In Wake Of Shocking Dinner, Trump Says It's Jews Who Should Be 'Ashamed' For Disloyalty

[Andycoops]

The guy is insane and should be sectioned.

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, vangrop said:

Indeed but why Americans voted him for president. Is more than 50% of the us people sooo du*b?

Less than 50% both times.

[Bluespunk]

5 hours ago, vangrop said:

Indeed but why Americans voted him for president. Is more than 50% of the us people sooo du*b?

Nah, as he never got 50% of the votes or even more votes than either Clinton or Biden I would never say that. 
 

The maga herd though is riddled with bigotry and belief in conspiracy theory nonsense…

[newnative]

6 hours ago, vangrop said:

Indeed but why Americans voted him for president. Is more than 50% of the us people sooo du*b?

    As others have pointed out, Trump has never received 50% of the vote.  Only 46.1% of the voters in 2016 voted for Trump and were 'sooo du*b'.  Clinton received more than 2 million more votes than Trump, so more Americans wanted Clinton to be their president.  The majority of the voters rejected Trump to be their president.  It's important to remember that the majority of the voters did not want him.  Unfortunately, with the Electoral College, Trump is what we got in 2016.  In 2020, Trump lost the popular vote even more badly, by over 7 million votes.  Again, the majority of the voters did not want him.

[billd766]

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Ah, but was it he that made it worse, or the opposition's continual attacks that did so. As an outsider, it seemed that Trump consumed the opposition so much they forgot that they were supposed to be making the country better for the people that lived in it.

 

BTW, "opposition" applies to all that opposed him whether Democrat or GOP.

It was Trump personally abusing his position as POTUS that made it worse.

[Scouse123]

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yes and once you've been president as Trump has been it's much harder to present yourself as a Washington outsider. Trump has learned how to use the levers of federal power to become a dictator. He knows all the loopholes now so he's very dangerous if he gets power again. The founders didn't imagine a president as corrupt and malicious as he is. It would be shocking if he's reelected again, but interestingly since he announced he's running for 24 he hasn't done any public events. So he's the weakest he has ever been politically but still strikes fear into republicans who can't wait for him to be indicted.

Agree with every sentence you have written.

[Greenhill]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Given what is going on that unfortunate region, I think peace is a word I would not use to describe it.

Perhaps you don't watch Al Jazeera to see what is actually happening.

Oh!    So, Al-Jazeera is your source of unbiased news is it????   I would suggest you widen your sights to include ALL sides of a story.

[Phoenix Rising]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Given what is going on that unfortunate region, I think peace is a word I would not use to describe it.

Perhaps you don't watch Al Jazeera to see what is actually happening.

Yes, could clearly see their stellar standards when, before the World Cup, they did a shamelessly lame fluff piece on the human rights issues among migrant worker in Qatar. It was like watching Hannity covering trump. 

[ballpoint]

3 hours ago, newnative said:

    As others have pointed out, Trump has never received 50% of the vote.  Only 46.1% of the voters in 2016 voted for Trump and were 'sooo du*b'.  Clinton received more than 2 million more votes than Trump, so more Americans wanted Clinton to be their president.  The majority of the voters rejected Trump to be their president.  It's important to remember that the majority of the voters did not want him.  Unfortunately, with the Electoral College, Trump is what we got in 2016.  In 2020, Trump lost the popular vote even more badly, by over 7 million votes.  Again, the majority of the voters did not want him.

Maybe Trump did have a point when he called for the termination of the constitution.  They should have a trial period by dismantling it bit by bit.  Starting with Article II, Section 1 (the Electoral College system), and the Second Amendment.

[JayClay]

On 12/12/2022 at 8:19 AM, Scouse123 said:

Anyway, the USA can't be in a bigger mess politically than we are in the UK.

 

We have a choice between lousy and terrible.

Let's look at the options shall we?..

 

On the one hand there's a party with policies of wealth redistribution, green technologies, and electorial reform lead by a former public prosecutor who has been in charge of putting people away for engaging in corrupt behaviours.

 

On the other hand, there's the current lot who have, over the last 12 years, crippled public services while protecting the highly wealthy. A party who bleed corruption out of their eyeballs. A party full of proven liars who are now trying to vilenise the same key workers who got us through the pandemic just because they have the nerve to ask for enough money to stand a chance of survival. There's not really even any point discussing the leader of the party because the MPs are so divided that he can't get any significant legislation through, and that would be the case regardless of who's in charge.

 

I know people love to bang on about how Labor under Tony Blair weren't much better. Even if that was the case, it's irrelevant; because that's not who the party is today.

 

At the end of the day the UK electorate will have a decision between sticking with the current government, who are demonstrably inadequate, or giving themselves a chance of change.

 

To write off Labor as lousy or terrible (I'm not sure which label you're attributing to who) just because you've historically not liked them is pretty foolish.

 

Luckily the electorate seems to have decided what they want. It's just a shame that the UK faces two more years of destruction under the current government before they have the chance to change it.

[JCauto]

15 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

While wildly off topic, you mentioned it so I should respond. I care about life on planet earth, but humankind has destroyed the environment and will pay the price for doing so. IMO it's about far more than climate change, and more about overpopulating and over exploiting resources. Likely to be wars over water to come in the future.

If it should come to the worst for human kind, the planet will survive quite well without us destroying the environment.

Oh, well, you didn't say that in your post I responded to but rather indicated the opposite. I agree with you, and wasn't even going to mention biodiversity collapse, but appreciate that you basically pointed in that direction which indeed is an even deeper problem.

I am also in agreement that the planet will survive the human virus.

[JCauto]

15 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Thanks for that. I feel quite flattered that you should take such a personal interest in my on forum comments, rather than just passing them by.

Have a nice day.

You're welcome! You're a pretty regular poster in these sorts of threads on the opposite side and unlike many of your colleagues you actually respond to the points made so it's possible to have discussions with you. I appreciate that because it's generally just frustrating trying to get other perspectives when it devolves into evasion and insults. For example, I agree with your response to the other part of that post, although it was kind of contradicting your original post.

[Skeptic7]

18 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

WOW, he really lives in your head! I probably dislike Hillary more than you do Trump, but I don't spend my time listing the bad things she did on here.

Nope...just stating facts which apparently so many, such as you, either don't know -OR- choose to ignore. Truth (aka reality) is a m-f'er, with which many cannot deal. ????????????

 

[thaibeachlovers]

13 hours ago, ballpoint said:

Maybe Trump did have a point when he called for the termination of the constitution.  They should have a trial period by dismantling it bit by bit.  Starting with Article II, Section 1 (the Electoral College system), and the Second Amendment.

Did he call for the termination of the entire constitution, or just the part about elections?

I read it as the latter.

Obviously Trump haters claim it's the entire constitution, as it makes him look bad.

[Credo]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did he call for the termination of the entire constitution, or just the part about elections?

I read it as the latter.

Obviously Trump haters claim it's the entire constitution, as it makes him look bad.

You do not get the option of deciding what part of the Constitution you wish to adhere to.  If you do not accept the entire document, you reject it in its entirety.  That's how it works.  There is a process to amend it.  

 

[Bluespunk]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did he call for the termination of the entire constitution, or just the part about elections?

I read it as the latter.

Obviously Trump haters claim it's the entire constitution, as it makes him look bad.

You think it’s better he is only calling for changes to the constitution that he believes are wrong because those parts mean he has to accept his crushing electoral defeat?

[Seth1a2a]

On 12/12/2022 at 10:50 AM, vangrop said:

Indeed but why Americans voted him for president. Is more than 50% of the us people sooo du*b?

Not exactly true....  Hillery 48.2% vs Trump 46.1%.

There is a system in place that can and did override the popular vote. It's called "The Electoral College". Slightly off topic so you'll have to look it up for a full explanation of how a loser like Trump can win a presidential election in the U.S. .

Source:

(CNN) — More Americans voted for Hillary Clinton than any other losing presidential candidate in US history. The Democrat outpaced President-elect Donald Trump by almost 2.9 million votes, with 65,844,954 (48.2%) to his 62,979,879 (46.1%), according to revised and certified final election results from all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/21/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-popular-vote-final-count/index.html

[placeholder]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did he call for the termination of the entire constitution, or just the part about elections?

I read it as the latter.

Obviously Trump haters claim it's the entire constitution, as it makes him look bad.

You mean calling only for disregarding only part of the Constitution doesn't make him look bad? It is to laugh.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, Seth1a2a said:

Not exactly true....  Hillery 48.2% vs Trump 46.1%.

There is a system in place that can and did override the popular vote. It's called "The Electoral College". Slightly off topic so you'll have to look it up for a full explanation of how a loser like Trump can win a presidential election in the U.S. .

Source:

(CNN) — More Americans voted for Hillary Clinton than any other losing presidential candidate in US history. The Democrat outpaced President-elect Donald Trump by almost 2.9 million votes, with 65,844,954 (48.2%) to his 62,979,879 (46.1%), according to revised and certified final election results from all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/21/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-popular-vote-final-count/index.html

Soooo, let's give thanks to the founding fathers that saved us from 4 years of her.