President Donald J. Trump

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
User avatar
Deebank
Resonator
Posts: 24071
Joined: 10 Oct 2003, 13:47
Location: Insanity filled foxhole

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Deebank » 06 Feb 2020, 10:03

Powehi wrote:While you can see where she was coming from, Pelosi really should have held her fire. The orange-faced buffoon's key supporters willl be lapping up her illl-advised ripping up of the SotU speech in the flyover states.


You reckon that will make any difference?

As an ignorant outsider I would say that being let off scot free for corruption on a global scale by your party despite being guilty as hell is likely to persuade more swing voters away from the Trump cause than a bit of (deserved) petulance would get them on board.

However you should never underestimate the stupidity of people - to misquote PT Barnum - and I would think that most people have known where they stand on Trump for some time now and this will make very little difference. :?
I've been talking about writing a book - 25 years of TEFL - for a few years now. I've got it in me.

Paid anghofio fod dy galon yn y chwyldro

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 28800
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby toomanyhatz » 06 Feb 2020, 16:13

Pelosi is a master of the burn that follows protocol. There is no senate rule against what she did.

I applaud her for doing it yet again.
Jimbo wrote:I need you to back up this claim.


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020? 2021?

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 39531
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: HAIL, ATLANTA!

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Count Machuki » 06 Feb 2020, 16:42

toomanyhatz wrote:Pelosi is a master of the burn that follows protocol. There is no senate rule against what she did.

I applaud her for doing it yet again.


RWD is very upset about it. Apparently decorum suddenly matters.

:roll:
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

Sam Stone
Posts: 2124
Joined: 25 Aug 2016, 17:12

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Sam Stone » 06 Feb 2020, 16:53

Deebank wrote:
Powehi wrote:While you can see where she was coming from, Pelosi really should have held her fire. The orange-faced buffoon's key supporters willl be lapping up her illl-advised ripping up of the SotU speech in the flyover states.


You reckon that will make any difference?

As an ignorant outsider I would say that being let off scot free for corruption on a global scale by your party despite being guilty as hell is likely to persuade more swing voters away from the Trump cause than a bit of (deserved) petulance would get them on board.

However you should never underestimate the stupidity of people - to misquote PT Barnum - and I would think that most people have known where they stand on Trump for some time now and this will make very little difference. :?


Wasn't talking about swing voters, I was talking about the millions of disenchanted Americans who voted Trump in in 2016 and who now constitute the bulk of his currently 49% approval rating.

Sam Stone
Posts: 2124
Joined: 25 Aug 2016, 17:12

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Sam Stone » 06 Feb 2020, 16:56

toomanyhatz wrote:Pelosi is a master of the burn that follows protocol. There is no senate rule against what she did.

I applaud her for doing it yet again.


Never said there was, just that she's foolishly made a rod with which Orangey will keep beasting on the Dems' back between now and Nov.

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 28800
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby toomanyhatz » 06 Feb 2020, 19:03

Powehi wrote:
toomanyhatz wrote:Pelosi is a master of the burn that follows protocol. There is no senate rule against what she did.

I applaud her for doing it yet again.


Never said there was, just that she's foolishly made a rod with which Orangey will keep beasting on the Dems' back between now and Nov.


It wasn't foolish, and the rod was already there, made of whole cloth.

Whether something is true or not matters not at all to the oaf or his supporters. Might as well impose some truth on it.
Jimbo wrote:I need you to back up this claim.


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020? 2021?

Jimbo
Dribbling idiot airhead
Posts: 18043
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 06 Feb 2020, 20:37

Hooray for Nancy applauding and springing from her chair when the orange asshole paid respect to the fake president of Venezuela.
kath wrote: *which is the real reason he can fucque off and rot for the rest of time.

Jimbo wrote: So Kath, put on your puka love beads ... Then go fuque yourself.

User avatar
Hepcat
Posts: 2438
Joined: 30 Aug 2010, 21:50
Location: Toronto

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Hepcat » 12 Feb 2020, 04:17

Jimbo wrote:No, on BCB I am alone. I have been staggered by that since 9/11 and now with Russia-gate and even now-er, Ukrainegate. Yes, BCB is a small pond but usually if you see one carp there's another one or two somewhere near by. But on BCB, noooooo.

No matter, we are just jousting with words here and I think I am getting better and better at it. Not good enough to get another BCBer on my side but someday I will. :D


I clearly recall that you were one of the pricks that wanted me banned. And now you perceive that you're "alone". Well I call that poetic justice. So fuck you, Jimbo.
Image

"That government governs best that governs least."

User avatar
Dr. Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 44115
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Dr. Baron » 27 Feb 2020, 04:56

So is it just me or is President Trump setting up Vice President Pence for a big time fall ...
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.
GoogaMooga wrote:It's a film I have waited 39 years to see. Now I have the chance, but I may just crap out.

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 2447
Joined: 02 Jun 2008, 12:43

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Rorschach » 27 Feb 2020, 11:26

Still Baron wrote:So is it just me or is President Trump setting up Vice President Pence for a big time fall ...


Ooh, interesting. I have no idea why you think that. Do tell.
Bugger off.

User avatar
Dr. Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 44115
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Dr. Baron » 27 Feb 2020, 14:34

Rorschach wrote:
Still Baron wrote:So is it just me or is President Trump setting up Vice President Pence for a big time fall ...


Ooh, interesting. I have no idea why you think that. Do tell.


Of all the aspects of governing, this is one a president can have most unfettered involvement in and one that President Trump is least interested in dealing with. His administration is not well poised to deal with this, given his neglect of public health appointments, the CDC, and his general antipathy.

It appears possible, and maybe probable, that the spread of this will cause at least widespread disruption in American lives. Unless they can somehow prevent its spread into the US (don’t think they can) then it’s gonna look bad unless it just fizzles out with no drama. Based on the budget cuts and the neglect of the CDC, the Trump Administration will be the obvious (and rightful) target of the media. Trump can then blame Pence, deflecting blame from himself. It’s what he does. As I see it, Pence can’t win (unless he has some sort of ... viral moment of heroism or empathy or some such). I think Trump would happily drop him in the hot grease. He’s served his purpose.
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.
GoogaMooga wrote:It's a film I have waited 39 years to see. Now I have the chance, but I may just crap out.

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 2447
Joined: 02 Jun 2008, 12:43

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Rorschach » 27 Feb 2020, 14:44

Still Baron wrote:
Of all the aspects of governing, this is one a president can have most unfettered involvement in and one that President Trump is least interested in dealing with. His administration is not well poised to deal with this, given his neglect of public health appointments, the CDC, and his general antipathy.

It appears possible, and maybe probable, that the spread of this will cause at least widespread disruption in American lives. Unless they can somehow prevent its spread into the US (don’t think they can) then it’s gonna look bad unless it just fizzles out with no drama. Based on the budget cuts and the neglect of the CDC, the Trump Administration will be the obvious (and rightful) target of the media. Trump can then blame Pence, deflecting blame from himself. It’s what he does. As I see it, Pence can’t win (unless he has some sort of ... viral moment of heroism or empathy or some such). I think Trump would happily drop him in the hot grease. He’s served his purpose.


Thanks for that. I hadn't realised that Pence had been made Plague Tsar. Just saw the story now. The details you've written make it all clear.
Bugger off.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 69071
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Diamond Dog » 27 Feb 2020, 17:11

Image
I have put the ignorant, inflammatory bore on ignore.

User avatar
harvey k-tel
Long Player
Posts: 40707
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 23:20
Location: 1220 on your AM dial

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby harvey k-tel » 27 Feb 2020, 18:46

Don't worry, I heard Liberty University is giving Pence an honorary doctorate in Epidemiology so everything's going to be fine.
If you've got nothing to do, don't do it here.

Six String
Posts: 21017
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Six String » 27 Feb 2020, 18:55

Diamond Dog wrote:Image


We need not worry. Pence is very strong at leading prayer. :roll:

User avatar
Dr. Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 44115
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Dr. Baron » 27 Feb 2020, 19:10

Holy shit a superdelegate showdown would be such a clusterfuck. All the Bernie Bros would go bananas and the Dems would be fucked for a good long while.

The NYT wrote:WASHINGTON — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer, the minority leader, hear constant warnings from allies about congressional losses in November if the party nominates Bernie Sanders for president. Democratic House members share their Sanders fears on text-messaging chains. Bill Clinton, in calls with old friends, vents about the party getting wiped out in the general election.

And officials in the national and state parties are increasingly anxious about splintered primaries on Super Tuesday and beyond, where the liberal Mr. Sanders edges out moderate candidates who collectively win more votes.

Dozens of interviews with Democratic establishment leaders this week show that they are not just worried about Mr. Sanders’s candidacy, but are also willing to risk intraparty damage to stop his nomination at the national convention in July if they get the chance. Since Mr. Sanders’s victory in Nevada’s caucuses on Saturday, The Times has interviewed 93 party officials — all of them superdelegates, who could have a say on the nominee at the convention — and found overwhelming opposition to handing the Vermont senator the nomination if he arrived with the most delegates but fell short of a majority.


BUT, See ...

The NYT wrote:The argument of Mr. Sanders and his allies — that a plurality of delegates should be sufficient to clinch the nomination — is a different standard than the one laid out in party rules that his team helped draft two years ago. It’s also a reversal of their stance in 2016, when Mr. Sanders encouraged superdelegates to support him over Mrs. Clinton, who secured the majority of pledged delegates.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/us/p ... gates.html
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.
GoogaMooga wrote:It's a film I have waited 39 years to see. Now I have the chance, but I may just crap out.

Jimbo
Dribbling idiot airhead
Posts: 18043
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 27 Feb 2020, 20:27

Still Baron wrote:
NYT - The argument of Mr. Sanders and his allies — that a plurality of delegates should be sufficient to clinch the nomination — is a different standard than the one laid out in party rules that his team helped draft two years ago.



Lying New York Times. "Helped draft" my ass. Just reminded that Bernie fought against having any superdelegates at all and reluctantly accepted their role in a compromise.

Crystal - "They would rather lose to Donald Trump ... than let Bernie win."

kath wrote: *which is the real reason he can fucque off and rot for the rest of time.

Jimbo wrote: So Kath, put on your puka love beads ... Then go fuque yourself.

User avatar
Dr. Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 44115
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Dr. Baron » 27 Feb 2020, 23:53

Jimbo wrote:
Still Baron wrote:
NYT - The argument of Mr. Sanders and his allies — that a plurality of delegates should be sufficient to clinch the nomination — is a different standard than the one laid out in party rules that his team helped draft two years ago.



Lying New York Times. "Helped draft" my ass. Just reminded that Bernie fought against having any superdelegates at all and reluctantly accepted their role in a compromise.


In what regard is the NYT lying? Was he actually for a rule holding that the nominee with the plurality of delegates (rather than a majority) gets the nomination? If so, what happened? Did his team not take part in drafting the rules?

Jimbo wrote:Crystal - "They would rather lose to Donald Trump ... than let Bernie win."



That's 10 minutes I'll never get back. The usual litany of false premises (or, in Jimbo speak, lies) followed by desired conclusions.
Is Elizabeth Warren really a hypocrite because she has been against superdelegates and is now running in a race in which she and the other candidates are bound by rules that include them? It's a bit like attacking someone as a hypocrite for running their campaign to maximize electoral college votes rather than a popular vote when they have criticized the electoral college system in the past

Would the democratic bigwigs rather lose the election than see Bernie be the nominee? I think what is much closer to the truth (and is borne out by the story) is that the democratic bigwigs are worried that Bernie as the nominee will lose. That's why most of them don't want him. To be clear, I think it would be a very foolish move to bust a superdelegate heavy move if he has something close to a majority. Finally, Krystal's conspiracy theory about leaders of left wing PACs (and the like) pulling for another Trump term so they can carry on raising money is remarkably silly. Are there some very cynical, unscrupulous political operatives out there? For sure. But I rather suspect that the people setting up and running left wing action committees and PACs and whatever else do so because they think that the Republican Party and the Trump Adnimistration are existential threats to their entire worldview. C'mon, man. What a load of amateurish, addled nonsense.

Here endeth my seasonal response to Jimbo. Talk again in late spring, old chap.
Quaco wrote:Are you fucking high?
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.
GoogaMooga wrote:It's a film I have waited 39 years to see. Now I have the chance, but I may just crap out.

Jimbo
Dribbling idiot airhead
Posts: 18043
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 28 Feb 2020, 02:46

Still Baron wrote:
Jimbo wrote:
Still Baron wrote:
NYT - The argument of Mr. Sanders and his allies — that a plurality of delegates should be sufficient to clinch the nomination — is a different standard than the one laid out in party rules that his team helped draft two years ago.



Lying New York Times. "Helped draft" my ass. Just reminded that Bernie fought against having any superdelegates at all and reluctantly accepted their role in a compromise.


In what regard is the NYT lying? Was he actually for a rule holding that the nominee with the plurality of delegates (rather than a majority) gets the nomination? If so, what happened? Did his team not take part in drafting the rules?

Jimbo wrote:Crystal - "They would rather lose to Donald Trump ... than let Bernie win."



That's 10 minutes I'll never get back. The usual litany of false premises (or, in Jimbo speak, lies) followed by desired conclusions.
Is Elizabeth Warren really a hypocrite because she has been against superdelegates and is now running in a race in which she and the other candidates are bound by rules that include them? It's a bit like attacking someone as a hypocrite for running their campaign to maximize electoral college votes rather than a popular vote when they have criticized the electoral college system in the past

Would the democratic bigwigs rather lose the election than see Bernie be the nominee? I think what is much closer to the truth (and is borne out by the story) is that the democratic bigwigs are worried that Bernie as the nominee will lose. That's why most of them don't want him. To be clear, I think it would be a very foolish move to bust a superdelegate heavy move if he has something close to a majority. Finally, Krystal's conspiracy theory about leaders of left wing PACs (and the like) pulling for another Trump term so they can carry on raising money is remarkably silly. Are there some very cynical, unscrupulous political operatives out there? For sure. But I rather suspect that the people setting up and running left wing action committees and PACs and whatever else do so because they think that the Republican Party and the Trump Adnimistration are existential threats to their entire worldview. C'mon, man. What a load of amateurish, addled nonsense.

Here endeth my seasonal response to Jimbo. Talk again in late spring, old chap.


The Times in this case is lying by omitting the truth of why Bernie, after a fight to do away with superdelegates altogether lost but did manage to craft a compromise which lessened the power of the superdelegates. The Times and you says like Pee Wee Herman might, "You agreed to superdelegates no backsies!"

And you think that all the interviewed superdelegates worry that Bernie is so weak he will lose to Trump rather than in Krystal's opinion that they'd rather have Trump again? Too cynical for ya? First of all, their job to not to pick whom they think will win and secondly, their jobs, their sinecures, rather, are in jeopardy if Bernie wins. Trump wins they're fine for another four years of doing nothing and getting paid. Think Biden or even Warren would try and shake up the party like Bernie might? No, he may be the people's choice but the party fucking hates him. News flash! THEY HATE SOCIALISTS. You pretend to think that this is just how business is done, how the sausage is made but no, this is what happens when power is threatened. The superdelegates are their last hope.
kath wrote: *which is the real reason he can fucque off and rot for the rest of time.

Jimbo wrote: So Kath, put on your puka love beads ... Then go fuque yourself.

Sam Stone
Posts: 2124
Joined: 25 Aug 2016, 17:12

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Sam Stone » 10 Mar 2020, 11:33

“If the Dow Joans (sic) ever falls more than 1,000 points in a single day, the sitting president should be loaded into a very big cannon and shot into the sun at TREMENDOUS SPEED. No excuses.”
Donald J. Trump, February 25, 2015.

Yesterday, the Dow fell more than 2,000 points.

Anyone know where we need to meet up to wave the Donald off?