(01-13-2016 12:03 AM)Sherman Wrote:  Nikki Haley bucks Donald Trump in State of the Union response

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/12/politi...ald-trump/

There are so many rats in the Republican party I have lost count. I hope Trump destroys the Republican party.

She is telling 45% of republicans that they are stupid. It's like they want to lose.

Luckily this won't change a thing.

What are the odds that a woman who no one has ever heard of will change voters' minds?

Edit: Just thought of something. Perhaps the republican party knows which way the wind is blowing. Maybe they know that any pushback from the establishment on Trump will increase his support from the voters and thereby helping him win the general election. This is probably giving them too much credit but something to think about.

(01-13-2016 12:03 AM)Sherman Wrote:  Nikki Haley bucks Donald Trump in State of the Union response

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/12/politi...ald-trump/

There are so many rats in the Republican party I have lost count. I hope Trump destroys the Republican party.

Welp, that's the end of her career in politics.

lol Trump announces that Haley had previously asked him for campaign contributions. way to bite the hand that could have fed you

At Cedar falls, Trump delivers a version of the scorpion and the frog meme that accurately explains why immigration is bad in the West:





Trump makes complicated Christian statements such as, "Do not cast pearls before swine," into simple easy to understand memes and redpills them to the public. I expect stuff like this to secure Trump's win in Iowa.

Here is the original song, very good:

(01-12-2016 11:38 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  I like John Reed's theory: they did it because any photographs they took show that bin Laden died due to illegal use by the SEALS team of explosive ammunition. (the SEAL who shot bin Laden apparently got a head shot. What we know from verbal accounts is that bin Laden's brains were hanging out his left ear. That would be consistent with the use of explosive ammo.)

Illegal, you say? Yes - by military forces. It is not forbidden to manufacture or sell explosive ammunition to civilians; Reagan was shot with "Devastator" exploding bullets. However, because this sort of ammo causes "disproportionate maiming and suffering", it's forbidden for use in war under the Geneva Convention - one of their first laws instituted (along with forbidding the use of grapeshot) was to outlaw the use of explosive ammunition less than about 500 grams or so.

Whenever objections were raised around bin Laden being a civilian, the US regularly responded that he was an enemy combatant. However, that cuts both ways: enemy combatants are entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions, which includes not blowing their faces off with explosive ammo. I suspect the SEALS, or Obama, or both, simply didn't want the trouble of explaining why they'd broken the laws of war getting a target they always said was military.

There was no use of explosive ammunition on Bin Laden. The standard 55-grain M193, or the green tip 62-grain M855 round striking bone/skull at a range of 10 feet or so is going to inflict serious damage. It will leave brain oozing from the target's ear.

(01-12-2016 10:10 PM)memcpy Wrote:  Boring, teleprompter speech. Flowery words no one will remember. Overall weak.

Are you describing his speech or Obama himself?

Some very good news.

Predictwise is a website which combines data from various sources - bookies, polls, and prediction markets - to feed an algorithm that determines each candidate's chance of winning the primary.

Today, Trump finally caught Rubio. They are both at 33%.

HOWEVER, you will notice that Rubio has been in a slow, steady decline for months now. On the other hand, Trump is surging. His surge over the last couple of days appears to be greater than any surge we've seen so far. Cruz is predictably falling, and it seems like Trump is picking up most of his support.

http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-pre...omination/

I think the audio of the Trump appearance at the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon was already posted, but I think it's always nice to actually see the man in action:





I wonder if Sanders felt the Bern at 4:30.
Towards the end, Trump also answers a question about this ridiculous theory of him only running so Clinton could win.


Also, in my personal opinion this is one reason for Trump to run for president that shows that, and why, he is damn serious about it:





It's so Barry personally has to hand over the keys to the White House to his dear old friend Donald Trump.

(01-12-2016 11:03 PM)philosophical_recovery Wrote:  

(01-12-2016 10:30 PM)rpg Wrote:  Capping Bin Laden was the high point of this administration. If he was still alive it would have been an utter failure.

I still wonder what was up with the fact that they said "yeah we killed Bin Laden" and then dumped his body off a Navy ship in the middle of nowhere with no photographs (at least what I remember).

Yeah man, I totally bagged a 10 last night.
Show me a pic man, I gotta see this!
Oh, no, I forgot.
Ok what's her facebook lemme see.
She doesn't have facebook.
OK, yeah, all right man. Sounds great.

Just what I was thinking. I don't think they did kill Obama, oh sorry, Osama. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcZnj499B1c

Bin Laden was fed to the fishes Sicilian Style with an at sea burial officiated by Muslim clerics because the Indian Ocean is swarming with sharks and likely his body long digested by now - NO Gitmo, NO trials, NO Saddam Hussein or Muammar Qadaffi TV executions = NO Muslim Islamist Radical Martyr.

Simples...

As for the US Navy SEALS perpetuating some conspiracy - you don't know Navy SEALS - they take the oath to protect and defend the Constitution and the country it stands for - NOT some oath of loyalty to a Marxist Socialist pro LGBTQ Europhobic CiC community organizer from Chiraq.

Only concern I have is how both the SEALS who shot Bin Laden left the service before retirement - both could have gotten cushy desk jobs until 20 year retirements - but left for book deals and the inconsistencies in their two stories raise questions to which one is true - and with too much publicity for themselves and their familes' safety.

BOT:

Trump vs. Obama: Smackdown over State of the Union
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-vs-...00840.html

“People occupy different realities on guns,” President Obama said recently at a town hall meeting. Yes, and people -- like Donald Trump -- also occupy different realities when it comes to the state of the union.

While Obama hails the recovery he has led, Trump claims the economy is a “disaster.” Where Obama sees progress on reining in Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Trump sees the “worst deal ever negotiated in my lifetime.” As the president takes credit for leading the fight against climate change, Trump calls Obama’s claim that global warming is our biggest threat “one of the dumbest statements I've ever heard in politics -- in the history of politics as I know it.”

Donald Trump has built his campaign challenging Obama’s realities, with understandable success. He is saying what many Americans think – that President Obama’s priorities and policies are wrong, and even dangerous. Obama claims that the ­Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the largest free-trade agreement concluded since NAFTA in 1993, would expand our exports and give “our workers the fair shot at [the] success they deserve.”

Donald Trump tweeted, “The incompetence of our current administration is beyond comprehension. TPP is a terrible deal.” A just-published World Bank study shows that of the 12 nations involved, the U.S. gains the least from the deal, boosting our economy by only 0.4 percent by 2030, compared to 10 percent for Vietnam. Whose view is closer to the truth?

The president celebrates Obamacare, and the increased number of people who have health insurance. But 33 million Americans still don’t have insurance and those who do are unhappy with their limited choice of doctors and high deductibles. Trump, who believes in universal coverage, calls the president’s signature healthcare plan a “complete disaster” which should be repealed and replaced. He cites fast-rising premium costs and proposes a private market solution. The majority of the country agrees.

Obama hails reductions in our troops stationed in Afghanistan and Iraq but increased violence in those countries mean that we’re soldiers are being deployed again. Meanwhile, Russia annexed Crimea and the U.S. stood by, desperately wanting Moscow to resolve the conflict in Syria. China has now placed military bases in the South China Sea and perpetrated enormous cyberattacks on the U.S. The Obama White House has not responded for fear that Beijing might torpedo the Paris climate accord. Iran has tested ballistic missiles in defiance of U.N. resolutions and fired rockets near a U.S. aircraft carrier, while Obama looked the other way to preserve the nuclear deal.

Trump tweets: “We need much tougher, much smarter leadership - and we need it NOW!” The country, which gives Obama low marks for his handling of terror threats and foreign policy, would seem to agree.

President Obama has belittled the threat of Islamic terror, despite its obvious spread. The president calls for an influx of refugees from war-torn lands who by definition cannot be vetted and who may pose real threats to our citizens. Donald Trump has called for a moratorium on Muslim immigrants “until our country’s representatives can figure out what’s going on” – attracting an avalanche of criticism. Lo and behold, 53 percent of the country agrees with him.

Trump’s criticisms tend to stick because they have substance. He says the 5 percent unemployment rate is bogus because there are so many who have dropped out of the workforce. He’s right: there are 94 million adults on the sidelines. He says the new jobs added are not high quality. It’s true that wages are stagnant. He says we haven’t been adding enough jobs. Economist William Dunkelberg of the National Federation of Independent Businesses notes, “The 1983-90 expansion created 689,000 jobs per quarter compared to 439,000 in this expansion…all that with a 30 percent smaller labor force….” Meanwhile, we see nearly 47 million receiving food stamps and an alarming decline in new business formations. Even Vice President Joe Biden agrees the middle class has been left behind.

I give the Obamas 5 years before they divorce or at least keep to together for political purpose like the Clintons, you will never see them together again.

DeepDiver, I cannot believe that was published on yahoo.com.

Another nonsense article saying Trump's supporters are uneducated blue collar "losers"

Washington Post:

Quote:There is nothing Donald Trump hates more than losers, but, statistically-speaking, that is what his supporters are.

Now, I don't mean to sound so harsh. I don't think Trump's supporters are "losers" in the same sense he uses the word—seemingly anyone who didn't have an eight-figure inheritance to, a couple of corporate bankruptcies aside, turn into a 10-figure fortune—but rather that there have been winners and losers from globalization. And his supporters are part of that latter group.

Indeed, Trump's biggest fans tend to be blue-collar, have a high school education or less, and come from the modern-day Rust Belt stretching from upstate New York down into Appalachia and then parts of the South. That, at least, is what the New York Times' Nate Cohn found when he crunched the numbers Civis Analytics put together from its 11,000 interviews of Republican-leaning voters. And it is pretty much what everyone else has found too. Trump, in other words, has become the unlikely tribune of the white-working class.

What do they want? Well, they're mad as hell, and they're not going to take globalization anymore. These are people, after all, who used to feel middle-class, but don't anymore—or at least not as securely—now that so many jobs have been outsourced. Consider this: economists David Autor, David Dorn, and Gordon Hanson have found that trade with China alone explains 21 percent of the decline in manufacturing employment between 1990 and 2007—that's about 1.5 million jobs—and, in the hardest-hit areas, even pushed non-manufacturing wages down too. That, in turn, has made people depend on the safety net more, and, in all likelihood, become even less likely to marry now that there aren't as many men with well-paying jobs. And these people feel like immigration is making this even worse, either by taking the few jobs that remain or overburdening local governments, despite the fact that immigrants actually tend to increase native workers' wages.

In this, the United States is not exceptional. It is the same across the rich world. The working-class in all these countries have stagnated as they've faced increasing competition from the billions of workers who have entered the global economy following the fall of the Berlin Wall. You can see that in the chart below from economist Branko Milanovic, in particular the red circle I added. It looks at how much inflation-adjusted incomes increased—or not—for the whole world between 1988 and 2008.

One thing these articles fail to point out is that democrats also have a huge base of support from economic "losers." But because they're a different color it's prohibited to point that out.

(01-13-2016 05:50 PM)Latinopan Wrote:  I give the Obamas 5 years before they divorce or at least keep to together for political purpose like the Clintons, you will never see them together again.

Supposedly his wife wanted to leave him in 2008, only to be talked out of it by politicos.

Florida rally in one hour. I've got your streams:

Let's hope this one is high energy.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SV0B3uCW-EU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0k-cayP7ZhY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSBJLacBcZg

(01-13-2016 01:51 PM)Celtic_Austrian Wrote:  I think the audio of the Trump appearance at the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon was already posted, but I think it's always nice to actually see the man in action:





I wonder if Sanders felt the Bern at 4:30.
Towards the end, Trump also answers a question about this ridiculous theory of him only running so Clinton could win.


Also, in my personal opinion this is one reason for Trump to run for president that shows that, and why, he is damn serious about it:





It's so Barry personally has to hand over the keys to the White House to his dear old friend Donald Trump.

I think there is a lot more truth to this then most people realize - Trump is ultra competitive and has a very long memory. He is not a bad guy but once he is attacked he will rip your throat and not feel bad about it. Obama has been making snide comments about him for a long time and I'm sure there is nothing Trump is going to like more then undoing everything he did, and possibly prosecuting him or his administration for their corruption.

(01-13-2016 06:51 PM)Hotwheels Wrote:  

(01-13-2016 05:50 PM)Latinopan Wrote:  I give the Obamas 5 years before they divorce or at least keep to together for political purpose like the Clintons, you will never see them together again.

Supposedly his wife wanted to leave him in 2008, only to be talked out of it by politicos.

If you look at his dating history, not a single one of his former girlfriends resemble Michelle, but, between his former girlfriends they all look alike, Michelle is just too masculine.

There was a rumor that Barack was having a affair with Beyonce, something I do not doubt, not woman can resist to fuck the number man in the world.

(01-13-2016 07:15 PM)TheBMan Wrote:  undoing everything he did, and possibly prosecuting him or his administration for their corruption.

(01-13-2016 06:51 PM)Hotwheels Wrote:  Supposedly his wife wanted to leave him in 2008, only to be talked out of it by politicos.

I heard that too. Also that they sleep in different beds.

Michelle is just masculine-looking enough for Barack to imagine her as a man. Once she realized he thought of her that way she began distancing herself.

Trump's core constituency is more accurately described as "the betrayed" rather than "losers". Describing working class American whites as losers implies that they were the ones responsible for losing [the game]. Of course, in reality, they did not lose. They were well ahead of their global competitors (in terms of GDP and productivity) until they were stabbed in the back by the elites who run their government and corporations. Trump is the only public figure in at least a generation who has given them a voice and who is in a position to actually turn things around for them and for the country as a whole.

How fucking worthless is the MSM when they refer to the backbone of the country as "losers"?

Blue collar, working class whites:

Drive the trucks that deliver goods to every store in the country
Maintain the nation's electric grid
Work in dirty, dangerous mines and oil wells
Do thankless, dirty HVAC and plumbing jobs
Work the railroads, shipyards and freighters
Perform skilled manufacturing work

It's too bad these "losers" couldn't have real jobs, like writing blogs for failing mainstream newspapers. Or working in one of the thousands of bullshit, makework federal government sinecures. Or scamming money out of people through fraudulent investments or lawsuits. Or feeding at the trough of the bloated healthcare system, which is massively government subsidized. Or exploiting the poor by dishing out egregiously usurious "payday loans". Or using government connections to receive bailout money to keep your failing business afloat. Or having your retail food business federally subsidized in the form of food stamps. Or working for a non-profit or NGO that survives off federal grants, again subsidized by the taxpayer.

In reality, working class blue collar whites, the so-called losers, are the only group of people who do any real fucking work anymore. The only group who aren't greedily sucking off the government's ever-flowing, bloated, pustulent teat in one way or another.

Such losers they are!

Trump 2016.

(01-13-2016 06:47 PM)Lucky Wrote:  

One thing these articles fail to point out is that democrats also have a huge base of support from economic "losers." But because they're a different color it's prohibited to point that out.
[/quote]

Oh look, another journalist that gets to pretend he's smart because he writes an article with a chart in it.

(01-15-2016 02:43 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  In Croatia, if both your parents are Croatian citizens when you're born, you're also automatically a citizen, no registration needed. The only case where naturalization is required is when only one of the parents is a Croatian citizen and the child is born abroad.

Actually, I said that wrong. You are a citizen if both your parents are, but you are still getting the citizenship through your parents rather than where you are born. That's the distinction they're arguing.

(01-15-2016 02:43 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  In Croatia, if both your parents are Croatian citizens when you're born, you're also automatically a citizen, no registration needed. The only case where naturalization is required is when only one of the parents is a Croatian citizen and the child is born abroad.

Which ironically is the case with Cruz, Born in Canada and only his mother is an American citizen, which is enough to make him a citizen of the USA, but is he automatically naturalized or is he natural born? Honestly, I think he would qualify as natural born the way I read the law. But I guess it's arguable that he is naturalized.

(01-15-2016 08:54 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  Trump should go and pardon Edward Snowden, whatever its name is Manning, and Julian Assange for their efforts in exposing the illegal actions of the elites for the past 10 years.

He'd score some major brownie points for that.

Snowden really messed up when he released certain info. Such as our government spying on allies and other leaders.

It was one thing to come out for the American people, many can get behind him for that. Then he took it to another level.