Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
pete wrote:Well maybe it will allow us to put in place legislation to better deal with the terrorists we have living here. This is a bad thing because...?
Daran wrote:AbstractPoetic,
I understand your concerns. I'd truly be more concerned about a GOP controlled congress. Trump isn't a far right guy, in fact, he's probably more left than Hillary. However, the support base that they each pander to needs to see these hard right or left views in order to garner support. I don't disagree with Hillary saying that you have to have differing public and private views. The running of the world's biggest superpower is more complicated than most can comprehend.
Trump isn't the devil you make him out to be. Listen to many of his past interviews, he's very leftist on most of social views. On a state level, I'd be more concerned with right wing politicians enacting anti-progressive policies.
He isn't a warmonger, he isn't beholden to wall street and powerful lobbyist. He's perhaps the best thing to ever happen to the GOP.
That said, he does have to follow and enact some right wing policies (and will probably be done on a state level), so things will get tougher for LGBT, women's right to choose, religious freedoms (when it comes to Islam) and immigration.
Trump is a political shake-up. I would have preferred Bernie, but Trump is probably going too far exceed your expectations.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Smh @ ppl who deny climate change
The scientific method of validating or invalidating a theory requires proofs.
Where iz the proof?
AbstractPoetic wrote:- Intentionally killing civilians (he suggested that we kill the family members of ISIS/terrorists on purpose)
--Ripping up the Iran Deal
--Denying climate change
--Promoting torture
--Blatant bigotry
...this is what the citizens and world have to look forward to.
I think a lot of people (including, Jill Stein) had good reason to think he was legitimately medically and mentally crazy/insane. He's a sick human being - in more than one way. It's truly scary having to think what could happen each and every day with a man like that in charge of the United States.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:So social justice warriors on one side and redneck hillbillies on the other?
Natural News? Seriously?Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Smh @ ppl who deny climate change
The scientific method of validating or invalidating a theory requires proofs.
Where iz the proof?
http://www.naturalnews.com/055151_globa ... icism.html
AbstractPoetic wrote:Daran wrote:AbstractPoetic,
I understand your concerns. I'd truly be more concerned about a GOP controlled congress. Trump isn't a far right guy, in fact, he's probably more left than Hillary. However, the support base that they each pander to needs to see these hard right or left views in order to garner support. I don't disagree with Hillary saying that you have to have differing public and private views. The running of the world's biggest superpower is more complicated than most can comprehend.
Trump isn't the devil you make him out to be. Listen to many of his past interviews, he's very leftist on most of social views. On a state level, I'd be more concerned with right wing politicians enacting anti-progressive policies.
He isn't a warmonger, he isn't beholden to wall street and powerful lobbyist. He's perhaps the best thing to ever happen to the GOP.
That said, he does have to follow and enact some right wing policies (and will probably be done on a state level), so things will get tougher for LGBT, women's right to choose, religious freedoms (when it comes to Islam) and immigration.
Trump is a political shake-up. I would have preferred Bernie, but Trump is probably going too far exceed your expectations.
You can't be serious. Is it very leftist to require all Muslim-Americans to be registered on a public registry?
This is separate from ridding proper health insurance for millions of sick poor Americans with no contingency plan in place on what replaces it.
Not to mention a "yyuuuuggeeee" plan to build America's infrastructure to help employ millions of Americans but no detail on HOW we're funding it.
Dark times are ahead.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Natural News? Seriously?Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Smh @ ppl who deny climate change
The scientific method of validating or invalidating a theory requires proofs.
Where iz the proof?
http://www.naturalnews.com/055151_globa ... icism.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_News
I thought you were in support of the scientific method?
EFFECTIC DESIGNS wrote:I think one of the problems with the spending of billions on climate change is the fact that there is simply too much corruption and lies in it. I don't think people deny climate change is real what is really going on is that people are looking to get rich off America and the money is going to get thief out asusual while China does not give a rats ass and will burn their coal and what have you regardless, this was the point Trump was making.
Daran wrote:I see everything flew straight over your head. Despite what Trump has said he's not actually going to enact those changes. He will do some, but he's not stupid, and as I said, he campaigned as a hard right politician but in reality he's quite left. Watch pre 2012 interviews, he's quite level headed. I for one don't believe he's going to be as nearly as anti progressive as your alarmist think.
Calm down, it's going to be alright. I honestly would have been worried about Hillary coming into power. Social views aside, she's a dishonest, warmonger and that caters to wall street. Why would any lefty want her in power?
AbstractPoetic wrote:bluesclues wrote:Abstractpoetic can i ask yu a question? If it were donald trump on the democrat ticket and hillary on the republican ticket... who would you vote for?
The candidate with policy ideas that do not reflect or support hate, xenophobia and misogyny.
AbstractPoetic wrote:OH, that's right - Trinidad and Tobago is on the list of countries that the United States considers harboring terrorists.
Immigration changes in 3..2..1....
Daran wrote:AbstractPoetic wrote:Daran wrote:AbstractPoetic,
I understand your concerns. I'd truly be more concerned about a GOP controlled congress. Trump isn't a far right guy, in fact, he's probably more left than Hillary. However, the support base that they each pander to needs to see these hard right or left views in order to garner support. I don't disagree with Hillary saying that you have to have differing public and private views. The running of the world's biggest superpower is more complicated than most can comprehend.
Trump isn't the devil you make him out to be. Listen to many of his past interviews, he's very leftist on most of social views. On a state level, I'd be more concerned with right wing politicians enacting anti-progressive policies.
He isn't a warmonger, he isn't beholden to wall street and powerful lobbyist. He's perhaps the best thing to ever happen to the GOP.
That said, he does have to follow and enact some right wing policies (and will probably be done on a state level), so things will get tougher for LGBT, women's right to choose, religious freedoms (when it comes to Islam) and immigration.
Trump is a political shake-up. I would have preferred Bernie, but Trump is probably going too far exceed your expectations.
You can't be serious. Is it very leftist to require all Muslim-Americans to be registered on a public registry?
This is separate from ridding proper health insurance for millions of sick poor Americans with no contingency plan in place on what replaces it.
Not to mention a "yyuuuuggeeee" plan to build America's infrastructure to help employ millions of Americans but no detail on HOW we're funding it.
Dark times are ahead.
I see everything flew straight over your head. Despite what Trump has said he's not actually going to enact those changes. He will do some, but he's not stupid, and as I said, he campaigned as a hard right politician but in reality he's quite left. Watch pre 2012 interviews, he's quite level headed. I for one don't believe he's going to be as nearly as anti progressive as your alarmist think.
Calm down, it's going to be alright. I honestly would have been worried about Hillary coming into power. Social views aside, she's a dishonest, warmonger and that caters to wall street. Why would any lefty want her in power?
because those 30,000 may not actually exist or may not be qualified, as with many other things Natural News states.Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Natural News? Seriously?Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Smh @ ppl who deny climate change
The scientific method of validating or invalidating a theory requires proofs.
Where iz the proof?
http://www.naturalnews.com/055151_globa ... icism.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_News
I thought you were in support of the scientific method?
Natural news has cited 30,000+ scientists who believe that do not believe the global warming theory.
They disagree with the Big Climate lobby 4 various reasons.
How iz that not science? How iz that not the scientific method?
bluesclues wrote:AbstractPoetic wrote:bluesclues wrote:Abstractpoetic can i ask yu a question? If it were donald trump on the democrat ticket and hillary on the republican ticket... who would you vote for?
The candidate with policy ideas that do not reflect or support hate, xenophobia and misogyny.
And this person was hillary?
cherrypopper wrote:We have a shield and God is a trini ...
Take that climate change! !!
Trini sheild "activate".
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:because those 30,000 may not actually exist or may not be qualified, as with many other things Natural News states.Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Natural News? Seriously?Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/Miktay wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Smh @ ppl who deny climate change
The scientific method of validating or invalidating a theory requires proofs.
Where iz the proof?
http://www.naturalnews.com/055151_globa ... icism.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_News
I thought you were in support of the scientific method?
Natural news has cited 30,000+ scientists who believe that do not believe the global warming theory.
They disagree with the Big Climate lobby 4 various reasons.
How iz that not science? How iz that not the scientific method?
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:a video from May 2016
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], pugboy and 42 guests