And to avoid harming precious profits they'll either have skimpy farcical parodies of security or have Donny divert government money into them à la Blackwater.
Advertisement
by Gauthier » Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:48 pm
by Gauthier » Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:54 pm
by Southerly Gentleman » Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:05 pm
by Thermodolia » Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:07 pm
Patridam wrote:Ashmoria wrote:no I think the vote must be next week.
I don't know when jeff sessions got so important that he cant be dissed.
I expected some dead fish flailing from the Democrats against all of his cabinet picks but a kangaroo court where they pull out a senator who had previously praised Sessions to say how ebul he was is ridiculous.
And if they pull this bs for every cabinet pick it will take forever and just hold up anything from actually getting done
by Thermodolia » Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:08 pm
by Rio Cana » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:00 pm
Novus America wrote:Rio Cana wrote:Found this article in which it seems they want a 10% tariff on imports but no one in the business community is for it. Politicians believe a comprehensive tax reform would do the same and not cause a trade war with other nations.
Article from fake news CNN - http://edition.cnn.com/2016/12/21/polit ... p-tariffs/
Of course those who got rich from selling our jobs to China do not want it. It might make it harder for them to finish cannibalizing our ecnomy.
A 2007 essay on nationalism, whose “most progressive” historical variant “in the human sense” stood for the defense of “old customs and traditions, communitarian institutions, egalitarianism [and] the rejection of the industrialization process”, a tendency that is currently “being jettisoned in favor of an extreme economic modernization” in which “local oligarchies that are intimately linked with world finance” dominate ethnic and regional separatist movements and the real historical foundations of “peoples” in the old sense have been suppressed and replaced with fake “nationalist paraphernalia, neo-folklore, flags, anthems … and subsidized culture”.
In a manner of speaking, everyone will end up either singing along with the “Macarena” or hating it
by Wallenburg » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:06 pm
by Thermodolia » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:09 pm
by Novus America » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:11 pm
Rio Cana wrote:Novus America wrote:
Of course those who got rich from selling our jobs to China do not want it. It might make it harder for them to finish cannibalizing our ecnomy.
So you cannot believe in pure Capitalism since Capitalism involves a company/business being allowed to make a profit any way they can with little to no government intervention. This includes not bailing out any company/business which is in danger of going bankrupt. Supposedly, would not any government intervention be considered socialist. A socialist act in benefit of the citizens.
You said "selling our jobs", would that not put you into the nationalism corner.
Found this short article written in 2007 by a Spanish writer (its translated into english) which you and others here might find informative. The following describes what it is about -A 2007 essay on nationalism, whose “most progressive” historical variant “in the human sense” stood for the defense of “old customs and traditions, communitarian institutions, egalitarianism [and] the rejection of the industrialization process”, a tendency that is currently “being jettisoned in favor of an extreme economic modernization” in which “local oligarchies that are intimately linked with world finance” dominate ethnic and regional separatist movements and the real historical foundations of “peoples” in the old sense have been suppressed and replaced with fake “nationalist paraphernalia, neo-folklore, flags, anthems … and subsidized culture”.
At one point he wrote the following -
In a manner of speaking, everyone will end up either singing along with the “Macarena” or hating it
Article - http://libcom.org.libcom.org/library/no ... iguel-amorós
by The Rich Port » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:15 pm
by Patridam » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:22 pm
by The Grene Knyght » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:28 pm
Patridam wrote:Wallenburg wrote:Someone didn't check the popular vote.
I am getting really sick of that eternally half-a**ed argument.Firstly, the will of the people is also represented by a Republican majority in both houses of congress.
Secondly, the popular vote in the presidential election is a goddamn meaningless statistic, because both candidates campaigned to win the electoral college vote, not the popular vote. If the campaigns had been run for the popular vote, Trump wouldn't have had eleven million rallies in Pennsylvania and would have had some in California.
If y'all Democrats hate the popular vote so much and find it so misrepresentative of the people, why did you try to get it changed when it was helping you? It's just something for you to whine about to help feed your victim complexes and patriarchy/white conspiracy theories.
[_★_]
(◕‿◕)
Currently
Reading
2015: x=-8.75,y=-6.56
2016: x=-8.88,y=-9.54
2017: x=-9.63,y=-9.90
2018: x=-9.88,y=-9.23
2019: x=-10.0,y=-9.90
2020: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
2021: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
FULLY AUTOMATED LUXURY GAY SPACE COMMUNISM
Portal Nationalist | Proletarian MoralistPRO: Socialism, Communism, Internationalism, Revolution, Leninism.
NEUTRAL: Anarchism, Marxism-Leninism.
ANTI: Capitalism, Liberalism, Nationalism, Fascists, Hyper-Sectarian Leftists.
by Jerzylvania » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:31 pm
The Grene Knyght wrote:Patridam wrote:
I am getting really sick of that eternally half-a**ed argument.Firstly, the will of the people is also represented by a Republican majority in both houses of congress.
Secondly, the popular vote in the presidential election is a goddamn meaningless statistic, because both candidates campaigned to win the electoral college vote, not the popular vote. If the campaigns had been run for the popular vote, Trump wouldn't have had eleven million rallies in Pennsylvania and would have had some in California.
If y'all Democrats hate the popular vote so much and find it so misrepresentative of the people, why did you try to get it changed when it was helping you? It's just something for you to whine about to help feed your victim complexes and patriarchy/white conspiracy theories.
Out of curiosity, when did the electoral college vote help the Dems?
by Lady Scylla » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:31 pm
by Patridam » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:38 pm
The Grene Knyght wrote:Out of curiosity, when did the electoral college vote help the Dems?
by The Grene Knyght » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:40 pm
Patridam wrote:The Grene Knyght wrote:Out of curiosity, when did the electoral college vote help the Dems?
You don't need to look too far, just to the 2012 election. Obama won 51% to 47%, but he won 332 to 206 by the electoral college. Proportionally, that would equate to a 62% to 38% vote for Obama.
For 2016 the same numbers are 46% vs 48% (Trump vs Hillary) popular vote, and 57% vs 43% electoral vote. The difference between the electoral college and the popular vote was the same advantage for both Trump and Obama, at 11%, while the difference disadvantaging Romney was 4 percent more than the one against Hillary, at 9% versus 5%.
The Electoral college helped Trump no more than it helped Obama in 2012.
[_★_]
(◕‿◕)
Currently
Reading
2015: x=-8.75,y=-6.56
2016: x=-8.88,y=-9.54
2017: x=-9.63,y=-9.90
2018: x=-9.88,y=-9.23
2019: x=-10.0,y=-9.90
2020: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
2021: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
FULLY AUTOMATED LUXURY GAY SPACE COMMUNISM
Portal Nationalist | Proletarian MoralistPRO: Socialism, Communism, Internationalism, Revolution, Leninism.
NEUTRAL: Anarchism, Marxism-Leninism.
ANTI: Capitalism, Liberalism, Nationalism, Fascists, Hyper-Sectarian Leftists.
by The Holy Empire of the Spaghetti Monster » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:42 pm
Patridam wrote:The Grene Knyght wrote:Out of curiosity, when did the electoral college vote help the Dems?
You don't need to look too far, just to the 2012 election. Obama won 51% to 47%, but he won 332 to 206 by the electoral college. Proportionally, that would equate to a 62% to 38% vote for Obama.
For 2016 the same numbers are 46% vs 48% (Trump vs Hillary) popular vote, and 57% vs 43% electoral vote. The difference between the electoral college and the popular vote was the same advantage for both Trump and Obama, at 11%, while the difference disadvantaging Romney was 4 percent more than the one against Hillary, at 9% versus 5%.
The Electoral college helped Trump no more than it helped Obama in 2012.
Tsaraine wrote:Nazis aren't known for their smarts. You don't adhere to an ideology that got flattened under a T-34 in 1945 if you're full of sparks and opportunities in life.
Caelestiam wrote:...wait,
Are we seriously in a dick measuring contest over who has the right to declare law by virtue of the most innocent dead?
Sounds horrible and insensitive.
Proceed.
by Patridam » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:42 pm
The Grene Knyght wrote:Patridam wrote:
You don't need to look too far, just to the 2012 election. Obama won 51% to 47%, but he won 332 to 206 by the electoral college. Proportionally, that would equate to a 62% to 38% vote for Obama.
For 2016 the same numbers are 46% vs 48% (Trump vs Hillary) popular vote, and 57% vs 43% electoral vote. The difference between the electoral college and the popular vote was the same advantage for both Trump and Obama, at 11%, while the difference disadvantaging Romney was 4 percent more than the one against Hillary, at 9% versus 5%.
The Electoral college helped Trump no more than it helped Obama in 2012.
Except Obama would've won without the electoral college...
by The Holy Empire of the Spaghetti Monster » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:44 pm
Patridam wrote:The Grene Knyght wrote:Except Obama would've won without the electoral college...
You asked when it helped the Dems. It helped Obama as much as it helped Trump. Now, did you have a problem with the electoral college in 2012? Or is it just because it helped the guy you don't like that you now claim it unfair?
Tsaraine wrote:Nazis aren't known for their smarts. You don't adhere to an ideology that got flattened under a T-34 in 1945 if you're full of sparks and opportunities in life.
Caelestiam wrote:...wait,
Are we seriously in a dick measuring contest over who has the right to declare law by virtue of the most innocent dead?
Sounds horrible and insensitive.
Proceed.
by Patridam » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:44 pm
The Holy Empire of the Spaghetti Monster wrote:Patridam wrote:
You don't need to look too far, just to the 2012 election. Obama won 51% to 47%, but he won 332 to 206 by the electoral college. Proportionally, that would equate to a 62% to 38% vote for Obama.
For 2016 the same numbers are 46% vs 48% (Trump vs Hillary) popular vote, and 57% vs 43% electoral vote. The difference between the electoral college and the popular vote was the same advantage for both Trump and Obama, at 11%, while the difference disadvantaging Romney was 4 percent more than the one against Hillary, at 9% versus 5%.
The Electoral college helped Trump no more than it helped Obama in 2012.
You can debate percentages all you want, but it did help Trump more because, unlike Obama, he would have lost without the electoral college.
by The Grene Knyght » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:46 pm
Patridam wrote:The Grene Knyght wrote:Except Obama would've won without the electoral college...
You asked when it helped the Dems. It helped Obama as much as it helped Trump. Now, did you have a problem with the electoral college in 2012? Or is it just because it helped the guy you don't like that you now claim it unfair?
[_★_]
(◕‿◕)
Currently
Reading
2015: x=-8.75,y=-6.56
2016: x=-8.88,y=-9.54
2017: x=-9.63,y=-9.90
2018: x=-9.88,y=-9.23
2019: x=-10.0,y=-9.90
2020: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
2021: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
FULLY AUTOMATED LUXURY GAY SPACE COMMUNISM
Portal Nationalist | Proletarian MoralistPRO: Socialism, Communism, Internationalism, Revolution, Leninism.
NEUTRAL: Anarchism, Marxism-Leninism.
ANTI: Capitalism, Liberalism, Nationalism, Fascists, Hyper-Sectarian Leftists.
by The East Marches » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:47 pm
The Grene Knyght wrote:Patridam wrote:
You asked when it helped the Dems. It helped Obama as much as it helped Trump. Now, did you have a problem with the electoral college in 2012? Or is it just because it helped the guy you don't like that you now claim it unfair?
Well firstly it didn't help Obama as much as it helped trump, because the system doesn't work proportionately to how much they won by.
Secondly, you seem to be implying I like Obama...
I've always had a problem with how needlessly complex the US's presidential elections are in comparison with my own country's, for as long as I've been aware that such a system was in place.
by Patridam » Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:47 pm
The Holy Empire of the Spaghetti Monster wrote:Patridam wrote:
You asked when it helped the Dems. It helped Obama as much as it helped Trump. Now, did you have a problem with the electoral college in 2012? Or is it just because it helped the guy you don't like that you now claim it unfair?
In terms of winning or losing, though, it didn't help him.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Duvniask, GMS Greater Miami Shores 1, Pingu 2nd, Spirit of Hope
Advertisement