What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Trump Years- Every day something more shocking than the last! (15 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Capt. Ahmed Adnan al-Musawe had survived another day battling Islamic State fighters in Mosul last weekend when he heard startling news: The new American president had temporarily barred Iraqis from entering the United States and wanted tougher vetting.

Captain Musawe, who commands an infantry unit of the Iraqi Army’s elite counterterrorism force, considers himself already fully vetted: He has been trained by American officers in Iraq and in Jordan. And backed by American advisers, he has fought the Islamic State in three Iraqi cities, including three months of brutal street combat in Mosul.

“If America doesn’t want Iraqis because we are all terrorists, then America should send its sons back to Iraq to fight the terrorists themselves,” Captain Musawe told a New York Times reporter who was with him this week at his barricaded position inside Mosul.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/world/asia/travel-ban-drives-wedge-between-iraqi-soldiers-and-americans.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share
Trump has already shown us what he thinks of those military folks from other countries, especially those who say anything slightly negative about him, when he took on Khizr Khan and his wife.  Just one of many disgusting moments Trump had during his campaign.

 
Iranian baby coming to US for heart surgery after travel ban halt. Let's see what happens to the 60,000+ others negatively affected by Trump's poorly written and executed EO.  Students, tech employees, Iraqi's who risked their lives for our soldiers and so on.
Bad move. That baby is probably "evil".
And if the baby isn't evil now, could certainly grow up into whatever the Iranian translation equivalent of "bad hombre" is.

And yes, that is our president literally talking to Mexican leaders saying "bad hombre" and threatening another country with us sending our military in.  

It's absolutely insane that this kind of stuff is real, but what's more, that so few people are becoming "unhinged" or "melting down" because of it.  It's worth of removing one's hinges from this Trump door.  The stuff that's happening is worthy of melting down and reforging ourselves into something not so broken or corrupted.

 
Going pretty great!  President has historically low approval ratings, the Dems are starting to move left and put up more resistance, Republicans are running scared and afraid to hold town hall meetings or roll back the ACA, and the massive flood of opposition to the immigration EO is helping fight off much of the damage the EO would otherwise be doing to America's reputation in the Middle East and around the world.  Also, he and his supporters are clearly obsessed with the opposition, making themselves look weak and insecure every time they reveal the obsession.  It's a regular Bowling Green Massacre.
well thats good ...at least they arent on some random message board just  talking about fighting the good fight

 
melting down


Somehow I think connecting these two things pro or con is a mistake and it's almost entirely seen from the Trumpites.

The Trumpites seems to think that their perception that "the left" is "melting down" means they are "winning."

It's weird to me - Trump told them they never win, yet here they basically just poll vaulted over the Dems to clutch a USSC seat. Did Trump do this? No, McConnell did that. Aside from that it's amazing how much damage Trump is doing trashing allies and domestic tranquility and international goodwill and cooperation for things they could have gotten with any other Republican... with far less damage. But hey, they never won right? And now they do? Because the left is melting down? Ok, thereyago.

And maybe the "left" should be melting down. Arguably they lost from apathy, and Trump seems like the perfect cure for that. Here the GOP won more state seats than ever, more governorships than ever, more House and Senate seats than ever (almost), without Trump, and here is Trump giving the opposition the one thing they lacked, motivation. But hey, winning. Maybe melting down is winning, consider that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
323 pages and I can count on one hand the number of times a poster has actually engaged in an intelligent defense of Trump's actions so far as POTUS.
Because no one here is interested in listening.

I have been here forever (reminding you I am #162 here and was a veteran at Old Yeller) and I don't frankly feel the need to make my opinion known on every little thing. I have attempted on multiple occasions to discuss Trump here and despite never having a beef with any of you, I am called stupid, racist or even worse. Why even bother attempting conversations here when that is the end conclusion?

You guys seriously have to stop. Every little story about Trump--real or imagined is reported here and half turn out to be untrue. I mean it is like living with Baghdad Bob with the media coverage here. Tonight CBS's top story is about the mission in Yemen and you can just hear the loaded language used in that report. Even you most die hard Trump haters have to at least acknowledge that Obama probably green-lighted hundreds of mission where soldiers were lost, but can you remember a network so actively putting the faces of those lost soldiers on the top story of the news for political gain? Frankly I wish they would have because these brave men and women deserve that respect. But honestly Trump approves the mission and a guy is lost=bad. Trump says no to the mission and you guys would have said he doesn't trust the generals.

It is so frustrating that a site that I remember looking at throughout the past 20 years has dissolved into this. We used to have fun here. A beef was settled in a few choice words and no more, but now we have pages upon pages of just flat out nastiness. If Trump is voted out in 2020, I literally will act like I did throughout the Obama years, I didn't attack any of you then because of who you voted for, and I wouldn't do it in the future. .

I have been a paid subscriber here forever because I believed that even though the content wasn't the best (and this year was kind of bad), my money was well spent to support these forums, but I am probably taking my money and I know most of the multiple leagues I am in. that use this site for info, elsewhere. Now you are saying "Oh godness, Joe will really miss that $600.00 :unsure:  " He obviously won't, but it is just disappointing what has become of this place.

I am sure if I look back tomorrow this thread will be 8 pages longer with new imagined Trump outrage. I already see CNN has scintillating pieces on how bad his necktie and signatures are on the front page.

Trump is the president. If you don't like it, don't insult those that exercised their right to vote--find a young energetic Democrat to take him down in 2020.

I hope you all have a good night no matter what you think of me.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Because no one here is interested in listening.

I have been here forever (reminding you I am #162 here and was a veteran at Old Yeller) and I don't frankly feel the need to make my opinion known on every little thing. I have attempted on multiple occasions to discuss Trump here and despite never having a beef with any of you, I am called stupid, racist or even worse. Why even bother attempting conversations here when that is the end conclusion?

You guys seriously have to stop. Every little story about Trump--real or imagined is reported here and half turn out to be untrue. I mean it is like living with Baghdad Bob with the media coverage here. Tonight CBS's top story is about the mission in Yemen and you can just hear the loaded language used in that report. Even you most die hard Trump haters have to at least acknowledge that Obama probably green-lighted hundreds of mission where soldiers were lost, but can you remember a network so actively putting the faces of those lost soldiers on the top story of the news for political gain? Frankly I wish they would have because these brave men and women deserve that respect. But honestly Trump approves the mission and a guy is lost=bad. Trump says no to the mission and you guys would have said he doesn't trust the generals.

It is so frustrating that a site that I remember looking at throughout the past 20 years has dissolved into this. We used to have fun here. A beef was settled in a few choice words and no more, but now we have pages upon pages of just flat out nastiness. If Trump is voted out in 2020, I literally will act like I did throughout the Obama years, I didn't attack any of you then because of who you voted for, and I wouldn't do it in the future. .

I have been a paid subscriber here forever because I believed that even though the content wasn't the best (and this year was kind of bad), my money was well spent to support these forums, but I am probably taking my money and I know most of the multiple leagues I am in. that use this site for info, elsewhere. Now you are saying "Oh godness, Joe will really miss that $600.00 :unsure:  " He obviously won't, but it is just disappointing what has become of this place.

I am sure if I look back tomorrow this thread will be 8 pages longer with new imagined Trump outrage. I already see CNN has scintillating pieces on how bad his necktie and signatures are on the front page.

Trump is the president. If you don't like it, don't insult those that exercised their right to vote--find a young energetic Democrat to take him down in 2020.

I hope you all have a good night no matter what you think of me.
I agree. I'm donating mine to the victims of the Bowling Green Massacre instead.

 
It's astonishing that you could write this without irony. The answer is of course I can remember it. There was a network obsessed with the deaths of 4 Americans and spent nearly two years featuring it as their #1 story. 
Are you referencing Benghazi? That wasn't a special ops military mission green lighted by a president and is completely irrelevant to this.

Obama sent troops in harms way and they did their jobs and did great things. He got OBL for goodness sake.

 
Are you referencing Benghazi? That wasn't a special ops military mission green lighted by a president and is completely irrelevant to this.

Obama sent troops in harms way and they did their jobs and did great things. He got OBL for goodness sake.
And didn't try to prove how great his op was by releasing a "retrieved" video that's been circulated for several years?

 
And didn't try to prove how great his op was by releasing a "retrieved" video that's been circulated for several years?
Did the Trump people release that video? I mean I am asking seriously. CBS and ABC said the military released it. CBS's words were to "justify the raid the military presented a video which was actively available years before"

Regardless of that Henry, did the media scrutinize every Obama authorized raid? I think Obama did a good job taking out ISIS, but I guess I just missed the coverage of every soldier lost in these raids--and I means pictures and bios and such every night.

 
Did the Trump people release that video? I mean I am asking seriously. CBS and ABC said the military released it. CBS's words were to "justify the raid the military presented a video which was actively available years before"

Regardless of that Henry, did the media scrutinize every Obama authorized raid? I think Obama did a good job taking out ISIS, but I guess I just missed the coverage of every soldier lost in these raids--and I means pictures and bios and such every night.
:ptts:

 
Did the Trump people release that video? I mean I am asking seriously. CBS and ABC said the military released it. CBS's words were to "justify the raid the military presented a video which was actively available years before"

Regardless of that Henry, did the media scrutinize every Obama authorized raid? I think Obama did a good job taking out ISIS, but I guess I just missed the coverage of every soldier lost in these raids--and I means pictures and bios and such every night.
That may be a matter of your political perspective.  Yes, they did. Partially because Obama lifted the gag order of soldiers dying that Bush put in place.  

If Obama had skipped the situation room and a soldier had died we would have heard about it every day for a year and there would have been 6 congressional hearings followed by Ted Cruz standing up and proclaiming he should be impeached.  

 
Did the Trump people release that video? I mean I am asking seriously. CBS and ABC said the military released it. CBS's words were to "justify the raid the military presented a video which was actively available years before"

Regardless of that Henry, did the media scrutinize every Obama authorized raid? I think Obama did a good job taking out ISIS, but I guess I just missed the coverage of every soldier lost in these raids--and I means pictures and bios and such every night.
Plus, the significance of this is that it was the first one of his presidency. Of course it's going to be scrutinized more than most.

 
Plus, the significance of this is that it was the first one of his presidency. Of course it's going to be scrutinized more than most.
And you are right in this comment, but not to play what ifs, Trump doesn't okay it, are you or any of the other anti-Trump crowd going to give him the benefit of the doubt and not say "Well here he goes not listening to his generals?:"

I mean the over/under of people re-quoting his stupid quote (yeah I called it that) I know more than the generals statement has to be 10-12 would you say?

 
And you are right in this comment, but not to play what ifs, Trump doesn't okay it, are you or any of the other anti-Trump crowd going to give him the benefit of the doubt and not say "Well here he goes not listening to his generals?:"

I mean the over/under of people re-quoting his stupid quote (yeah I called it that) I know more than the generals statement has to be 10-12 would you say?
Honestly, this whole thing ranks incredibly low on my list of things to hate about Trump's first two weeks. It's a relative non story to me for a few reasons:

1) We will never know the true details of what did or didn't happen

2) We will never know if the mission was considered a true success or not.

3) We will never know how much of this is related to Obama and how much to Trump.

I would say that the only thing I would care about this story is if Trump strayed from normal convention and that resulted in a poor outcome as a direct result. Or if he broke tradition of where and when he should be someplace or doing something. And since there have been conflicting reports on all of that, it's mostly a single wrong note amongst a symphony of other colossal blunders.

For example, today, I'm much more concerned about his repeal of Dodd-Frank, especially with his ####ty reasoning for it. It's a disgrace.  And that's just today.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hillbilly boycott of Budweiser incoming.
This is a pretty interesting strategy for Bud. I think it's probably smart.

What, 40% of people in the country like Trump? Obviously, a large number of current Bud drinkers are in that 40%, so that might seem dangerous. Those guys can easily switch to Coors Banquet (growing of late, with a face that Trumpkins love in Sam Elliot), but they are also just as likely to switch to Busch and Natty Light (the ones that haven't already) not knowing that's AB too. 

But Bud sales have been falling off for a long time, and it probably makes more sense to go after some of that other 60% if they can. May seem a stretch, but hipsters and other snowflakes do like piss beer. With PBR prices going through the roof, Bud heavy could be primed to be the next hipster beer.

I normally drink Coors Banquet for my piss beer allotment, but I do pick up a case of Bud every couple of months. I'll probably pick one up today for the hell of it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Honestly, this whole thing ranks incredibly low on my list of things to hate about Trump's first two weeks. It's a relative non story to me for a few reasons:

1) We will never know the true details of what did or didn't happen

2) We will never know if the mission was considered a true success or not.

3) We will never know how much of this is related to Obama and how much to Trump.

I would say that the only thing I would care about this story is if Trump strayed from normal convention and that resulted in a poor outcome as a direct result. Or if he broke tradition of where and when he should be someplace or doing something. And since there have been conflicting reports on all of that, it's mostly a single wrong note amongst a symphony of other colossal blunders.

For example, today, I'm much more concerned about his repeal of Dodd-Frank, especially with his ####ty reasoning for it. It's a disgrace.  And that's just today.
Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn. 

The President could be on the back 9 when he gets the call. He should need a quick brief and give the ok.  Yes, it's his decision, but the experts / Proffesionals should be doing their job well enough that the call is basically notifying him that there could be some political backlash.  (And the political issues are his to decide) he doesn't (shouldn't) stop the raid because he's concerned we could lose a soldier, he might stop it because of a political decision the generals don't get to decide.  Strategy and politics are his perview.

From what I've read, this raid was a success regardless of CENTCOM and the pentagon releasing an old video to exemplify the benefits of these types of actions. 

But the bigger picture is the issue here.  Is anyone convinced that the president understands all of the dynamics at play?  That he understands that area enough to know the potential political fallout?  A lot of this is predictions and guesswork, but I never doubted the decisions Obama, bush, or Clinton made because they seemed to be educated enough to make the best decision possible at the time. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A thought that has occurred to me in the last two weeks, during the election all the polls skewed heavily to Clinton and Trump won. This was largely in part to bad polling data where people who were voting trump didn't own it when talking to pollsters.  Now, post-election I am seeing an outpouring of protests against Trump and very little if any support of his decisions/policies.  Where is his base?  Did they evaporate or is this another case of his supporters not owning up to their support?  
They're on Facebook clogging my news feed with fake outrage at the fake outrage.  Ask Max.  He knows all about it.  

 
323 pages and I can count on one hand the number of times a poster has actually engaged in an intelligent defense of Trump's actions so far as POTUS.
Lest we forget that rarely did anyone engage in an intelligent defense of Trump during his campaign.  Why would we expect to have a reasoned debate with them now just because he's sworn in?  

 
https://regiehammblog.wordpress.com/2017/02/01/this-hitler-nonsense/

The idea of comparing an American president to Hitler is just as absurd …from any angle, in any context. The American system ITSELF pretty much prevents “Hitlers” from showing up. And America ITSELF is anathema to what Hitler was trying to create. An American ANYTHING or ANYONE is hard to fit into the Hitler model. It’s just not apples to apples.

There are some fundamental things to understand about Hitler:

1. He took over a small, failing state that didn’t have separated government, enumerated powers or checks and balances. It’s difficult for a guy like that to show up here, in this system.

2. His entire political career was violent from the beginning. There was always death in his wake. He didn’t just suddenly “turn” violent. It was a pattern …as it always is with sociopaths. This is THE most important thing to watch; the violence. I always keep an eye on who is rioting …breaking things …throwing rocks and bombs. It doesn’t make them Nazis. But it signals how far they’re willing to go.

3. He entered office with his own personal military construct (the SS) with allegiance to him ONLY. They would carry out things the regular military would never carry out: i.e. the murder of private citizens and political opponents. Nothing like that exists or COULD exist in America. We simply wouldn’t allow it.

4. He didn’t start out just killing Jews. He started out euthanizing people with special needs …for the betterment of the care-givers’ lives. (You can decide which side of the aisle favors the extermination of “inconvenient” people).

5. He disarmed the population, then nationalized healthcare and education. (Two-out-of-three of those are Bernie Sanders moves …But, guess what? Bernie isn’t Hitler either …not by a long shot)

The list goes on and on. But the deal is this:

Hitler was a real life murdering sociopath. He wasn’t just a charismatic speaker who incrementally fell into bad behavior. He wasn’t just a racist corrupted by unfettered power. In other words, you or I probably couldn’t end up being Hitler. A garden variety KKK leader probably couldn’t end up being Hitler either …or a community organizer …or a New York real-estate tycoon. It’s not that easy or simple.

NONE of our American presidents have ever been Hitler. But the people of Germany certainly thought FDR was a murdering dictator when B-17s started dropping bombs on them. This is why you have to KNOW what you believe and why you believe it. Good guys and bad guys are often in the eyes of the beholder. And they often look similar in the fog of conflict. I would imagine Japanese Americans in internment camps wondered if their president was Hitler-like. Nope. Horrible act …but not close to Hitler.

To that point, ironically, the American president who could’ve actually been likened to Hitler (before Hitler) in some of his methods was …wait for it …Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln broke more constitutional law than any other president in U.S history. He imprisoned political opponents without due process. He suspended habeas corpus. He was personally responsible for the deaths of six hundred thousand people.

He invaded countries that had declared their own sovereignty and forced them back into a union they didn’t want to be a part of. He unilaterally annexed Nevada, without 60 thousand residents, (a pre-requisite for becoming a state) in order to carry it and win the 1864 election. In other words, he pretty much rigged it.

And when he was killed by the highest paid and most famous actor of his day (ironic …don’t you think?), the actor screamed “death to tyrants!” (in latin) because the man thought he was being a patriot for ridding the world of a dictator. But he wasn’t …and he didn’t.

Lincoln did all of those things to end and win the Civil War. And today we love him for it …as we should. Because in the end, his vision was right …even though his methods were suspect in the heat of the moment.

When people think they’re seeing a Hitler, they might actually – sometimes – be seeing something closer to a Churchill. Before WWII everyone thought Churchill was the big bad wolf. His own people hated him and thought he was a Hitler type character (again …pre-Hilter). But he just kept saying, “guys …I’m telling you. This Hitler guy is the real problem. Not me.” And he turned out to be right. There’s a difference between an abrasive leader who makes you uncomfortable …and a despot.

Now, people are comparing Donald Trump to Hitler. And the countdown has officially begun, to …well …I don’t know …but something really bad. I get that someone who is combative with the press and who wants to vet refugees and shut down open immigration fits the bill some are always looking for when it comes to finally getting their “Hitler” villain.

But if you study enough about it, you realize the guy vetting and banning refugees is probably not Hitler …the guy CREATING refugees probably is.

If we keep looking for Hitler in every United States president we disagree with, we’re not going to recognize the real one when he actually shows up …in a different country.

 
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/156778990841/berkeley-and-hitler

I’m ending my support of UC Berkeley, where I got my MBA years ago. I have been a big supporter lately, with both my time and money, but that ends today. I wish them well, but I wouldn’t feel safe or welcome on the campus. A Berkeley professor made that clear to me recently. He seems smart, so I’ll take his word for it.

I’ve decided to side with the Jewish gay immigrant who has an African-American boyfriend, not the hypnotized zombie-boys in black masks who were clubbing people who hold different points of view. I feel that’s reasonable, but I know many will disagree, and possibly try to club me to death if I walk on campus. 

Yesterday I asked my most liberal, Trump-hating friend if he ever figured out why Republicans have most of the Governorships, a majority in Congress, the White House, and soon the Supreme Court. He said, “There are no easy answers.”

I submit that there are easy answers. But for many Americans, cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias hide those easy answers behind Hitler hallucinations. 

I’ll keep working on clearing the fog. Estimated completion date, December 2017. It’s a big job.

 
Because you have to have a legit case to file a lawsuit? :lmao:

Enjoy the ride snowflakes!
Or you have to be a complete douche bag to get sued so much.

Going to be a quick 3 1/2 years and then the era of rule by the uneducated will come to an abrupt end. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A thought that has occurred to me in the last two weeks, during the election all the polls skewed heavily to Clinton and Trump won. This was largely in part to bad polling data where people who were voting trump didn't own it when talking to pollsters.  Now, post-election I am seeing an outpouring of protests against Trump and very little if any support of his decisions/policies.  Where is his base?  Did they evaporate or is this another case of his supporters not owning up to their support?  
I think Trump probably won the election, but I do find it odd (or mad genius) that he is disputing the outcome. If all of the Oscar critics predict La LaLand will win and then Superman v Batman wins, would people walk away say "interesting" or would they say "maybe there was some funny business that we don' know about"?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top