11 hours ago, uptheos said:

 

 America voted him in, says a lots for 62,000,000 Americans

 

62m/231m eligible voters = 27% of Americans actually voted for him for president.  And he lost the popular vote by 3 million.  

 

So, it's safer to say that he was elected due to effectively working the electoral college and taking advantage to the apathy created by his opponent which kept many voters at home. 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

Not sure how Trump and his camp are panicking?  But I agree that he's not exactly respected by 'the world'.

 

More interesting IMO is how the anti-Trump circus is escalating - and I gather you agree with this?

 

FWIW, I don't trust Trump as far as I could throw him either - but get tired of the political and media spin against him.

 

It's not spin if it's true.  For weeks and weeks now he's been denying that Russia had anything to do with the hacking.  He's so concerned about delegitimizing the vote that he has dismissed and insulted the entire intelligence community claiming that he doesn't believe them.  

 

That's not media spin.  

 

I think the difference is that as a candidate he can say whatever he wants.  As president (or president-elect) of the US, the media now expects him to rise up to the level of the office.  

 

Remember back when Obama first took office and he threw shade at Fox News because he did not take them seriously as a news organization? All the other news agencies stood up for Fox because even though they represented things they disagreed with, the media felt it was dangerous for a president to pick who could report the news.  

 

A lot of what you're calling political and media spin is simply Trump being held to a higher standard of truth.  He can't dodge and duck hard questions because now they impact all Americans (and beyond).  Sure, as a candidate he could say some crazy BS and everyone would just role their eyes and report it.  Now we want to know exactly how he plans on implementing what he just said and if holding him to his word or expecting your leader to give you a straight answer is negative media spin . . . well, we simply see the world in very different ways.  

24 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

So, it's safer to say that he was elected due to effectively working the electoral college and taking advantage to the apathy created by his opponent which kept many voters at home. 

 

 

He had a poor opponent and a superior strategy. He WON an election that was considered unwinnable and that is what matters.

The original investigation into Trumps background was paid for by another Republican nominee.  After Trump won the nomination this investigative group found interest for the info at the DNC.  The ex MI6 guy was a contractor for said group. Supposedly a rich donor donated a million$ to continue this search.  No donation limits apply for this sort of thing.   Who knows if it is fake... but no one doubts that this sounds like something Da Don would do!

You know that Russia is always looking 20-30 years ahead trying to get hooks in politicians around the World.

IMHO Trump has already been worth billions in free advertisement for improving the image of Russia at least to the deplorables that voted for him. 

sad time to live in the USA.  And his cabinet picks are all just the same old Grey haired old school racist pigs

I'm a bit concerned about a military guy in DOD but Ret Gen Mattis does seem top be a bright spot in Trumps pick so far.https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-has-chosen-retired-marine-gen-james-mattis-for-secretary-of-defense/2016/12/01/6c6b3b74-aff9-11e6-be1c-8cec35b1ad25_story.html?utm_term=.2eb204369d25

 

 

2 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

He had a poor opponent and a superior strategy. He WON an election that was considered unwinnable and that is what matters.

 

I didn't say he didn't win.  What I was responding to was the implication that he had broad support.  In other words, 27% of eligible voters voted for him.  His points of view may or may not be shared by the other 73% of Americans.  The person I was responding to threw out 63 million as an indication of how many people voted for him - implying it to be a large number.  I was trying to show that out of 231 million eligible, 63 million is not that substantial of a number.  

 

Sort of like I wouldn't say that just because Abhisit wins an election, all Thais support Abhisit.  

 

Also, I don't know that I would agree that he had a superior strategy.  He lost the popular vote so his constant flubs and bombastic attitude obviously did not win over the majority of voters who did vote.  

 

I say, "I don't know" because I'm unsure if blatant lying is a strategy or a character defect.  I mean, all politicians lie but Trump's lies are on the order of pointing at the grass and telling you that it's purple.  

 

Then again, his lies often captured the attention of the media and pundits so thoroughly that one could easily forget what he originally lied about as his media surrogates made absurd excuses as to why what Trump said was actually true.  

 

So maybe that was a strategy.  You lie about lying and then lie some more until people get so used to you lying that it's hard to shock anyone with whatever comes out of your mouth.  

 

I think his opponent had a horrible strategy which relied on counting her chickens before they hatched.  She went after strongly Republican states in an attempt to run up the score against what she thought was an inevitable victory and failed to shore up her core base in strong blue states that flipped red after not getting any Hillary love during the campaign.  

 

Even GOP pollsters said that her loss of the Blue Wall (Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania) was mostly due to "her colossal failure" in those states.  She made zero visits to Wisconsin in the general election campaign.  All the states in her Blue Wall she lost about roughly 1% point.  

 

 So did Trump win or did Hillary lose?  I think Hillary lost.  You put almost any other Democrat in that race, especially Bernie, and Trump would be watching the inauguration from Mar Lago.  

 

 

 

 

12 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

 So did Trump win or did Hillary lose?  

 

 

Both obviously and too much hair splitting. He won the votes of wonnthe racrabout half the voters who actually voted and they are the ones who count. He had a superior strategy because it WON the election. The popular vote is not the point.

I do not agree that any other Democrat would have won the race, but you could also theorize that almost any other Republican would have beaten Hillary, if you want to look at it that way.

Edited January 12, 20179 yr by Ulysses G.

Just now, digibum said:

 

62m/231m eligible voters = 27% of Americans actually voted for him for president.  And he lost the popular vote by 3 million.  

 

So, it's safer to say that he was elected due to effectively working the electoral college and taking advantage to the apathy created by his opponent which kept many voters at home. 

 

 

 

 

It's your system, you weren't moaning about the electoral college when dems were winning.

23 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

...

Invoking "Nazi Germany" when referencing propaganda shows a complete lack of a basic education. 

 

So it should resonate with his voter base.

48 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Both obviously and too much hair splitting. He won the votes of wonnthe racrabout half the voters who actually voted and they are the ones who count. He had a superior strategy because it WON the election. The popular vote is not the point.

I do not agree that any other Democrat would have won the race, but you could also theorize that almost any other Republican would have beaten Hillary, if you want to look at it that way.

 

I do think it makes a difference.

 

Someone who wins with strong, broad based support can lead in one way and someone who wins based on their competitor doing a horrible job has to lead in a very different manner.  

 

Hillary would have had the same problem.  She can't claim that she has a mandate to make changes if she barely wins.

 

But true, Trump gets to be president for the next four years but for many the vote amounted to, would you rather eat dog poop or drink your own vomit?  He just happened to be the least revolting option.  

 

If you're looking at the number of voters who voted saying, "You know, I like the cut of that candidate's jib and agree with them on most major issues," that 63 million is probably more like 23 million.   

 

 

5 minutes ago, uptheos said:

 

It's your system, you weren't moaning about the electoral college when dems were winning.

 

Really?  Do you have some previous posts of mine that indicate that would be true?  

 

Since the late 1980's, I've voted for the Republican presidential candidate 4 times and the Democratic candidate 5 times.  In fact, I've never registered as a Democrat.  I guess I originally registered as a Republican because my dad was a Republican but as I learned more about politics I realized that neither party actually represented my point of view on enough issues for me to identify myself with either party.  I have been a registered independent or no-party since Bill Clinton's second term.  

 

I've felt that the electoral college was a stupid idea going back to when I was in high school and first learned about it.  That was over 30 years ago.  

 

And no matter which party wins, every four years Americans suddenly wake up and realize what a stupid system it is when they have to watch the TV anchors plot out red and blue states like they're diagramming a football play.  

 

So, clearly you have no clue what you're talking about.  

 

 

 
Both obviously and too much hair splitting. He won the votes of wonnthe racrabout half the voters who actually voted and they are the ones who count. He had a superior strategy because it WON the election. The popular vote is not the point.
I do not agree that any other Democrat would have won the race, but you could also theorize that almost any other Republican would have beaten Hillary, if you want to look at it that way.

Which has nothing to do with the point being made here.

Sent from my ROBBY using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

18 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

The BBC is now reporting that a Brit. MI6 officer was behind the documents claiming Russia has compromising material on Trump.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38591382

 

Oops... I guess it's back of the bus again for those pesky trade talks then.

51 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

But true, Trump gets to be president for the next four years but for many the vote amounted to, would you rather eat dog poop or drink your own vomit?  He just happened to be the least revolting option.

 

 

Now THIS we agree on. That is certainly how I felt. However, now that he is in office, I am willing to give him a chance. I have been happy with the way that he has softened some of his positions and like some of the things that he intends to do.

 

I find the people who just want revenge -  because he proved them wrong - and want nothing more than to delegitimize his presidency,  sickening. They attack absolutely eveything that he says and does and are not sincere about their reasons for doing it. Their problem is that they have falsely cried wolf so often that no one is paying attention anymore.

18 hours ago, uptheos said:

Is there anything left that the scumbag CNN et al won't try to come up with?

I loved the press conference, really peed CNN reporter off. In future don't let

CNN occupy any seats near the front.

In a normal world, a world that no longer exists, a scandal besieged politician would want to move on from the issue as speedily as possible. He would be heard with silent embarrassment and after a few minutes the event would switch to more elevating issues.

Not with Donald Trump. Standing in front of 10 US flags, with his daughter Ivanka to one side of the stage, he was itching to talk about the story - almost moreso than the jouros. He was loving it, if you sent this guy to Pamplona for the bull run he would quite possibly run towards the bull. And the beast might as well, in such circumstances, do a quick U turn and gallop to safety.  You American's really are lucky to be rid of Hussein and get a real man. 

Why blame CNN?  The documents were already out there.  Many had them in their possession.  CNN also said they were unverified.  CNN was just reporting the news.  Yet getting blasted for it.  It's been proven it's not fake.  Unverified, yes.  But not fake.

18 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Now THIS we agree on. That is certainly how I felt. However, now that he is in office, I am willing to give him a chance. I have been happy with the way that he has softened some of his positions and like some of the things that he intends to do.

 

I find the people who just want revenge -  because he proved them wrong - and want nothing more than to delegitimize his presidency,  sickening. They attack absolutely eveything that he says and does and are not sincere about their reasons for doing it. Their problem is that they have falsely cried wolf so often that no one is paying attention anymore.

You start to make good arguments, then go downhill by blaming others for Trump's rants.  I don't see any who want revenge.  Just a reputable president.  One who doesn't lie.  And one who's focused on the US, not his businesses and his family.  It's all up to Trump as to how things play out from here.  Nobody to blame but himself.

2 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Both obviously and too much hair splitting. He won the votes of wonnthe racrabout half the voters who actually voted and they are the ones who count. He had a superior strategy because it WON the election. The popular vote is not the point.

I do not agree that any other Democrat would have won the race, but you could also theorize that almost any other Republican would have beaten Hillary, if you want to look at it that way.

This isn't about the election.  It'd be great if Trump supporters would move on.  Focus on what's happening now.

20 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Now THIS we agree on. That is certainly how I felt. However, now that he is in office, I am willing to give him a chance. I have been happy with the way that he has softened some of his positions and like some of the things that he intends to do.

 

I find the people who just want revenge -  because he proved them wrong - and want nothing more than to delegitimize his presidency,  sickening. They attack absolutely eveything that he says and does and are not sincere about their reasons for doing it. Their problem is that they have falsely cried wolf so often that no one is paying attention anymore.

 

Very much like what happened to Obama and one of the chief culprits was none other than the present President elect and his birther nonsense.

6 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

You start to make good arguments, then go downhill by blaming others for Trump's rants.  I don't see any who want revenge.  Just a reputable president.  One who doesn't lie.  And one who's focused on the US, not his businesses and his family.  It's all up to Trump as to how things play out from here.  Nobody to blame but himself.

 

What are you talking about? Who doesn't lie? You certainly can not be talking about the current president. His lies have certainly hurt the American people a lot more than Trump's.

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

What are you talking about? Who doesn't lie? You certainly can not be talking about the current president. His lies have certainly hurt the American people a lot more than Trump's.

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

Don't you get tired with deflections?  This has nothing to do with Obama! LOL  Topic is Trump.  Nazi practice comment.  Etc.

 

It's like Trump's PR team. Blame everybody else.

35 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

They attack absolutely eveything that he says and does and are not sincere about their reasons for doing it. 

 

But, isn't that exactly what you've done over the years with regard to Obama?

45 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

 

But, isn't that exactly what you've done over the years with regard to Obama?

 

Not at all. I voted for Obama his first election and soon realized it was a BIG mistake. I am very sincere about pointing out the things he does that I object to.

Edited January 13, 20179 yr by Ulysses G.

34 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Not at all. I voted for Obama his first election........

 

Ouch! Just fell off my chair.

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

What are you talking about? Who doesn't lie? You certainly can not be talking about the current president. His lies have certainly hurt the American people a lot more than Trump's.

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

 

 

 

Terrible lie.  The uninsured rate is at the lowest recorded level ever.  There are lots of  Republican governors don't want to get rid of the Medicaid portion. Matt Bevins, the tea party governor of Kentucky, ran against Obamacare but when he got in to office, found that somehow Kentucky couldn't do without it. And if Trump's lies haven't hurt as many people as the President, that's only because he wasn't in any position to do so. That said, the fraudster did what he could to hurt others so he could profit. Now he's got the chance to do damage on a worldwide scale.

40 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Not at all. I voted for Obama his first election and soon realized it was a BIG mistake. I am very sincere about pointing out the things he does that I object to.

We see a lot of this kind of nonsense on Thaivisa Where someone claims such and such about himself or hersefl ith no way of corroborating whether it's truthful or not.  

7 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

He had a poor opponent and a superior strategy. He WON an election that was considered unwinnable and that is what matters.

Finally, you concede that Trump did collaborate with the Russians. After all, the key to his winning was the hacking of the DNC.  So, if his strategy is to be given credit, that must have been part of it. Also, James Comey last minute bombshell which turned out to be a dud as regards facts but did its damage nonetheless.

I don't think the facts warrant such a conclusion yet. But who knows, maybe I'll soon be concurring with you if more info comes out.

Edited January 13, 20179 yr by ilostmypassword

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

We see a lot of this kind of nonsense on Thaivisa Where someone claims such and such about himself or hersefl ith no way of corroborating whether it's truthful or not.  

 

I believe him.

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

Finally, you concede that Trump did collaborate with the Russians. After all, the key to his winning was the hacking of the DNC.  So, if his strategy is to be given credit, that must have been part of it. Also, James Comey last minute bombshell which turned out to be a dud as regards facts but did its damage nonetheless.

 

I don't believe that for a minute. Trump won because he tapped into the anger of ordinary working class people that had been told that the US was doing fine economically, yet, they were on their knees due to job losses and zero wage growth. An anger that the Democratic party didn't even know existed.

2 minutes ago, KarenBravo said:

 

I believe him.

 

The old timers on TV know it is true - kind of embarrassing though.

5 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Finally, you concede that Trump did collaborate with the Russians. After all, the key to his winning was the hacking of the DNC.  So, if his strategy is to be given credit, that must have been part of it. Also, James Comey last minute bombshell which turned out to be a dud as regards facts but did its damage nonetheless.

 

Putting words in my mouth much? I never said any of that.

2 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Putting words in my mouth much? I never said any of that.

But you did say Trump had a superior strategy.  And that's why he won. If that's the case, then the Russian Hackers and James Comeys bombshell must have been part of it.  Or maybe is it the case that Trump's strategy wasn't so brilliant?