Trump Erupts After House Delivers Iran War Rebuke

19 hours ago, webfact said:

"The Democrats are fueled by Trump <removed>. They would rather have our Country fail than give me another, of many, victories," he wrote.

Referring to the four Republicans who supported the resolution, Trump added: "They're GRANDSTANDERS! They should be ashamed of themselves."

As above. And following the Supreme Court vote against the tariff issue:

Trump on Friday afternoon called the decision "deeply disappointing" and said he was ashamed of certain members of the court for not having the courage to do what was right for the country. He said he would move to restore tariffs through different avenues, including a temporary 10% global tariff.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/supreme-court-ruling-trump-tariffs-authority/4042018/

NB Seems DJT is ashamed of anyone who disagrees with him.

7 hours ago, thaibreaker said:

You had one in two terms not that long ago, in Obama. A fantastic, uniting president.

After that America has been going downwards fast, the hate between you guys is endless, and the result you see today with this lunatic, self-centred clown at the wheels, is so embarrassing to watch. He is firing up just more hate each day.

Do something, Americans. Get rid of this (for us) absolutely insane dictator, for the sake of both your own country, but also for the world. He's ruining that as well.

Clinton was teflon, O'B was slick. Oversaw military actions in Iraq, Afghanistan (inherited from Dubya), Syria, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Uganda. IOW, he was no peace president, either. He just did it under the radar. The most egregious was the murder of Bin Laden. He should have been arrested in brought to the US for trial. Not a conspiracy theorist but they dumped his body in the ocean so do we really know what happened?

I liked O'B. He was, after all, a Constitutional law professor. But none of his wars were overseen by Congress, either. He was, in no way, "hope and change" Still no hope and the only change was he is Black.

What Trump is missing is that Congress is giving him the perfect solution to end US participation in war on Iran. "Sorry, Bibi, Congress won't let me. I'm outta here. Do your worst."

6 hours ago, FolkGuitar said:

I am in full agreement with your comment.
Fortunately, many Americans are now waking up to the fact that trump has caused so many financial difficulties for the average family, cause international upheavals that we had no business getting involved with, and insulting allies and friends all over the world.
Had trump had been a Russian sleeper agent, he could not have planned and executed a more effective method of worldwide destruction to the United (no longer) States of America!

90% of that economic pain is because of a bloated military and contracts with US arms companies.

2 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

The American Political system is antiquated and dominated by the Electoral College which was established during the 1787 Constitutional Convention as a compromise between electing the president through a direct popular vote and letting Congress make the decision, I think America has moved on since then!

the other point is some Americans can not vote

Voting is a right that allows citizens to make their voices heard, but the reality is that as many as half of eligible voters in the US still don’t participate in the election process.

The US lags far behind most other developed countries when it comes to voter turnout. Only 55.7% of Americans voted in the 2016 presidential election, and even less of the population, 36.4%, voted in 2014, according to the Pew Research Center. 

People’s motivations for voting vary. They might believe voting is their civic duty and that their ballot has the power to make a difference. Others just want to fit in with their peers, or their anger about a certain issue drives them to the polls. 

The reasons people don’t vote are just as complex. While full voter participation helps maintain a fair and functioning democracy, everything from logistics to socioeconomic status can get in the way.

Voters need identification to vote in 36 states, which means the 21 million Americans who don’t have government-issued photo ID are at risk of missing out. Financial barriers, lack of access to transportation, and limited information can make it difficult for older people, people of color, and low-income people to obtain an ID. And this is going to be harder to get with the new bill being introduced

Former and current prisoners convicted of felonies are another group of people who are often disenfranchised during elections, especially if they are African American. Maine and Vermont are the only states that do not prohibit those convicted of felonies from voting, even when they are in prison.

The Electoral College system, a body of electors founded by the US constitution, also bars millions of residents who live in US territories — including Guam, the Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico — from voting in general elections, even though presidents’ decisions influence their lives.

I've only voted once in my life, not for anybody. I voted against Trump. Having somebody you believe in, to vote for, is the bedrock of the democratic process.

Part of the blame is on gerrymandered electoral districts. But the other is the two-party system. No party has to step up to the plate with a real choice.

I'll never bother to vote again. "If voting could change anything, it would be illegal." Emma Goldman.

4 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

I've only voted once in my life, not for anybody. I voted against Trump. Having somebody you believe in, to vote for, is the bedrock of the democratic process.

Part of the blame is on gerrymandered electoral districts. But the other is the two-party system. No party has to step up to the plate with a real choice.

I'll never bother to vote again. "If voting could change anything, it would be illegal." Emma Goldman.

I would have to agree with you ! The American two-party system is outdated in fact the whole American system is outdated ! i would think America has moved on since this was established A new and fair system should be established were ALL Americans can vote

It is your right to choose not to vote BUT you need to consider the Impact of Not voting

1. Loss of Voice and Representation

2. Undermining Democracy

3. Empowering Minority Interests

4. Increased Polarization

5. Civic Disengagement

6. Erosion of Public Trust

7. Impact on Policy and Funding

8. Historical Struggles for Voting Rights

While the decision to vote or not is personal, understanding the potential consequences of abstaining is essential. The negative impacts on personal representation, democratic health, and societal well-being are significant. Encouraging informed and engaged participation in elections remains vital for a robust and responsive democracy.

42 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

system should be established were ALL Americans can vote

All Americans over 18 can vote. Unless you are a felon.

1 hour ago, unblocktheplanet said:

90% of that economic pain is because of a bloated military and contracts with US arms companies.

How do you figure?

12 minutes ago, TedG said:

All Americans over 18 can vote. Unless you are a felon.

Utter Rubbish !!

Qver 21 million Americans lack ready access to documentary proof of citizenship therfore can not vote

Your right to vote is not affected by a criminal conviction in these states and territories

• Maine

• Vermont

• District of Columbia

• Puerto Rico

  The Electoral College process does not provide for residents of U.S. Territories (Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and the U.S. Minor Outlying Islands) to vote.

Just now, MikeandDow said:

Utter Rubbish !!

Qver 21 million Americans lack ready access to documentary proof of citizenship therfore can not vote

Your right to vote is not affected by a criminal conviction in these states and territories

• Maine

• Vermont

• District of Columbia

• Puerto Rico

  The Electoral College process does not provide for residents of U.S. Territories (Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and the U.S. Minor Outlying Islands) to vote.

So you have a source for this claim?

1 minute ago, MikeandDow said:

• The Electoral College process does not provide for residents of U.S. Territories (Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and the U.S. Minor Outlying Islands) to vote.

These are territories. Not states.

1 minute ago, TedG said:

These are territories. Not states.

Quote "All Americans over 18 can vote. Unless you are a felon." oh you want to change "ALL " and you best change Felons as well !

2 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

Quote "All Americans over 18 can vote. Unless you are a felon." oh you want to change "ALL " and you best change Felons as well !

Territories are not states.

6 minutes ago, TedG said:

So you have a source for this claim?

read the Save Act and your laws

1 minute ago, MikeandDow said:

read the Save Act and your laws

What about the Save Act?

1 minute ago, TedG said:

Territories are not states.

so !! you Stated ALL which is incorrect

Just now, MikeandDow said:

so !! you Stated ALL which is incorrect

Yes, they are not in states.

1 minute ago, TedG said:

What about the Save Act?

READ IT and it will tell you who can vote and who can not and why

Off topic troll posts removed

@TedG discuss the topic and not other posters or their nationality, this is the second time today you have had posts removed for this.

1 hour ago, MikeandDow said:

I would have to agree with you ! The American two-party system is outdated in fact the whole American system is outdated ! i would think America has moved on since this was established A new and fair system should be established were ALL Americans can vote

It is your right to choose not to vote BUT you need to consider the Impact of Not voting

1. Loss of Voice and Representation

2. Undermining Democracy

3. Empowering Minority Interests

4. Increased Polarization

5. Civic Disengagement

6. Erosion of Public Trust

7. Impact on Policy and Funding

8. Historical Struggles for Voting Rights

While the decision to vote or not is personal, understanding the potential consequences of abstaining is essential. The negative impacts on personal representation, democratic health, and societal well-being are significant. Encouraging informed and engaged participation in elections remains vital for a robust and responsive democracy.

As if we ever had a say, Mike!

1 hour ago, TedG said:

How do you figure?

1 hour ago, TedG said:

How do you figure?

Money spent on the military and arms are a direct theft from the American people. They may have been brainwashed to think they need the war machine. I like Ike!

10 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

All Americans share some systemic blame, regardless of how they individually voted in electing Trump or not, you Yanks are responsible for the state of the worlds economy now

anyone participating in—or opting out of—the American political and cultural landscape shares the collective responsibility for its outcomes. This includes eligible citizens who chose not to vote, thereby altering the election dynamics.

Nonsense as an individual who has allways been against trump and has recognized what he is from the get go.I’m not responsible just like any German person who was against Hitler wasn’t responsible for what that evil person did in the name of his nation.your cheep shots at decent Americans is getting pretty thin dude …….. how do you think it feels to see this abomination wreck my country?

2 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

As if we ever had a say, Mike!

Money spent on the military and arms are a direct theft from the American people. They may have been brainwashed to think they need the war machine. I like Ike!

This is very true !! i have just seen on You tube the homeless in the US its staggering ! for a first world country its is shameful.

9 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

As if we ever had a say, Mike!

Money spent on the military and arms are a direct theft from the American people. They may have been brainwashed to think they need the war machine. I like Ike!

The war machine kept the USSR from running over Europe. The war machine ended the third reich and imperial Japan.

14 minutes ago, Tug said:

Nonsense as an individual who has allways been against trump and has recognized what he is from the get go.I’m not responsible just like any German person who was against Hitler wasn’t responsible for what that evil person did in the name of his nation.your cheep shots at decent Americans is getting pretty thin dude …….. how do you think it feels to see this abomination wreck my country?

Sorry if you feel it is a cheap shot but i stand by what i posted

Donald Trump’s presidency did not occur in a vacuum. In a democracy, leadership is not merely the product of those who cast votes for a candidate, but the culmination of societal forces, historical inequities, and collective inaction.

While it is tempting to place blame solely on the individuals who supported Trump at the polls, the reality is far more complicated. By examining voter apathy, entrenched inequities, the modern media landscape, and outdated institutional structures, it becomes evident that each American plays some role in the broader public responsibility for enabling Trump’s rise, and for the subsequent damage wrought by his administration.

At the heart of any democracy lies a social contract. Citizens agree to remain informed, vote, and hold their leaders accountable. In return, they expect fair representation and a government that addresses the public’s needs.

Over the years, that unwritten pact has frayed. Millions of Americans did not vote in the 2016 election. Some absences were due to frustration with the political system, others out of a sense of futility, or more notably the fruition of years of disenfranchisement campaigns designed to keep voters from the polls.

The combination of widespread disengagement and disillusionment created a vacuum that allowed a smaller, more energized faction of the electorate to determine the country’s trajectory. That vacuum was not filled overnight.

Democratic engagement in the United States has been on a downward trend for decades, with midterm elections often drawing only a fraction of eligible voters. Community-level activism waned in many parts of the country, allowing local issues to fester unchecked.

By the time Trump began his campaign, he was able to tap into simmering resentments and cynicism about “the establishment.” For every American who saw through his rhetoric, there may have been a neighbor, coworker, or relative who — facing a lack of consistent information and feeling ignored by mainstream politics — opted to believe his promises.

Even those who recognized Trump’s shortcomings should bear some responsibility if they did not work hard enough to enfranchise the disenfranchised, or work to promote reforms that encourage fairer voting practices.

an awareness of how an entire society can enable such a presidency is essential to preventing its recurrence. Accountability can begin in everyday spaces.

The United States has long prided itself on having a stable democratic system, yet the Electoral College — a structure conceived centuries ago to protect the institution of slavery — allowed Trump to secure the presidency even though he lost the national popular vote.

Defenders of the system argue that it prevents less populous states from being overlooked, but critics contend it has become an outdated mechanism that fails to accurately represent the will of the people. The system allows for a minority of the population to have a disproportionate amount of power, upending the foundation of “majority” rule.

Fixing a problem requires identifying the problem, and Americans have shown their preference for putting bandaids on systemic wounds. Until Americans are willing to confront the darker truths about themselves and their institutions, progress will remain an illusion, and the cycle of harm will continue unchecked.

11 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

The United States has long prided itself on having a stable democratic system, yet the Electoral College — a structure conceived centuries ago to protect the institution of slavery — allowed Trump to secure the presidency even though he lost the national popular vote.

There is nothing wrong with the EC. How many Western countries elect their head of government via popular vote?

The mental image of Trump "erupting" is not making my day.

4 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

There is nothing wrong with the EC. How many Western countries elect their head of government via popular vote?

The only western countrys i know are that use a Presidential Systems are the United States and France

The Disadvantages of the EC are

By Undermines the popular vote: The winner of the national popular vote can lose the presidency, which violates the principle of "one person, one vote" and can lead to public disenfranchisement

Focuses on swing states: Campaigns tend to concentrate time, money, and policy promises on a few "swing" or "battlefield" states, effectively ignoring voters in reliably red or blue states.

Depresses voter turnout: Voters living in states where the outcome is predictable often feel their individual votes do not matter, lowering civic participation.

Disproportionate voting power: Weighs individual votes unequally because small states get a minimum of three electoral votes regardless of how low their population is

2 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

The only western countrys i know are that use a Presidential Systems are the United States and France

The Disadvantages of the EC are

By Undermines the popular vote: The winner of the national popular vote can lose the presidency, which violates the principle of "one person, one vote" and can lead to public disenfranchisement

Focuses on swing states: Campaigns tend to concentrate time, money, and policy promises on a few "swing" or "battlefield" states, effectively ignoring voters in reliably red or blue states.

Depresses voter turnout: Voters living in states where the outcome is predictable often feel their individual votes do not matter, lowering civic participation.

Disproportionate voting power: Weighs individual votes unequally because small states get a minimum of three electoral votes regardless of how low their population is

I can also use AI.

1. . Encourages broad geographic support

   • A candidate must win votes across multiple states, not just pile up large margins in a few densely populated areas.

   • Supporters argue this helps ensure presidents have support from different regions of the country.

2. Protects the role of states in a federal system

   • The United States is a federation of states, not a unitary country.

   • The Electoral College reflects that structure by giving states a formal role in choosing the president.

3. Prevents recounts from becoming nationwide

   • If the presidential election were decided by a single national popular vote, a very close election might require recounts across the entire country.

   • Under the Electoral College, recounts are usually limited to closely contested states.

4. Encourages coalition-building

   • Candidates often need to appeal to a variety of demographic, economic, and regional interests to assemble enough electoral votes to win.

5. Provides a clear winner in many elections

   • The winner-take-all system used by most states can produce an Electoral College margin that is larger than the popular-vote margin, making the outcome appear more decisive.

1 minute ago, Effective altruism said:

I can also use AI.

1. . Encourages broad geographic support

   • A candidate must win votes across multiple states, not just pile up large margins in a few densely populated areas.

   • Supporters argue this helps ensure presidents have support from different regions of the country.

2. Protects the role of states in a federal system

   • The United States is a federation of states, not a unitary country.

   • The Electoral College reflects that structure by giving states a formal role in choosing the president.

3. Prevents recounts from becoming nationwide

   • If the presidential election were decided by a single national popular vote, a very close election might require recounts across the entire country.

   • Under the Electoral College, recounts are usually limited to closely contested states.

4. Encourages coalition-building

   • Candidates often need to appeal to a variety of demographic, economic, and regional interests to assemble enough electoral votes to win.

5. Provides a clear winner in many elections

   • The winner-take-all system used by most states can produce an Electoral College margin that is larger than the popular-vote margin, making the outcome appear more decisive.

This has been debated for years ! what iam point out that it is a very old system 1787 i think America has moved on from this ! i agree each side has its good and bad but it is failing IMHO The EC put in Trump a woefully inadequate guy as was Biden, the system needs to change if America is to survive this period

1 minute ago, MikeandDow said:

This has been debated for years ! what iam point out that it is a very old system 1787 i think America has moved on from this ! i agree each side has its good and bad but it is failing IMHO The EC put in Trump a woefully inadequate guy as was Biden, the system needs to change if America is to survive this period

There has been a long-standing debate, and I am on the correct side of it.