack on his original belief.

So is that all you got?

VinLieger

recedite wrote: »

Trump was loud at the time in calling for the death penalty, so it is difficult for him to believe now that they were innocent. That is how most people tend to think, unfortunately. Its basic human psychology. Once you have "skin in the game" you have a bias.
However, as the guy who was later proven to be the rapist was also black, I don't see this as being a racist issue. If the proven rapist had been white, and Trump was still saying "the black guys did it" that might be construed as racist. Trump apparently believes that all 6 were involved, but that is not, in itself, a racist belief. Its just Trump being reluctant to backtrack on his original belief.

So is that all you got?

Just cus the guy who actually committed the crime was black doesn't make this suddenly not racist when trump refuses to admit the other black men are innocent.

Compare that refusal to his speed to remark that there were some good white supremacists in charlotte.....

Are you trying to argue his motivation is he's a thick headed moron who cant admit when he was wrong?

VinLieger wrote: »

Just cus the guy who actually committed the crime was black doesn't make this suddenly not racist when trump refuses to admit the other black men are innocent.

The others should be considered innocent unless proven guilty, but Trump still thinks they were involved. He could be right, or he could be wrong, but there as there is no proof against them, he should keep his mouth shut on the issue.
If shooting off your mouth was a crime, then Trump would be a serial criminal. Doesn't show him to be a racist though.

VinLieger wrote: »

Compare that refusal to his speed to remark that there were some good white supremacists in charlotte.....

I don't remember him saying that. I remember him saying there were some good people there who just wanted the Robert E Lee statue to be preserved. And I remember him condemning the white supremacists.

oscarBravo

recedite wrote: »

Trump was loud at the time in calling for the death penalty, so it is difficult for him to believe now that they were innocent. That is how most people tend to think, unfortunately. Its basic human psychology. Once you have "skin in the game" you have a bias.
However, as the guy who was later proven to be the rapist was also black, I don't see this as being a racist issue. If the proven rapist had been white, and Trump was still saying "the black guys did it" that might be construed as racist. Trump apparently believes that all 6 were involved, but that is not, in itself, a racist belief. Its just Trump being reluctant to backtrack on his original belief.

So is that all you got?

Well, if nothing else, it's somewhat clearer why you personally have trouble perceiving Trump's racism.

Samaris

Celticfire wrote: »

I'm giving you the reason why it was voted against.You had no idea so I'm enlightening you. I'm not going to debate whether $16bn ($11BN more than was asked for) for HUD is " Pork" padding, or any other of the myriad of spending asked for.
To try to pass it off as "NY is too rich" is a load of cobblers.

Ah, I see - thanks

alchemist33

The Bombardier news today may be an unfortunate sign of things to come under Trump - slapping huge tariffs on Bombardier at the behest of Boeing, and seriously jeopardizing at least 4000 jobs in NI. It fits exactly with Donald's protectionist views and if the British government are serious about contracts with Boeing being in jeopardy, it's bad news for everyone.

I can't remember what the government's stance was on a Donald visit, but he's sure no friend of Ireland.

MadYaker

I hope he never comes here.

alchemist33 wrote: »

slapping huge tariffs on Bombardier at the behest of Boeing, and seriously jeopardizing at least 4000 jobs in NI. ... he's sure no friend of Ireland.

Presumably that will be 4000 extra jobs for the USA then?
Or maybe more, because most of the Bombardier plane is made in Canada?

Boeing claims various government subsidies have enabled Bombardier to sell its C-Series aircraft in the US below the cost of production. If that is true then The Donald would be expected to act in some way to even the playing field. So either he gives free money to Boeing as Trudeau did with Bombardier, or he slaps a tariff on Bombardier.

Anyway, if you are going to be indignant about it, shouldn't you be rooting for Airbus? That's the EU firm, and we were in the EU last time I looked.
The UK and Canada will probably be looking to work much closer together in future, but they won't be looking out for the interests of people in RoI.
The Donald on the other hand, has invested a lot of his own money in his hotel in Doonbeg.

Leroy42

recedite wrote: »

Trump was loud at the time in calling for the death penalty, so it is difficult for him to believe now that they were innocent. That is how most people tend to think, unfortunately. Its basic human psychology. Once you have "skin in the game" you have a bias.
However, as the guy who was later proven to be the rapist was also black, I don't see this as being a racist issue. If the proven rapist had been white, and Trump was still saying "the black guys did it" that might be construed as racist. Trump apparently believes that all 6 were involved, but that is not, in itself, a racist belief. Its just Trump being reluctant to backtrack on his original belief.

So is that all you got?

Sorry, but you are not seriously suggesting that you don;t think that Trump is racist are you?

What do you define as a racist? I take the dictionary definition

a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

Now clearly Trump believes that US people are better than anyone else but that can be put down to simple nationalistic fervour.

But to condemn a whole group of people (Mexicans) based on nothing more than where they live?
Whilst not racism in the strictest terms, he clearly has an issue with Muslims.

He is the very definition of a racist, in that he groups people based on the colour of their skin or their nationality.

What we hadn't seen, to a large scale, was any sign that he was aggressively racist in his past. However, that could just as easily be because his wealth effectively protected him from dealing with them in any meaning full way.
Has he lived beside minorities? Wealth has is great leveler when it comes to racism.

Although he did deny african americans from getting access to live in his apartments blocks. But since he became POTUS he has shown more than a glimpse of racism. He continues to try to ram through a Muslim ban. He clearly feels that white supremacists have a point and that they have every right to protest, whilst at the same time decrying black sports stars from peaceful protest.

Did he call for any of those marchers in Charlottesville to lose their jobs? Did he call them SOB's for waving the confederate rather than the US flag (remembering that the confederate flag is a symbol of treason against the US).

Leroy42 wrote: »

Sorry, but you are not seriously suggesting that you don;t think that Trump is racist are you?

What do you define as a racist? I take the dictionary definition

Now clearly Trump believes that US people are better than anyone else but that can be put down to simple nationalistic fervour.

But the US people are made up of every ethnicity and background imaginable including Mexican Americans. Not just ole whitey.

But to condemn a whole group of people (Mexicans) based on nothing more than where they live?

When and where did he condemn the whole of Mexico and all it's people? Illegals and criminals, yes.

Whilst not racism in the strictest terms, he clearly has an issue with Muslims.

Islam is a religion not a race.

The U.S. notified all countries in July of “baseline” standards they would need to meet to avoid travel restrictions, said Miles Taylor, a counselor to Duke at DHS. Several countries didn’t respond to the U.S. requests for more information, he said.

“Some countries didn’t even have the courtesy to say ‘fly a kite’,” Taylor said. “We’re talking about countries that were willfully non-compliant and refused to engage with the United States.”

Perhaps if they engaged with the US they wouldn't be banned. Sudan has been removed from the travel ban . Also I note no mention or comment on North Korea and Venezuela being added to the list. I guess it doesn't have the same outrage causing factor as a "Muslim ban"

He is the very definition of a racist, in that he groups people based on the colour of their skin or their nationality.

What we hadn't seen, to a large scale, was any sign that he was aggressively racist in his past. However, that could just as easily be because his wealth effectively protected him from dealing with them in any meaning full way.
Has he lived beside minorities? Wealth has is great leveler when it comes to racism.

Although he did deny african americans from getting access to live in his apartments blocks. But since he became POTUS he has shown more than a glimpse of racism. He continues to try to ram through a Muslim ban. He clearly feels that white supremacists have a point and that they have every right to protest, whilst at the same time decrying black sports stars from peaceful protest.

Did he call for any of those marchers in Charlottesville to lose their jobs? Did he call them SOB's for waving the confederate rather than the US flag (remembering that the confederate flag is a symbol of treason against the US).

'Racism is evil, and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans,' the president said in a statement to reporters at the White House on Monday.

'We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence,' he said.

Celticfire wrote: »

But the US people are made up of every ethnicity and background imaginable including Mexican Americans. Not just ole whitey.

And a lot of Trump fans would tell you they're not "real Americans". Still trying to figure out that

When and where did he condemn the whole of Mexico and all it's people? Illegals and criminals, yes.

Nope, Mexican immigrants in general. And in the US, 'Mexican' means 'hispanic' generally speaking - particularly among Trump's base.

Perhaps if they engaged with the US they wouldn't be banned. Sudan has been removed from the travel ban . Also I note no mention or comment on North Korea and Venezuela being added to the list. I guess it doesn't have the same outrage causing factor as a "Muslim ban"

You seem to forget "Muslim ban" is what Trump referred to it as. Repeatedly. Seems he's given up on that though since he relies on a lot of Muslim countries for his own personal income. And when it comes to the country Trump is president over vs his own bank account, bank account wins every time.

Billy86 wrote: »

And a lot of Trump fans would tell you they're not "real Americans". Still trying to figure out that

A lot? Your statement is borne of your personal bias. What percentage of the 62,979,636 american that voted for him are you trying to imply don't consider each other "real Americans"?

Nope, Mexican immigrants in general. And in the US, 'Mexican' means 'hispanic' generally speaking - particularly among Trump's base.

More BS. Different geographical areas might think of a certain nationality if you use the word "hispanic", but only because of the larger groupings of certain Latino nationalities in those areas. I'm sure that in Miami the first nationality to spring to mind would be Cubans.

You seem to forget "Muslim ban" is what Trump referred to it as. Repeatedly. Seems he's given up on that though since he relies on a lot of Muslim countries for his own personal income. And when it comes to the country Trump is president over vs his own bank account, bank account wins every time.

Can you show me where Trump called the Travel ban that was implemented restricting entry from seven country's a "Muslim ban"?

Nothing about the fact that Sudan is now off the list? Did they all become Christians ?

Manic Moran

He's very definitely a nationalist. That can exist without being racist.

New tax code proposals came out today. Some believe that the drop in corporate tax is a bit too much (from 38% to 20%. International average is about 22.5%). Initial impressions on whether or not a typical individual person will have a higher or lower tax bill will depend on where they are, because one of the exemptions being dropped is state and local tax, and that's a very large exemption. Citizens in high-taxation States will find that their increased tax bills will be greater than the increased deductible, whereas the opposite will take place in citizens with low-taxation States. Fortunately, deductions on mortgage interest and charitable contributions will remain. A lot of other itemisable deductions will be lost, doubtless to the annoyance of the tax preparation industry, and the number of tax brackets to be reduced. Child credits to be increased, personal deductions removed.

Overall, analysts on the radio on the way in are giving it a fair reception. Not exactly ecstatic, but they do think it's got some good grounding to work with, pending in-depth analysis.

Celticfire wrote: »

A lot? Your statement is borne of your personal bias. What percentage of the 62,979,636 american that voted for him are you trying to imply don't consider each other "real Americans"?

A lot of them, that's how much. Are you trying to claim that there are not a lot of Trump fans who dislike hispanic people?

More BS. Different geographical areas might think of a certain nationality if you use the word "hispanic", but only because of the larger groupings of certain Latino nationalities in those areas. I'm sure that in Miami the first nationality to spring to mind would be Cubans.

No, it's pretty standard across America - including in Port St. Lucie where I have family.

Can you show me where Trump called the Travel ban that was implemented restricting entry from seven country's a "Muslim ban"?

Nothing about the fact that Sudan is now off the list? Did they all become Christians ?

Sure, here you go before going into any of the others, and the likes of Guliani discussing how Trump came to him looking to legally enact a ban of Muslims. This took all of 30 seconds to find given it was his main campaign promise (along with the wall that also never happened, again due to Trump's incompetence and uncanny ability to shovel his entire foot into his mouth repeatedly).

alchemist33

recedite wrote: »

Presumably that will be 4000 extra jobs for the USA then?
Or maybe more, because most of the Bombardier plane is made in Canada?

Boeing claims various government subsidies have enabled Bombardier to sell its C-Series aircraft in the US below the cost of production. If that is true then The Donald would be expected to act in some way to even the playing field. So either he gives free money to Boeing as Trudeau did with Bombardier, or he slaps a tariff on Bombardier.

Anyway, if you are going to be indignant about it, shouldn't you be rooting for Airbus? That's the EU firm, and we were in the EU last time I looked.
The UK and Canada will probably be looking to work much closer together in future, but they won't be looking out for the interests of people in RoI.
The Donald on the other hand, has invested a lot of his own money in his hotel in Doonbeg.

There's plenty of evidence Boeing have received government money too, under different guises. Whatever this decision is about it isn't fairness.

oscarBravo

Manic Moran wrote: »

He's very definitely a nationalist. That can exist without being racist.

Of course it can. But it's also in no way whatsoever incompatible with racism.

Anyone who genuinely believes he's not a racist probably also believes that he has the utmost respect for women, that Mexico is going to pay for the wall, and that repealing and replacing Obamacare is easy.

alchemist33 wrote: »

recedite wrote: »

Presumably that will be 4000 extra jobs for the USA then?
Or maybe more, because most of the Bombardier plane is made in Canada?

Boeing claims various government subsidies have enabled Bombardier to sell its C-Series aircraft in the US below the cost of production. If that is true then The Donald would be expected to act in some way to even the playing field. So either he gives free money to Boeing as Trudeau did with Bombardier, or he slaps a tariff on Bombardier.

Anyway, if you are going to be indignant about it, shouldn't you be rooting for Airbus? That's the EU firm, and we were in the EU last time I looked.
The UK and Canada will probably be looking to work much closer together in future, but they won't be looking out for the interests of people in RoI.
The Donald on the other hand, has invested a lot of his own money in his hotel in Doonbeg.

There's plenty of evidence Boeing have received government money too, under different guises. Whatever this decision is about it isn't fairness.

You mean like Carrier where Trump organised to give them millions of dollars to not move. Then they took the money and moved?

Colsin91

There was an online petition that accumulated quite a significant number of signatures, imploring Enda not to go over to the WH for Paddy's Day. Fat lot of good that did. It would be the same story if he wanted to visit

MadYaker wrote: »

I hope he never comes here.

Colsin91 wrote: »

There was an online petition that accumulated quite a significant number of signatures, imploring Enda not to go over to the WH for Paddy's Day. Fat lot of good that did. It would be the same story if he wanted to visit

Online petitions are one of the most consistent wastes of time out there, no only because they're easy to ignore but also because they're so open to exploitation.

Mind you, Enda did very well over there and even mocked Trump to his face who seemed to not even cop it. Said it at the time that the guy is about as charismatic as a wet newspaper, but he did himself well there.

Billy86 wrote: »

A lot of them, that's how much. Are you trying to claim that there are not a lot of Trump fans who dislike hispanic people?

You made the claim that a lot of Trump supporters don't consider people of various ethnic backgrounds "real Americans" I asked for a percentage. You made the claim Now back it up.

No, it's pretty standard across America - including in Port St. Lucie where I have family.

I lived there for almost 10 years and in that time I never heard the word Mexican used as a catchall for Hispanics. Why would a New Yorker call a Puerto Rican a Mexican????? Does your family in Port St Lucie call Cubans Mexicans? That's exceeding ignorant of them if they do.

Sure, here you go before going into any of the others, and the likes of Guliani discussing how Trump came to him looking to legally enact a ban of Muslims. This took all of 30 seconds to find given it was his main campaign promise (along with the wall that also never happened, again due to Trump's incompetence and uncanny ability to shovel his entire foot into his mouth repeatedly).

I didn't ask you for an electioneering quote. I asked to you show Trump saying that the travel ban on seven country was a Muslim ban. Show me where as President he said that it was a Muslim ban. Nothing to say about all the new Christians in Sudan?

VinLieger

Colsin91 wrote: »

There was an online petition that accumulated quite a significant number of signatures, imploring Enda not to go over to the WH for Paddy's Day. Fat lot of good that did. It would be the same story if he wanted to visit

Incorrect weve seen from his stalling of his UK visit he wont go anywhere where theres a hint of people possibly protesting him.

In my opinion hes actually quite scared of any large protest being within his view because for several years now hes never had to face a group of people that weren't lauding praise on him and cheering his every word, the UN speech might be the first time in a long while that he wasnt guranteed a standing ovation when making a speech to a large group and look how that went down.

Celticfire wrote: »

You made the claim that a lot of Trump supporters don't consider people of various ethnic backgrounds "real Americans" I asked for a percentage. You made the claim Now back it up.

So you are denying that there are a lot of Trump supporters who don't consider non-whites as not being American? You're trying to claim people born and raised in America are not being shouted at to "go home"?

I lived there for almost 10 years and in that time I never heard the word Mexican used as a catchall for Hispanics. Why would a New Yorker call a Puerto Rican a Mexican????? Does your family in Port St Lucie call Cubans Mexicans? That's exceeding ignorant of them if they do.

You never heard someone refer to a hispanic person as Mexican? In 10 years living there? Never? That's really odd coming from the guy calling BS, given that I've a cousin in Maspeth who works in a Manhattan pub, and the hispanic staff are constantly referred to as Mexican, even though only one of them is from Mexico. Been out with them for drinks a few times and their opinion was they didn't really care being called Mexican too much because it happens so often they're just used to it.

I see you haven't refuted by the way that Trump was referring Mexican immigrants in general (and not just illegals) when he condemned them.

I didn't ask you for an electioneering quote. I asked to you show Trump saying that the travel ban on seven country was a Muslim ban. Show me where as President he said that it was a Muslim ban. Nothing to say about all the new Christians in Sudan?

Right there I've shown you Trump calling it a Muslim ban, and Guliani confirming Trump was looking for legal help on how to enact it. The fact that he called it a muslim ban so often that is became a slogan of the campaign does not take away from the fact that it was a Muslim ban he wanted - in fact, it adds to it. Fortunately, Trump isn't competent enough to make it happen so he had to change to something else - going for a few countries in the region that don't line his family's pockets well enough.

As Leroy said, Trump clearly has an issue with Muslims - do you disagree with this?

Billy86 wrote: »

So you are denying that there are a lot of Trump supporters who don't consider non-whites as not being American? You're trying to claim people born and raised in America are not being shouted at to "go home"?

I'm not denying anything. I asked how many of 62M this "lot" is. A general percentage will do.

You never heard someone refer to a hispanic person as Mexican? In 10 years living there? Never? That's really odd coming from the guy calling BS, given that I've a cousin in Maspeth who works in a Manhattan pub, and the hispanic staff are constantly referred to as Mexican, even though only one of them is from Mexico. Been out with them for drinks a few times and their opinion was they didn't really care being called Mexican too much because it happens so often they're just used to it.

So your cousin and co-workers do it everyone does it?I worked with Puerto Ricans , Dominicans and Brazilians and never herd them being called Mexicans. I still stand by my statement that Mexican is not a catchall for hispanics. If anything hispanic is the catchall for Latinos.

Right there I've shown you Trump calling it a Muslim ban, and Guliani confirming Trump was looking for legal help on how to enact it. The fact that he called it a muslim ban so often that is became a slogan of the campaign does not take away from the fact that it was a Muslim ban he wanted - in fact, it adds to it. Fortunately, Trump isn't competent enough to make it happen so he had to change to something else - going for a few countries in the region that don't line his family's pockets well enough.

As Leroy said, Trump clearly has an issue with Muslims - do you disagree with this?

But the supreme court disagrees with you that it's a Muslim ban as was evident when they allowed it to be implemented.. So no matter how many times you wish to repeat it it's not a Muslim ban as is evident by Sudan having the travel ban lifted and many other Muslim majority countries never being on it.

The U.S. notified all countries in July of “baseline” standards they would need to meet to avoid travel restrictions, said Miles Taylor, a counselor to Duke at DHS. Several countries didn’t respond to the U.S. requests for more information, he said.

“Some countries didn’t even have the courtesy to say ‘fly a kite’,” Taylor said. “We’re talking about countries that were willfully non-compliant and refused to engage with the United States.”

Manic Moran

Celticfire wrote: »

So your cousin and co-workers do it everyone does it?I worked with Puerto Ricans , Dominicans and Brazilians and never herd them being called Mexicans. I still stand by my statement that Mexican is not a catchall for hispanics. If anything hispanic is the catchall for Latinos.

Agreed. I hear Hispanic and Latino all the time here in California. "Mexican" is only ever used when specifically referring to the people from that country, for whatever reason.

Itssoeasy

Celticfire wrote: »

I'm not denying anything. I asked how many of 62M this "lot" is. A general percentage will do.

So your cousin and co-workers do it everyone does it?I worked with Puerto Ricans , Dominicans and Brazilians and never herd them being called Mexicans. I still stand by my statement that Mexican is not a catchall for hispanics. If anything hispanic is the catchall for Latinos.

But the supreme court disagrees with you that it's a Muslim ban as was evident when they allowed it to be implemented.. So no matter how many times you wish to repeat it it's not a Muslim ban as is evident by Sudan having the travel ban lifted and many other Muslim majority countries never being on it.

They let it be implemented for 6 months and only parts of it.

Celticfire wrote: »

I'm not denying anything. I asked how many of 62M this "lot" is. A general percentage will do.

We can start with the majority of "birthers" - we know there are a whole tonne of them. As to what percentage they make up it's anyone's guess, but they run well into the tens if not hundreds of thousands. Show them your birth cert and they'll still think you're a Kenyan.

So your cousin and co-workers do it everyone does it?I worked with Puerto Ricans , Dominicans and Brazilians and never herd them being called Mexicans. I still stand by my statement that Mexican is not a catchall for hispanics. If anything hispanic is the catchall for Latinos.

That's not what the lads claimed, when they said it happens so often they meant in work, out of work, and in life in general.

But the supreme court disagrees with you that it's a Muslim ban as was evident when they allowed it to be implemented.. So no matter how many times you wish to repeat it it's not a Muslim ban as is evident by Sudan having the travel ban lifted and many other Muslim majority countries never being on it.

That's because in office Trump came to realise that he couldn't outright ban Muslims (it's impossible to prove very often), and the reality that trying to ban Muslim countries that fattened his wallet would mean less money for him personally. So he sold his voters out and went for a cheap trick instead (it's come to be expected of him). But none of that does anything to change the fact that he quite clearly has issues with Muslims as Leroy said, and was bleating on about Muslim bans almost a full year before the election.