What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

"Official" Donald Trump for President: Great Wall of Mexico (2 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Beaver saying others are trolling...by trolling.

Can't make this crap up folks.

:lmao:

Have you actually posted anything about Trump in here?  Or just comments about junior or me or tim...?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BeaverCleaver said:
That isn't being excellent again, Junior. 
Click to expand...
Lol. You know how many times I've mentioned your name on this board ever? That would be zero.  I log on, and for the 10th time, you've mentioned me or called me in for something. Get over your obsession with me, and I will try being more excellent. How's that work for you?

 
sho nuff said:
Beaver saying others are trolling...by trolling.

Can't make this crap up folks.

:lmao:

Have you actually posted anything about Trump in here?  Or just comments about junior or me or tim...?
Click to expand...
You have admitted to trolling. Deal with it. I enjoy reading the political threads. When they get polluted with name calling etc I call that out. Have a great Friday buddy.

 
TobiasFunke said:
Because he's not calling them out as distant examples. He's condemning the companies themselves in addition to condemning the bad trade deals.  He literally said he's gonna stop eating Oreos. Why? Because Nabisco did something that Trump also does. Nobody's asking Trump to put his companies at a disadvantage ... but if he's not willing to do it he can't condemn others for making the exact same decision he has made.

This is the clearest example of hypocrisy I can remember in politics. It doesn't matter one bit whether you agree or not. The meaning of a word doesn't change based on your opinion.
Click to expand...
Trump ties, scarfs other products are being made overseas. In addition, Trump Towers and his Mar-a-Lago were/are being built and staffed by legal and illegal cheap foreign labor. I think boycotts can be counter-productive. Do Trump supporters suggest that we boycott Ford, Oreos or any part of the Trump empire?   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BeaverCleaver said:
You have admitted to trolling. Deal with it. I enjoy reading the political threads. When they get polluted with name calling etc I call that out. Have a great Friday buddy.
Click to expand...
Your whole existence on this board is trolling (which is why you are on your 4th or 5th id now).

You brought up 2 people who were not involved in the conversation, then complain about others not being excellent.

I enjoy reading the topics too...even participating in the conversation about the topic once in a while.  You should try it.

You have a great day too!.  Off to the driving range.

 
SoBeDad said:
Trump ties, scarfs other products are being made overseas. In addition, Trump Towers and his Mar-a-Lago were/are being built and staffed by legal and illegal cheap foreign labor. I think boycotts can be counter-productive. Do Trump supporters suggest that we boycott Ford, Oreos or any part of the Trump empire?   
Click to expand...
Wife bought me a Trump tie once.

Looked good...but like many crap products, the stitching started coming apart on the back.

 
sho nuff said:
Your whole existence on this board is trolling (which is why you are on your 4th or 5th id now).
Click to expand...
And your existence on this board and other boards is to argue, get the last word in and be snarky with people. When you act like that you get called out for it. Don't slice too much today!

 
JuniorNB said:
And he's wealthier than them three put together. He's going to do everything in his power to ensure that he pays as little tax as possible, and that he keeps every penny he has and makes as much as he can. Whether it's with American workers or not. Business as usual.
Click to expand...
Maybe he's that disingenuous.  Maybe he truly wants to improve the system.  You don't have to believe him.  I really don't either but at least there's a chance he's being honest and really wants change.  I might be willing to bet on that chance.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
INFORMATION: How NY's GOP primary works. 

In a nutshell, state-wide polling is useless for NY; there are 28 races...1 state-wide race and 1 for each of the 27 Congressional Districts. The NYP is also closed, so there are no Democrat, Independents, Independent, or Conservative party members that are able to cross-over.

Trump may "win" the state, but with both Cruz and Kasich working the state, he could get shut out in many CDs. IMO, anything less that 75-80 delegates out of NY and Trump is denied a first ballot win.

 
Gachi said:
Isn't that what the welfare reform bill did back in the mid-90s?

Pretty sure welfare recipients have to actively look for work, and there is a cap on how long they can actually receive cash benefits (no more than 5 years, less in some states). Also, individuals don't get any more money for children born after they've been on assistance for 10 months. Some states only provide cash assistance for 2 children and no more (I think California is like this).  

This isn't directed towards you, Blick. But it has always bothered me how a lot of people assume the poor is living some kind of lavish life on the government's dime. It simply isn't true, just more propaganda to vilify the poor. 
Click to expand...
Repeat a lie often enough people will eventually believe it

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) requires a single parent to work at least 30 hours per week to eligible and a two parent household must combine for between 35 and 50 hours to be eligible

 
Blick said:
Maybe he's that disingenuous.  Maybe he truly wants to improve the system.  You don't have to believe him.  I really don't either but at least there's a chance he's being honest and really wants change.  I might be willing to bet on that chance.
Click to expand...
Well you're not the only gullible one.

 
Tom Servo said:
INFORMATION: How NY's GOP primary works. 

In a nutshell, state-wide polling is useless for NY; there are 28 races...1 state-wide race and 1 for each of the 27 Congressional Districts. The NYP is also closed, so there are no Democrat, Independents, Independent, or Conservative party members that are able to cross-over.

Trump may "win" the state, but with both Cruz and Kasich working the state, he could get shut out in many CDs. IMO, anything less that 75-80 delegates out of NY and Trump is denied a first ballot win.
Click to expand...
I suspect Trump will win NY 27.  NY 26 could be up in the air but I would be surprised if Cruz won.  Very little Cruz talk around here.  Carl Paladino is the Buffalo-area talking head with the most sway, he was on with Cavuto just the other day, and he's 100% Trump.  I was actually at a forum (not political related) a few weeks ago and before the discussion started he kept trying to engage the crowd to vote for Trump.  NY 27's congressional rep is Chris Collins (R), who was the first sitting member of congress to endorse Trump back in February.  I suspect Trump is probably the favorite for NY 26 as well if I had to guess.  Local news was showing a local Kasich supporters group meeting the other day, supporters brainstorming on how to get out the vote.  There were like 6 people in what looked like a school classroom.  It was pretty sorry-looking.

Trump will be here on Sunday the 17th to campaign at the First Niagara Center, where the Sabres play.  I am trying to figure out how to get tickets to attend...anyone know?  The local news outlets direct you to his website but there's only the Rochester event in there and not the Buffalo one.

 
Steve Tasker said:
I suspect Trump will win NY 27.  NY 26 could be up in the air but I would be surprised if Cruz won.  Very little Cruz talk around here.  Carl Paladino is the Buffalo-area talking head with the most sway, he was on with Cavuto just the other day, and he's 100% Trump.  I was actually at a forum (not political related) a few weeks ago and before the discussion started he kept trying to engage the crowd to vote for Trump.  NY 27's congressional rep is Chris Collins (R), who was the first sitting member of congress to endorse Trump back in February.  I suspect Trump is probably the favorite for NY 26 as well if I had to guess.  Local news was showing a local Kasich supporters group meeting the other day, supporters brainstorming on how to get out the vote.  There were like 6 people in what looked like a school classroom.  It was pretty sorry-looking.
Click to expand...
The thing about the article is that Cruz is campaigning in the Bronx. Why? Because he gets NYC media exposure for one; additionally, all he has to do is get roughly 11,000 out about 20,000 GOP voters in that CD to win all 3 delegates. There are other small GOP voter districts in NYC that could be ripe for the pickings too. Ironically, getting 11k out of 20k in the Bronx >> 90,000 votes out of 180,000 upstate because that would probably be a plurality which he'd share with whomever came in second.

The greater point is that Kasich and Cruz can help keep Trump from scooping up all three delegates per CD. If someone wins with a plurality, the winner gets 2 and second place gets 1. If Trump gets 1 or 0 delegates in 6-8 CDs, he's looking at a bad night even if he "wins" statewide.

 
Yenrub said:
Repeat a lie often enough people will eventually believe it

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) requires a single parent to work at least 30 hours per week to eligible and a two parent household must combine for between 35 and 50 hours to be eligible
Click to expand...
So if parents are required to work to receive benefits then why do people think those receiving assistance don't work at all?

Why do we hate poor people so much? What did they do to us? 

 
Gachi said:
So if parents are required to work to receive benefits then why do people think those receiving assistance don't work at all?

Why do we hate poor people so much? What did they do to us? 
Click to expand...
I have no idea. I think it’s said that the myth/lie that says welfare recipients are lazy and don’t work is so widely believed

 
Tom Servo said:
The thing about the article is that Cruz is campaigning in the Bronx. Why? Because he gets NYC media exposure for one; additionally, all he has to do is get roughly 11,000 out about 20,000 GOP voters in that CD to win all 3 delegates. There are other small GOP voter districts in NYC that could be ripe for the pickings too. Ironically, getting 11k out of 20k in the Bronx >> 90,000 votes out of 180,000 upstate because that would probably be a plurality which he'd share with whomever came in second.

The greater point is that Kasich and Cruz can help keep Trump from scooping up all three delegates per CD. If someone wins with a plurality, the winner gets 2 and second place gets 1. If Trump gets 1 or 0 delegates in 6-8 CDs, he's looking at a bad night even if he "wins" statewide.
Click to expand...
It's all in the details with each primary having its own rules. Good point about Kasich + Cruz  needing to combine for numbers.

 
Gachi said:
So if parents are required to work to receive benefits then why do people think those receiving assistance don't work at all?

Why do we hate poor people so much? What did they do to us? 
Click to expand...
It's not what they do to us, it's what they don't do.

If you contribute to society, you should benefit. If you spend your entire life mooching and forcing others to work FOR you, then you should receive less. That way, you're incentivized to stop being a net drain on society.

I would fully support an increase in minimum wage (and all lower tier wages in general) if that increase is paid for by tightening of unemployment/welfare laws. Pay less to people who are faking injuries and those who are too lazy to work. Pay more for those willing to put 40 hours a week into flipping burgers and pumping gas. At least they're contributing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Warrior said:
It's not what they do to us, it's what they don't do.

If you contribute to society, you should benefit. If you spend your entire life mooching and forcing others to work FOR you, then you should receive less. That way, you're incentivized to stop being a net drain on society.

I would fully support an increase in minimum wage (and all lower tier wages in general) if that increase is paid for by tightening of unemployment/welfare laws. Pay less to people who are faking injuries and those who are too lazy to work. Pay more for those willing to put 40 hours a week into flipping burgers and pumping gas. At least they're contributing.
Click to expand...
The entire point of the post to which you replied, and the post to which that post replied, was that this doesn't happen on a large scale. It's a myth.

As for your second idea, the problem is that you tightening those laws would probably cost money, not save money that could be allocated elsewhere. Catching the relatively small number of people who are gaming or defrauding the system requires enhanced enforcement efforts, which requires funding.

It's fine to want to catch people who are abusing the system.  But there are outliers who abuse every system.  The difference here is that people wrongly assume that these outliers are not outliers at all but are the norm, then they spread that lie and villify the poor, which just makes the problem worse.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Warrior said:
It's not what they do to us, it's what they don't do.

If you contribute to society, you should benefit. If you spend your entire life mooching and forcing others to work FOR you, then you should receive less. That way, you're incentivized to stop being a net drain on society.

I would fully support an increase in minimum wage (and all lower tier wages in general) if that increase is paid for by tightening of unemployment/welfare laws. Pay less to people who are faking injuries and those who are too lazy to work. Pay more for those willing to put 40 hours a week into flipping burgers and pumping gas. At least they're contributing.
Click to expand...
1. Increasing minimum wage won't do a damn thing to help anybody. If anything it's just gonna make major retailers like walmart & target slash worker hours. 

2. Increasing cash benefits to somebody working 40 hours a week doesn't make sense to me. If they're working full-time, they're getting more money and likely won't qualify for any kind of assistance. 

 
Ditka Butkus said:
A well regulated militia? Sounds like a states National Guard....Not my psychotic neighbor...
Click to expand...
It's a "right of the people", and it makes the most sense as a response to ceding more power to a central government as a counter-balance.  It makes the least sense as a personal guarantee to own a weapon.

 
Blick said:
Maybe he's that disingenuous.  Maybe he truly wants to improve the system.  You don't have to believe him.  I really don't either but at least there's a chance he's being honest and really wants change.  I might be willing to bet on that chance.
Click to expand...
Trump lies so much he probably wouldn't even know when he was telling the truth.  Why on Earth would anyone believe he's ever telling the truth.  He could tell me the sky is blue and I'd need to consider if I'd been wrong all my life.

 
sho nuff said:
Beaver saying others are trolling...by trolling.

Can't make this crap up folks.

:lmao:

Have you actually posted anything about Trump in here?  Or just comments about junior or me or tim...?
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

He has never posted anything for the sole purpose of discussing issues. Never. 

 
Regarding welfare, I say let's have the folks collecting welfare work for the state one day per week doing something. That's a lot of "free" labor to get things done, and may actually make the recipients feel good about themselves and gain some marketable skills.

 
Leroy Hoard said:
It's all in the details with each primary having its own rules. Good point about Kasich + Cruz  needing to combine for numbers.
Click to expand...
It's one of the few places where having Kasich still in the race is a good thing for #neverTrump forces. Some CDs will have Kasich outperform Cruz and/or Trump; others would have Cruz (most likely upstate) beating Trump and Kasich.

I really see Trump ending up with probably 50 delegates, Cruz 30-some and Kasich with table scraps.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
kutta said:
Regarding welfare, I say let's have the folks collecting welfare work for the state one day per week doing something. That's a lot of "free" labor to get things done, and may actually make the recipients feel good about themselves and gain some marketable skills.
Click to expand...
what kind of "welfare" are you talking about? housing assistance, "food stamps", or something else?

 
saintfool said:
what kind of "welfare" are you talking about? housing assistance, "food stamps", or something else?
Click to expand...
All of it. I'm just saying if the state or Feds give you assistance, go pick up trash for a Saturday afternoon. We get enough people doing that, we'll have some pretty nice cities. And, then it's kind of a job, which is kind of cool.

i may make an exception for single moms.

 
TobiasFunke said:
The entire point of the post to which you replied, and the post to which that post replied, was that this doesn't happen on a large scale. It's a myth.

As for your second idea, the problem is that you tightening those laws would probably cost money, not save money that could be allocated elsewhere. Catching the relatively small number of people who are gaming or defrauding the system requires enhanced enforcement efforts, which requires funding.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the huge audit Canada did on their parliament a few years ago. They spent $23 million to uncover $1 million in wasteful spending. 

 
massraider said:
Kasich can't be going anywhere, especially with the prospect of a brokered convention, can he?
Click to expand...
No way is he going anywhere. If it gets to a 2nd or 3rd ballot he becomes a serious favorite. Either party if Sanders or Kasich breaks into the open field vs just Trump or just Hillary to beat they are all of a sudden heavy favorites to reach the WH. The GOP leadership can't help but know they can do an instant 180 on this thing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
 


Former CIA chief Hayden: Clinton better prepared than ‘incoherent’ Trump


Donald Trump is a national security threat, George W. Bush’s spymaster tells Glenn Thrush in an exclusive interview for POLITICO’s ‘Off Message’ podcast.

Earlier this month, former CIA Director Michael Hayden found himself on the not-so-hot seat at "Fox & Friends" with noted national security expert Brian Kilmeade, who asked him this: Which one of the remaining GOP candidates would he trust most on national security?

Easy. Hayden (who describes Donald Trump’s fist-in-face foreign policy pronouncements as “incoherent”) answered, “John Kasich,” whose mainstream Republican views most closely resembled his own and those of his chosen candidate, the bygone Jeb Bush.

...“Who is a larger threat,” to national stability on security matters, I asked him: Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton?

“Donald Trump,” Hayden answered without hesitation.

“I view his current statements as erratic. … I just don’t know what it is he’s going to do,” he explained.

...

As I was talking to the 71-year-old Pittsburgh native, Trump was sitting down for an epic 100-minute chat with two New York Times reporters that seemed to underscore Hayden’s impression of Trump as a low-information, high-testosterone gunslinger.

Tear up agreements with Saudi Arabia, Trump told Maggie Haberman and David Sanger, if they don’t start paying their way. The same holds true, he added, for deadbeats Japan and South Korea — they might want to think about building their own nukes — and why not pull U.S. troops off the tinderbox North Korean border if Seoul doesn’t cut Uncle Sam a big check? Trump touted his own “unpredictability” — you know, just like Nixon — and said “I wouldn’t want them to know what my real thinking is,” referring to the brain chess he planned to play against the Russians, Chinese, terrorists or anyone else dismissive of America’s uncontested puissance.

“Mr. Trump,” the authors concluded drily, “explained his thoughts in concrete and easily digestible terms, but they appeared to reflect little consideration for potential consequences.”

Trump’s national security patter is precisely the kind of vague, bombastic talk that really spooks a spook. “It’s not so much wrong or overly certain. It’s incoherent,” said Hayden, whose criticism played a part in Trump walking back his call for U.S. forces to “go after” the families of terrorists.

He deplores Trump’s call to temporarily ban Muslims from the country — and thinks it has already aided extremist recruitment efforts (“it has made the United States less safe than it would otherwise be”). He hated the bit about ordering up hits on terrorists' families and, in general, thinks the developer-turned-pol doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about. But Hayden — who admits his own culpability in providing some of the spurious “storytelling” on weapons of mass destruction that led to the invasion of Iraq — is most offended by what he sees as Trump’s indifference to fact.

Take Trump’s insistence on telling “the story about the families fleeing two days before 9/11,” Hayden says. “There is no data that supports any thread of that story. Most of the 9/11 hijackers weren’t married, none of them had families inside the United States, and there’s no evidence that any family members moved before, during, or after 9/11. It was completely made up. … [That] doesn’t seem to matter to some fraction of our electorate.”

But here Hayden makes a significant pivot: Trump, he believes, is a histrionic symptom of otherwise sensible conservative frustration with President Barack Obama’s unwillingness to make the war on terror a top priority.  ...
Click to expand...
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/off-message-michael-hayden-hillary-clinton-2016-221276

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
 


Uhm why yes, you see in elections... nm.

This guy is losing it.
Click to expand...
From Evita: 

It's annoying that we have to win elections for our cause

The inconvenience, having to gain a majority

If normal methods of persuasion fail to win us applause

There are other ways of establishing authority

 
timschochet said:
From Evita: 

It's annoying that we have to win elections for our cause

The inconvenience, having to gain a majority

If normal methods of persuasion fail to win us applause

There are other ways of establishing authority
Click to expand...


I will say Peron is an excellent comparison for Donald and should be used more often, instead of say Hitler.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
For those starting a Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program with family or friends
Replies
11
Views
506
Hoh
H
B Maverick
Router Suggestions
Replies
4
Views
173
gianmarco
gianmarco
Todem
Official Rush “Fifty Something Tour” Thread
2
Replies
93
Views
2K
Ghost Rider
Ghost Rider

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top