PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: MarkZ on January 07, 2017, 08:21:46 PM
-
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170108/5ca69ea795ac1bb5d9ae3e90fc3a1c88.jpg)
This guy needs to grow up.
Sent from my iPad . Squirrel!!
-
This was the second half of that tweet:
Donald J. Trump – Verified account @realDonaldTrump
... being a movie star-and that was season 1 compared to season 14. Now compare him to my season 1. But who cares, he supported Kasich & Hillary
The guy is interesting, I'll say that.
-
Wierd.. why would he insult a show he owns that makes him a ton of money?
-
Wierd.. why would he insult a show he owns that makes him a ton of money?
He's listed as a producer of the show, but perhaps he doesn't "own" in the sense of having the breadth of personal control that you might think. Take the "Trump Taj Mahal" casino in Atlantic City as an example. Trump has had no personal involvement in its management for years, but they had a contractual right to use his name for branding purposes. It wasn't "his" in any real sense except when people wanted to make it a millstone to hang on him.
Or, perhaps, even if he did own it, with ratings down it isn't making him "a ton of money"?
Besides, I thought President Trump promoting his businesses was evil; a conflict of interest; bad for America? Now Trump criticizing "his" business is also wrong? TDS is real, folks...
-
Why does someone that thinks using the "ignore" function makes you a snowflake want to censor the president elect?
I guess it is the same type of person that thinks it is ok for a college to succumb to protests against conservative speakers and cancel their events.
Rather than take his Twitter account away, it should be required that if the MSM is going to report it, they must report in its entirety .
-
It doesn't matter how you want to spin it. Fact is, DJT is the POTUS in two weeks. And he's tweeting about his old show like some ex-girlfriend who's comparing the new girl her ex-beau found. It's petty and callous.
Grow the fuck up and let it go. He's going to be POTUS and he has a lot of more important shit going on than this. If he can't, then mommy and daddy need to ground him from Tweeting for a while.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
-
It doesn't matter how you want to spin it. Fact is, DJT is the POTUS in two weeks. And he's tweeting about his old show like some ex-girlfriend who's comparing the new girl her ex-beau found. It's petty and callous.
Grow the fuck up and let it go. He's going to be POTUS and he has a lot of more important shit going on than this. If he can't, then mommy and daddy need to ground him from Tweeting for a while.
I totally agree. The guy needs to wake up, and smell the Oval Office. However, I will take his occasional child like statements if he does what he says he is going to do. That being said, he needs to GROW THE EFFF UP.
MAGA!
-
The dude likes to troll folks.
-
It doesn't matter how you want to spin it. Fact is, DJT is the POTUS in two weeks. And he's tweeting about his old show like some ex-girlfriend who's comparing the new girl her ex-beau found. It's petty and callous.
Grow the fuck up and let it go. He's going to be POTUS and he has a lot of more important shit going on than this. If he can't, then mommy and daddy need to ground him from Tweeting for a while.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
OK, I'll give you that point.
I never claimed that I loved everything about Trump. But I do have high hopes that he can help the economy, and not just us rich people. (not that I am rich, but I am comfortable). I am the only one in my family that is in good economic shape. I have many brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces and in-laws that are suffering. They have all gone from middle class to virtual poverty in the past 8 years. They cannot find jobs anywhere near the level they used to have. Liberals seem to accept that as "the new normal". I don't and I think Trump can help fix that.
-
I AM LOVING it that Donald Trump has the courage to respond to the whacked out leftist in the most blunt possible terms.
They are the most loudmouthed, self righteous, greedy, narrow minded, bigoted people on earth, constantly lecturing us about narrow mindedness and bigotry.
If you progressive liberals don't like hearing the truth from your opponents, shut the fuck up and stop badgering the rest if us.
-
I AM LOVING it that Donald Trump has the courage to respond to the whacked out leftist in the most blunt possible terms.
They are the most loudmouthed, self righteous, greedy, narrow minded, bigoted people on earth, constantly lecturing us about narrow mindedness and bigotry.
If you progressive liberals don't like hearing the truth from your opponents, shut the fuck up and stop badgering the rest if us.
Struck a nerve, did she?
I hope Trump continues to tweet to his heart's content. It provides some real insight into his personality and morals that has been lacking in typical politicians when you only see them talking off teleprompters. Go for it Donald, there's nothing people like more than seventy year old rich dudes acting like 6 year olds. Who would have thought it would be the President of the greatest country on earth? It's very interesting seeing how his supporters defend his actions. It'd be almost as entertaining if it didn't say something about how loudmouthed, self righteous, greedy, narrow minded, and bigoted Trump supporters have to be in order to condone his behavior.
-
Gotta love some people.
Let's see what changes President-Elect Trump advances when POTUS.
I'll leave all the whining about his tweets to the democrats.
(don't get me wrong, I would dearly love someone to take away his twitter account .... or at the very least have a filter on it...)
-
(don't get me wrong, I would dearly love someone to take away his twitter account .... or at the very least have a filter on it...)
I am glad he can communicate directly without the spin of the media. However, when he takes office he needs to conduct himself in a Presidential manner, unlike Obama, who used the Presidency to publicly advance racial, gender, and economic divisiveness, but more like Reagan.
-
The way the far left loony-tunes rephrase ever word the Trump speaks, having his won words unfiltered by idiots and communists (I realize the two are one for the most part) is refreshing.
-
Struck a nerve, did she?
Puh-leese. If Americans gave a $h!t about what Meryl Streep and her Hollywierd ilk thought about our (Our!) politics, then we'd be preparing to inaugurate President Hillary Clinton in a few days.
-
Puh-leese. If Americans gave a $h!t about what Meryl Streep and her Hollywierd ilk thought about our (Our!) politics, then we'd be preparing to inaugurate President Hillary Clinton in a few days.
You must really be math challenged if the fact that almost 3 MILLION more Americans voting for Trump's opponent doesn't indicate that a great many Americans do give a $hit about the sentiments expressed by Meryl Streep. I suspect the supporters of HRC feel quite marginalized when their candidate wins more votes but loses the election but that fact doesn't make their disgust with the winner any less real.
-
You must really be math challenged if the fact that almost 3 MILLION more Americans voting for Trump's opponent doesn't indicate that a great many Americans do give a $hit about the sentiments expressed by Meryl Streep.
And you are (not must be, but are) severely constitutionally challenged if you do not yet appreciate that we do not elect the president by a direct popular vote in this country. But the election results are in, they are conclusive, and Hillary lost convincingly. But you just can't swallow it, can you? TDS is real.
I suspect the supporters of HRC feel quite marginalized when their candidate wins more votes but loses the election
How exactly do you become a functioning adult in this society but not come to realize that there are a vast many ways that our constitutional system defining a federal government of limited and enumerated powers has a vast many ways that a raw majority cannot simply exercise its will to oppress the minority?
but that fact doesn't make their disgust with the winner any less real.
Well, here we agree -- Politically speaking, leftists like Streep and yourself are quite disgusting.
-
I suspect the supporters of HRC feel quite marginalized when their candidate wins more votes but loses the election but that fact doesn't make their disgust with the winner any less real.
They probably do. But that always happens when you have this situation. It doesn't happen often. But the fact that California overwhelming approved of Mrs Clinton should not be the reason she won.
There is a system that we use which gives every state a voice, even the little ones. If Trump had not carried the rust belt, it would have been New Hampshire and Nevada who carried the election for Clinton. Of course, if we didn't use electoral votes then Mr Trump would have campaigned differently, IF he was even the candidate.
At a time like this, one important lesson that is being overlooked is the important of consistency and how that relates to us being a Republic. The law is supposed to make things always be the same - we should not make exceptions because we like someone. I have spent a good part of the past 8 years asking my Leftist friends if they would be comfortable with a Republican president having whatever authority they were seeking to bestow on Obama. Most of them scoffed at me and told me that conservatism was dead so they weren't worried about it. Surprise!
Well, here we are. In 10 days, the United States is going to change and in unpredictable ways. It will change because the previous administration massively overstepped and therefore expanded what the president could do. Now everything that Obama ruled by executive fiat will be undone by executive fiat. It's perfectly legal and perfectly abhorrent to occur in a Republic.
-
And you are (not must be, but are) severely constitutionally challenged if you do not yet appreciate that we do not elect the president by a direct popular vote in this country. But the election results are in, they are conclusive, and Hillary lost convincingly. But you just can't swallow it, can you? TDS is real.
How exactly do you become a functioning adult in this society but not come to realize that there are a vast many ways that our constitutional system defining a federal government of limited and enumerated powers has a vast many ways that a raw majority cannot simply exercise its will to oppress the minority?
Well, here we agree -- Politically speaking, leftists like Streep and yourself are quite disgusting.
And yet it's perfectly alright for a minority of Americans to impose its will against a majority? Got it. Small states have the same number of Senators as huge States. That's their protection against large state domination. The Constitution has protections of minority rights, not guaranteed of minority rule. It would make more sense if all states apportioned electoral votes based on the popular vote rather than winner take all That would make every citizen's vote count. Oh, by the way, I relish your disgust if all it takes to disgust you is to exercise my constitutional right to express my opinion.
-
It would make more sense if all states apportioned electoral votes based on the popular vote rather than winner take all That would make every citizen's vote count.
Exactly.
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
-
And yet it's perfectly alright for a minority of Americans to impose its will against a majority? Got it. Small states have the same number of Senators as huge States. That's their protection against large state domination. The Constitution has protections of minority rights, not guaranteed of minority rule. It would make more sense if all states apportioned electoral votes based on the popular vote rather than winner take all That would make every citizen's vote count. Oh, by the way, I relish your disgust if all it takes to disgust you is to exercise my constitutional right to express my opinion.
You make some valid points.
The problem is that the current rules have been in effect forever now, and complaining about it after your party lost sounds like sour grapes.
The time to begin the discussion is before the election. So beginning with the new Congress, perhaps your representatives will bring it up.
Or are you under the impression we live in a Democracy instead of a Republic?
-
You make some valid points.
The problem is that the current rules have been in effect forever now, and complaining about it after your party lost sounds like sour grapes.
The time to begin the discussion is before the election. So beginning with the new Congress, perhaps your representatives will bring it up.
Or are you under the impression we live in a Democracy instead of a Republic?
I no longer consider myself a member of any party. I once considered myself Repubican but now vote across party lines based on the individual. You seem surprised that people are upset when the losing candidate receives more votes than the winner. It rarely happens so most people expect the electoral college to affirm the popular vote as it usually does. When it doesn't, of course there will be calls for change. It's been too many years but my undergraduate degree is political science so spare me the lectures on how a Republic differs from pure Democracy. Our votes express our participation in government and when the system marginalizes millions of voters, government loses it legitimacy which can lead to dire consequences for the Republic.
-
. You seem surprised that people are upset when the losing candidate receives more votes than the winner. It rarely happens so most people expect the electoral college to affirm the popular vote as it usually does. When it doesn't, of course there will be calls for change.
The electoral college did indeed confirm the popular vote. Each state that Trump won, he received the electoral votes for that state, same as Clinton for each state she won. At the end of the day, Trump received 304 votes to Clinton's 227, so obviously Trump won, decisively.
You do understand the constitution does not address citizens voting for president, or any federal election, don't you? Voting is a state issue, not federal. The constitution calls for the electoral college and how it's carried out, but each state decides on who are the electors and how those electors vote.
It's been too many years but my undergraduate degree is political science so spare me the lectures on how a Republic differs from pure Democracy.
Apparently you (a) skipped class, or (b) attended a shitty school, because you still haven't demonstrated that you actually understand anything with regards to Republic vs Democracy, or how the US constitution was drafted and how it applies.
Our votes express our participation in government and when the system marginalizes millions of voters, government loses it legitimacy which can lead to dire consequences for the Republic.
Again, no one was marginalized, not a single voter. In each state voters cast votes, their votes were counted and the winner of those votes won that state and the apportioned electors.
Get over it.
-
Blah blah Trump won blah blah blah. Good argument. Trump won the popular vote. Really? Did you get that from a Trump tweet?
-
Blah blah Trump won blah blah blah. Good argument. Trump won the popular vote. Really? Did you get that from a Trump tweet?
Can't stay focused?
Apparently the constitution and the electoral college is just too complicated for you to figure out.
-
And yet it's perfectly alright for a minority of Americans to impose its will against a majority? Got it.
Good, because that's exactly the way the framers planned it. Forgive me if I give them more credit that I give you. The electoral college is, in part, anti-democratic BY DESIGN. It is more important that the successful candidate have a broad base of support throughout the country, than that any candidate be a "favorite son [daughter?]" of any one state. So yes, California doesn't get to pick the president even if it votes 100% Democratic.
Oh, by the way, I relish your disgust if all it takes to disgust you is to exercise my constitutional right to express my opinion.
Its not the fact of the expression that is disgusting, but rather what is being expressed. How hypocritical that you bathe in "minority rights" guaranteed under the constitution and your own precious right to free expression, but you want to trash the electoral college. The constitution framework is a system, not a buffet. To paraphrase Prof. Instapundit on the matter of support for constitutional freedom of expression:
If you only favor constitutional provisions that are popular, you're a coward.
If you only favor those that help your side, you're a hack.
-
TDS is real, folks.
-
Last night Obama used the term "our Democracy" on several occasions in his farewell speech. Did he not teach the Constitution at some point in his career?
Idiots abound. The election of a President is a bunch of individual elections, state by state, that are used to determine the ultimate winner. If you cannot understand that..........
Here's a question for Liberals, you're all about Democracy until the outcome does not fit your agenda. Someone tell me how that State of California voted when "Traditional Marriage" was on the ballot? Why was that not allowed to stand, the people voiced their opinion. is that democratic opinion any less important than how California voted for President?
-
Senators weren't popularly elected until fairly recently. It's time to do the same to the presidency.
-
The far left is populated with a majority of civic illiterates, many of whom claim to be far btter educated than everybody else.
Take Witmo and Steingar for instance.
Their egos trump any collision with reality whenever their devotion to soundbites and DNC talking points are involved.
Trying to discuss anything fo substance once the indoctrination of idiocy kicks in is like trying to dissuade a rattlesnake from biting. It's a worthless exercise because their minds are closed, dark, brainwashed places where every logical and factual argument is met with cliches, talking points and breathless arrogance.
-
Senators weren't popularly elected until fairly recently. It's time to do the same to the presidency.
Senators are popularly elected by their respective states, just as the president.
And if you think the 17th amendment is such a good idea, I suggest you educate yourself. The US senate was originally intended to be selected by each states legislature and go to Washington to represent state issues. The 17th amendment ruined that by allowing popular vote, so now we have senators representing whoever the highest bidder (donors) are and involving themselves in national matters instead of looking out for their home state, as originally intended.
-
The far left is populated with a majority of civic illiterates, many of whom claim to be far btter educated than everybody else.
Take Witmo and Steingar for instance.
Their egos trump any collision with reality whenever their devotion to soundbites and DNC talking points are involved.
Trying to discuss anything fo substance once the indoctrination of idiocy kicks in is like trying to dissuade a rattlesnake from biting. It's a worthless exercise because their minds are closed, dark, brainwashed places where every logical and factual argument is met with cliches, talking points and breathless arrogance.
I've never claimed to be "better educated" than anybody. Your arguments, if they can charitably described as arguments, appear to attack me personally rather than the points in discussion. I submit that is a tactic used by someone who is intellectually challenged. You and Mr. Trump use similar tactics so it's no wonder you admire him so. I enjoy it, keep it up. I'm sure you have a hard time finding something else that gives you any satisfaction.
-
Senators are popularly elected by their respective states, just as the president.
And if you think the 17th amendment is such a good idea, I suggest you educate yourself. The US senate was originally intended to be selected by each states legislature and go to Washington to represent state issues. The 17th amendment ruined that by allowing popular vote, so now we have senators representing whoever the highest bidder (donors) are and involving themselves in national matters instead of looking out for their home state, as originally intended.
That's a good point. Senators were not supposed to be just more powerful representatives, and gravy train riders. The career politicians we have today are nothing like what the Founders intended.
-
Senators are popularly elected by their respective states, just as the president. ...
So California has a different President-elect than Texas? Really?
You rabid conservatives are quick to use the term "democracy" when it suits you but are quick to criticize democratic concepts. The President can't be claimed to be popularly elected when he can't even claim a plurality of the American citizens voting. Popular refers to the people and not a group of appointed electors.
-
Senators weren't popularly elected until fairly recently. It's time to do the same to the presidency.
A Constitutional amendment only takes 38 States. Have at it.
-
A Constitutional amendment only takes 38 States. Have at it.
Let's do it.
-
So California has a different President-elect than Texas? Really?
You rabid conservatives are quick to use the term "democracy" when it suits you but are quick to criticize democratic concepts. The President can't be claimed to be popularly elected when he can't even claim a plurality of the American citizens voting. Popular refers to the people and not a group of appointed electors.
I'm now convinced you are just too fucking stupid to even read, much less comprehend the constitution with regards to how a president is elected. In no way did I infer what you wrote, and you know it. You can't make a cohesive argument, so you resort to acting like a moron in order to make a (lame ) attempt at justifying your TDS.
-
Let's do it.
.
You don't even have a clue as to how it works.
-
Senators weren't popularly elected until fairly recently. It's time to do the same to the presidency.
why?
-
Senators weren't popularly elected until fairly recently. It's time to do the same to the presidency.
So who do you think should appoint the President? Congress? Is that because they do such a great job at their other functions? Like the budgeting process? Or health care? Or even public education? The best thing our government has done is the interstate highway system and the military, but that is only because they spent incredible amounts of money on it which provides huge barrels of pork for a whole bunch of politicians.
But then again, the people haven't done such a wonderful job either.
I think we should privatize our leadership. Put the office up for sale to the highest bidder.
(That's a joke son, a joke I tell ya).
Seriously, I don't think there is anything wrong with the Electoral College. You wouldn't either if HRC hadn't been so fucked up and hadn't fucked up her campaign so badly. Or if the Dems nominated an electable candidate.
-
why?
Because his candidate lost the Electoral vote. :o
-
Seems the anti-EC crowd won't absorb the brilliance of it.
Witmo, awesomely cogent and concise arguments have been laid out here and all over the documents relating to our government, showing how the EC is actually more representative of the citizenry than the popular vote. What the heck is your problem, dude? Your "arguments" are starting to sound like whining, not thinking.
As I said elsewhere, the EC in just under one generation has saved us from Al Gore and Hillary Clinton. Thus it almost can be considered divinely inspired.
I fully admit Trump is an unknown. But when Door #1 is the zonk, you pretty much have to go with an unknown, no?
-
Seems the anti-EC crowd won't absorb the brilliance of it.
Witmo, awesomely cogent and concise arguments have been laid out here and all over the documents relating to our government, showing how the EC is actually more representative of the citizenry than the popular vote. What the heck is your problem, dude? Your "arguments" are starting to sound like whining, not thinking.
Minor edit...
As I said elsewhere, the EC in just under one generation has saved us from Al Gore and Hillary Clinton. Thus it almost can be considered divinely inspired.
I fully admit Trump is an unknown. But when Door #1 is the zonk, you pretty much have to go with an unknown, no?
Worth repeating.
-
Seems the anti-EC crowd won't absorb the brilliance of it.
Witmo, awesomely cogent and concise arguments have been laid out here and all over the documents relating to our government, showing how the EC is actually more representative of the citizenry than the popular vote. What the heck is your problem, dude? Your "arguments" are starting to sound like whining, not thinking.
As I said elsewhere, the EC in just under one generation has saved us from Al Gore and Hillary Clinton. Thus it almost can be considered divinely inspired.
I fully admit Trump is an unknown. But when Door #1 is the zonk, you pretty much have to go with an unknown, no?
They won't absorb it because it tends to work against them, that's all. If it worked in their favor they'd be all for it.
The left is so full of hypocrisy. If it's a third world nation and poor villagers against a rich ruling family, they're all for the poor villagers. But not here at home, because they've grown to hate "flyover country".