Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place


Recommended Posts

Just now, urbanhack said:

Wait...you realize we're talking about a recreational, non necessary event vs. transforming government, services, etc.

Maybe you should revisit the Obama years to see who was constantly #####ing about how much stuff cost.  

Or the democrat debate thread where trump supporters complain about how we will pay for things but never bat an eye about how Trump pay for his things (or care about how much debt we are racking up in a good economy).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:
24 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

It's sad that our president is so unpopular that he has to stack the crowd at his own party.

I'm guessing at the core of this there is a concern that the crowd may be critical or unsupportive. But the opportunity for fundraising and a grandiose campaign rally - on the holiest of public backdrops - is a double bonus.

I'm not too offended by the fundraiser aspect -- after all, every Presidential speech is, on some level, a campaign speech. If Trump wants to turn it into a grotesque rant about his enemies or his fake achievements, it's not going to embarrass the country any more than it has already been embarrassed. His supporters have already gone all-in on blurring the line between private enterprise and public service.

As long as the general public has free access to the event, I'm not going to be too bothered by it.

Edited by [scooter]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Max Power said:

We're talking pennies on the dollar vs the current proposals Democrats are pushing.  I just find it interesting we care about price tags now. 

"Our Wasteful Spending Isn't Quite As Bad As The Other Party's Wasteful Spending!"

That's pretty much the Republican Party mantra these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Are you comparing needlessly holding a taxpayer funded campaign event to trying to provide healthcare?

Ive cared before and continue to care and will point out such wasteful spending.  Especially the hypocrisy of Trump after all of his complaints.

It's good for Morale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if they’ll start arresting people in the crowd who don’t clap hard enough just like his bff KJU?  It’s always interesting to watch one of KJU events, a group of people seeing who can clap the hardest.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

I wonder if they’ll start arresting people in the crowd who don’t clap hard enough just like his bff KJU?  It’s always interesting to watch one of KJU events, a group of people seeing who can clap the hardest.  

So classic:lmao: 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

The parade responses are so classic.  You would think Trump is going to step out onto a stage wearing a chest full of medals like Gaddafi the way the left is characterizing this. :lmao:

Or like Sherriff Clarke used to...when he was a darling of the GOP?

He wants a bog parade with tanks and weapons on display...the characterizations are exactly what he described.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, lod001 said:

When they lost the election. They will rejoice in spending if they win in 2020 and the Rs will then complain. That's how it works.

False...it was before that.  Spending?  Nit all no.  That people wonder why people are ok with spending in something like healthcare, but not ok with footing the bill for a campaign rally and tanks is amazing...but expected.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry buddy but both parties spend like drunken sailors when they get into power. Maybe not for a 'campaign rally' but they do. Just another cry the blues cause you lost the election temper tantrum from the left. Your act is old.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Or like Sherriff Clarke used to...when he was a darling of the GOP?

He wants a bog parade with tanks and weapons on display...the characterizations are exactly what he described.

Clarke was wearing his sheriff uniform. That bothered you? And what is a bog parade?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, John Blutarsky said:

So classic:lmao: 

The classic’s are so for a reason.  

And btw I’m disappointed, one, one rolling emoji?  I expect more from you John.  

Edited by dkp993
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Nah, just selling access to a patriotic tradition.

It’s the start of a great tradition that will be around In 2024 when President Haley takes over and 2032 with President AOC.  Not sure how anybody could be against this.

Edited by Widbil83
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

It’s the start of a great tradition that will be around In 2024 when President Haley takes over and 2032 with President AOC.  Not sure how anybody could be against this.

Because its wasteful, pointless, and (other things id call it that would get me a timeout).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

It’s the start of a great tradition that will be around In 2024 when President Haley takes over and 2032 with President AOC.  Not sure how anybody could be against this.

You specifically want Republican and Democratic Party and campaign involvement in national patriotic events and fundraising around it? Press 4 was the answer I guess.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody remember the thread that was lost in the shuffle a few years ago about the Harvard Study they showed 4th of July parades make people support Republicans?  It all makes sense now why Democrats would be against this.

Here it is-

https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/07/july-4th-july-fourth-parade-fireworks-republicans.html

Edited by Widbil83
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without looking at the study details, I would guess that has more to do with predilections of who chooses to go to the parades,rather than being brainwashed by them.;)

But here is your 4th of July trivia; the following from the article has some fallacies.. Adams wrote that about July 2 being a day of celebration.. The vote on the Declaration of Independence was on July 2nd, with adoption taking place on the 4th. Document was signed in August.

---->   On July 3, 1776, he wrote that the Fourth "ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward, forevermore."

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

Anybody remember the thread that was lost in the shuffle a few years ago about the Harvard Study they showed 4th of July parades make people support Republicans?  It all makes sense now why Democrats would be against this.

Here it is-

https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/07/july-4th-july-fourth-parade-fireworks-republicans.html

I love 4th on the Mall. The event happens every year. And it’s not the money. The problem is converting public resources to private use, which is different.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mystery Achiever said:

Without looking at the study details, I would guess that has more to do with predilections of who chooses to go to the parades,rather than being brainwashed by them.;)

But here is your 4th of July trivia; the following from the article has some fallacies.. Adams wrote that about July 2 being a day of celebration.. The vote on the Declaration of Independence was on July 2nd, with adoption taking place on the 4th. Document was signed in August.

---->   On July 3, 1776, he wrote that the Fourth "ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward, forevermore."

Ooh no you didn't!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Widbil83 said:

Anybody remember the thread that was lost in the shuffle a few years ago about the Harvard Study they showed 4th of July parades make people support Republicans?  It all makes sense now why Democrats would be against this.

Here it is-

https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/07/july-4th-july-fourth-parade-fireworks-republicans.html

It’s undeniable that there is a lot more patriotism and Pro-American vibe in the air the last 2 4ths of July.  

I hope the networks are covering this important parade.  

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What’s the deal with Liz Warren wanting to bust up all the big tech companies?  Doesn’t she know these people are actively shadow banning, censuring and deplatforming people on the other side who are disagree with her?  This seems like a very bizarre way to treat people who are helping you.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Widbil83 said:

Anybody remember the thread that was lost in the shuffle a few years ago about the Harvard Study they showed 4th of July parades make people support Republicans?  It all makes sense now why Democrats would be against this.

Here it is-

https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/07/july-4th-july-fourth-parade-fireworks-republicans.html

I think the author of the study was talking more about typical republicans and not this makeup wearing guy who backs down on threats, talks glowingly about his love letters with types like Kim Jong, defers to dictators, and is afraid of the press.

Libs have nothing to worry about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tonydead said:
4 hours ago, Mystery Achiever said:

---->   On July 3, 1776, he wrote that the Fourth "ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward, forevermore."

Ooh no you didn't!!

Just when you think you've made a nice, non-partisan holiday post....  ;)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Widbil83 said:

What’s the deal with Liz Warren wanting to bust up all the big tech companies?  Doesn’t she know these people are actively shadow banning, censuring and deplatforming people on the other side who are disagree with her?  This seems like a very bizarre way to treat people who are helping you.  

How do you consume as much propaganda as you do?  Amazing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, urbanhack said:

How do you consume as much propaganda as you do?  Amazing.

Google Executive Jen Gennai

 

“Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And I love her but she's very misguided, like that will not make it better, it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don't have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it's like a small company cannot do that.”

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Google Executive Jen Gennai

 

“Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And I love her but she's very misguided, like that will not make it better, it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don't have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it's like a small company cannot do that.”

Can't see urbanhack getting up from that knockdown.

  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Google Executive Jen Gennai

 

“Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And I love her but she's very misguided, like that will not make it better, it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don't have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it's like a small company cannot do that.”

According to what?  Because of i look up that quote it only brings up stuff from project Veritas again.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

According to what?  Because of i look up that quote it only brings up stuff from project Veritas again.

 

Came out of her mouth.... that's what a quote is. She hasn't denied saying it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Came out of her mouth.... that's what a quote is. She hasn't denied saying it. 

As quoted where?  Since there was no actual link.  And where has it come out of Warrens mouth?  Again, since there was no link provided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

As quoted where?  Since there was no actual link.  And where has it come out of Warrens mouth?  Again, since there was no link provided.

Just Google it man. I have no interest in doing the work for links that you're going to immediately dismiss without reading. 

Pro tip, it will all be page 1 results 

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

As quoted where?  Since there was no actual link.  And where has it come out of Warrens mouth?  Again, since there was no link provided.

James O’Keefe deleted the YouTube clip, that’s why you can’t find it. Here’s the Daily Mail on it.

This is Gennai’s explanation of the background and context.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

Google Executive Jen Gennai

 

“Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And I love her but she's very misguided, like that will not make it better, it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don't have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it's like a small company cannot do that.”

Senator Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts Democrat who is bidding to be the policy pacesetter in the Democratic presidential primary, championed another expansive idea on Friday evening in front of a crowd of thousands in Queens: a regulatory plan aimed at breaking up some of America’s largest tech companies, including Amazon, Google, Apple and Facebook.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiqmeuGx5fjAhVSmeAKHb4UDX4QzPwBegQIARAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2019%2F03%2F08%2Fus%2Fpolitics%2Felizabeth-warren-amazon.html&psig=AOvVaw2iFD9erdMeE6EkdZQpfro_&ust=1562202258690084

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Just Google it man. I have no interest in doing the work for links that you're going to immediately dismiss without reading. 

Pro tip, it will all be page 1 results 

I dod and there is only one link to the CEO and its an article talking about a Veritas thing...excise me that i dint take what Okeefe says or an article about and Okeefe produces as anything factual.

In addition when you make a claim about something with a quite, its expected you would actually link to where it came from.  When people don't, usually its because they are trying to hide that they got it from what amounts to a bogus source like Okeefe.  

And work?  Yeah, you probably should do the work rather than get exposed like that.

Edited by sho nuff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • knowledge dropper changed the title to TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...