Trump 2016

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

You know it's 2017 right? Last time I checked, the decision to have kids and start a family is made by 2 people, not just women. You know fathers are responsible for raising children too right? You know that declaring that women choose to start families over focusing on work is incredibly unfair to women that choose to work over starting a family....

Oh who am I kidding, no you don't.

---

I have traveled the world and lived in many states. One was Washington State where I met a few stay at home dad's. With very successful wives but it isn't the norm and come with many challenges. Men and Women are biologically different and emotionally different. That's just a scientific fact but I am sure you don't care about that...... CEO's are the best of the best in there field generally speaking. Taking any time off, including having a family puts you behind your competitors male or female. It's a complicated issue but this entire sexist mentality is just non sense in 2017. Don't get me wrong, I am sure their are a few sexist people out there. That base job to gender but it's not wide spread or a problem to me seeing it's a free country. I know of a few companies run by woman that only hire women. Thing is alot of people play the gender card as a excuse, same goes for the race card or Religion card. It's human nature to make excuses when faced with failure. One of my best friends came to me saying he couldn't get a job. No matter how hard he tried because he was black. Which I said was non sense their had to be another reason and he needed to check his credit score and criminal history. Sure enough come to find out someone at the court house accidentally put a felony on his record. Two months later after getting it off his record he started working three jobs with companies fighting over him. Moral of the story sins of the fathers shouldn't be put on the children. I believe most Americans have moved passed alot of the racism, sexist and bigotry of the past.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

I believe most Americans have moved passed alot of the racism, sexist and bigotry of the past.

---

You are the walking embodiment of not only why this is not true, but why people think it is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Women do not deserve any special treatment when it comes to getting jobs. It's like anything in life you choose your priorities and most of the time woman choose to have children. It's hard to become a CEO of a company while raising kids.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

I believe most Americans have moved passed alot of the racism, sexist and bigotry of the past.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

You are the walking embodiment of not only why this is not true, but why people think it is true.

---

I agree with Palem. How you can say you believe most Americans have moved beyond sexism and bigotry immediately following your statement that women don't deserve special treatment in getting jobs is beyond me. The fact that you even think it's about women getting special treatment in getting jobs shows that you have not moved beyond the sexism and bigotry of the past.

I hope you and your sexist mentality and all its ensuing nonsense are very happy together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goodlilwitch

I agree with Palem. How you can say you believe most Americans have moved beyond sexism and bigotry immediately following your statement that women don't deserve special treatment in getting jobs is beyond me. The fact that you even think it's about women getting special treatment in getting jobs shows that you have not moved beyond the sexism and bigotry of the past.

I hope you and your sexist mentality and all its ensuing nonsense are very happy together.

---

So you basically you want women to have more rights? A Man and women go into a job interview they should have the exact same chance to get the job. They should be treated the same also. There should be zero special treatment to either person. Most qualified gets the job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

A Man and women go into a job interview they should have the exact same chance to get the job.

---

I agree. Unfortunately that isn't the case.

The argument isn't that women need more rights than men. It's that women need more rights than they currently have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

So you basically you want women to have more rights? A Man and women go into a job interview they should have the exact same chance to get the job. They should be treated the same also. There should be zero special treatment to either person. Most qualified gets the job.

---

I absolutely want women to have more rights. You see it as "special treatment" but what it's actually called is "equal rights".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goodlilwitch

I absolutely want women to have more rights. You see it as "special treatment" but what it's actually called is "equal rights".

---

In America by law women have more rights in the work place. Biggest one is paternity leave, but there are other rules and regulations that protect women. If your talking about the wage myth. Any real study has come to the conclusion that once the baby boomers retire from there senior positions in companies that the wage gap will shrink and eventually disappear. But you can't expect companies to fire or replace these people with seniority. Also you can't expect a new employee to make the same amount as a employee who has been with the company for thirty years. Everything takes time 😉

The wage myth that you just confirmed actually does exist and will continue to shrink as old entitled men die off lol

You're complaining about protections that stop women from getting screwed because they "lost" the coin flip of gender. Just take a moment and reflect on that. No one should be discriminated against for anything that's not related to the job they're applying for. That's what all these laws and protections aim to stop, which is a notion you claim to support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

In America by law women have more rights in the work place. Biggest one is paternity leave, but there are other rules and regulations that protect women. If your talking about the wage myth. Any real study has come to the conclusion that once the baby boomers retire from there senior positions in companies that the wage gap will shrink and eventually disappear. But you can't expect companies to fire or replace these people with seniority. Also you can't expect a new employee to make the same amount as a employee who has been with the company for thirty years. Everything takes time 😉

---

1st off, not just women are entilted to paternity leave. Men can also get paternity leave.
2nd Paternity leave is a social responsibility. We as a society want parents to be with their child in the earliest stages of their development. Those 1st few weeks of having a baby is hell and we should support them any way we can.
No that is not going to close the wage gap. Your dreaming. The wage gap is more from blue collar jobs going to automation. Something like 80% of jobs lost is due to automation. So your left with owners and low wage 'service' jobs. The wage gap will just continue to grow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DonJuan

Its not surprising that things cannot and will not be civil in the US...as Trump, specifically Trump VOTERS, represent everything wrong with society.

In a world where technology is advancing at a much faster pace than the comprehension skills of any typical conservative living in the US today, the developing world benefits from an ideology of inclusion and equality. The fear that has been created for 8 years from the constant fear-mongering of the radical right wing of US politics has just brainwashed the common, predominately white, uninformed and misinformed US voter.

When they try to claim that the message that Democrats lost was primarily about bring jobs back to an middle-class economy...the US was ALREADY seeing the best job growth with protections and regulations set by Democrats...however as the elections has shown it was less about how well the economy really was and more about what Clinton was did. It was more about the lost of white privilege and entitlement...since Obama basically gave all poor people "food stamps and free health care on the back of working Americans."

I live in California (LA Suburb) and I know middle-class and lower class white republicans too...and throughout these last 8 years they do not care about poking fun at the racial stereotypes or using racial overtones to express their displeasure with their old president. handofthrawn can also drop the charade when it comes to turning a blind eye to these truths...im sure he knows more people where he lives that are more racist and less subtle about it.

I'm sure those same ppl were panicking when a woman was looking to win the White House since most middle-age white men (that are republican) really don't believe women are qualified to hold major positions of power. You can even draw a correlation from the business world: Fortune 500 companies have less female CEOs than male CEOs.

The GOP have done nothing to help the economy or the middle-class in the first 2 months while in power...in fact they tried removing a healthcare law that would have cut the benefits for middle-class people while trying to roll back taxes on higher income earners and more importantly...are beginning to remove tons of regulations that will only benefited the bottom lines of companies.

I wonder how the middle-class will prosper when Trump provokes and participates in another world war after trying to strong-arm every respectable world leader except Putin?

Civility is not an option with people who purposely choose to believe in half-truths that are catered to them specifically...and respect cannot be given to people who do not wish to educate themselves.

---

The BEST growth?!? WHERE was that growth when I was laid off in 2015? Where was that job growth when my husband was looking for work in his field and was only able to get a job with the city picking up garbage in city parks. Where was that growth when I was turned down for jobs simply because I do not speak SPANISH?!? I was only recently in the last few days been able to find work, AFTER Trump was elected President.

You may not like the man, having met him a couple of times at entrepreneur meet and greets, he is quite the abrasive man. Carries Purell with him everywhere and does not like to shake hands. (He comes off as Autistic and OCD, which do go hand in hand.)

Honestly, the only reason Obama ended up becoming President in the first place is because Republicans did the same thing as they did with Trump, "Can't be any worse than the other guy." (Honestly I felt Manchurian Candidate with him all 8 yrs)...

What people fail to remember is that no candidate for President tells the truth, they all tell half truths and they all tell half lies.

In regards to a Woman running for President, the consensus has been, any woman, NOT THAT WOMAN! If the Democratic party had run ANYONE ELSE besides CLINTON, they MIGHT have had a chance at another 4-8 years. Face it, the Democratic party messed up on this ticket. Honestly, if they had run Bernie, they would have won. (Even my husband and I who are devout Republican would have voted for Bernie Sanders.) There were Republicans that were PISSED because he was overlooked for the office.

Your seething towards Republicans (without you even saying you were from CA) was an instant tell for me that was MOST LIKELY the state you lived in. Too many Californians seem to forget that there are 50, yes FIFTY states within the US, not just your stolen (yes stolen, I'm from TX and learned CA history because it used to be all one parcel) from Mexico plot of land and that really cannot self sustain. Can you imagine what would happen to CA if NV, UT, NM and TX cut off your energy supplies? Your water supplies? California would not have a leg to stand on for quite some time, despite what they believe.

So, keep up the tantrums, all they are doing for me now is providing quite a bit of comedy relief because of over reaction and no knowledge of history the CA and that think that they know what the rest of the Union wants for them instead of listening to them. Not all of us want a nanny...Thanks, but no thanks.

...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greendragon2000

The BEST growth?!? WHERE was that growth when I was laid off in 2015? Where was that job growth when my husband was looking for work in his field and was only able to get a job with the city picking up garbage in city parks. Where was that growth when I was turned down for jobs simply because I do not speak SPANISH?!? I was only recently in the last few days been able to find work, AFTER Trump was elected President.

---

You understand that correlation does not imply causation right? The fact that you found work after Trump was elected doesn't mean that you found work because Trump was elected. Given how short into his term he is, I doubt Trump really deserves much credit to your employment unless you work in the coal industry or something. Likewise, just because it was a hard time for you, that doesn't mean it's been a hard time for everyone. You're free to research job growth rates if you want and I suggest you do it quickly. As quickly as our Internet rights are being stripped from us, such activities might quickly become a less-than-trivial task.

Quote:

---

What people fail to remember is that no candidate for President tells the truth, they all tell half truths and they all tell half lies.

---

And what you're failing to realize is that Trump doesn't tell half lies. He tells whole lies. And he does it far more frequently than any president that we have such information on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

You understand that correlation does not imply causation right? The fact that you found work after Trump was elected doesn't mean that you found work because Trump was elected. Given how short into his term he is, I doubt Trump really deserves much credit to your employment unless you work in the coal industry or something. Likewise, just because it was a hard time for you, that doesn't mean it's been a hard time for everyone. You're free to research job growth rates if you want and I suggest you do it quickly. As quickly as our Internet rights are being stripped from us, such activities might quickly become a less-than-trivial task.


And what you're failing to realize is that Trump doesn't tell half lies. He tells whole lies. And he does it far more frequently than any president that we have such information on.

---

Trump left the tpp trade deal, which saved many companies in America. One was the scrap steel industry. Tpp took the tariff off foreign steal coming into America. Dropped scrap metal from 250 dollars a ton to 40 dollars. People lost millions over night, companies folded because of Hillary Clinton and Obama. Anyways if all Trump accomplishes is redo nafta, remove stupid EPA regulations and gets us out of all dumb trade deals I will be happy. But I am sure he will fix healthcare, taxes and seal off the border. Yes company's are become alot more confident and comfortable under President Trump then Obama. I am preparing to hire more employees soon and I haven't hired in 10 years.

I'd hate to break it to you, but you probably weren't uncomfortable with Obama because of his impact on the economy. It probably had more to do with believing a false narrative that he was a Kenyan born, Muslim, terrorist that was establishing Sharia law across the US and systematically destroying the economy from the inside out for the glory of Allah.

All data I've seen suggests that Obama had a positive impact on the economy (at least as a whole, obviously different industries will grow and shrink with changing policy). Job growth was up. Unemployment was down. He bailed out the auto industry (which i disagreed with at the time) and saved potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs and had the bailout money paid back before he left office. If you want people to embellish your baseless "reality" where Obama was train wreck for the economy is suggest you join your Russian comrades on Breitbart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

I'd hate to break it to you, but you probably weren't uncomfortable with Obama because of his impact on the economy. It probably had more to do with believing a false narrative that he was a Kenyan born, Muslim, terrorist that was establishing Sharia law across the US and systematically destroying the economy from the inside out for the glory of Allah.

All data I've seen suggests that Obama had a positive impact on the economy (at least as a whole, obviously different industries will grow and shrink with changing policy). Job growth was up. Unemployment was down. He bailed out the auto industry (which i disagreed with at the time) and saved potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs and had the bailout money paid back before he left office. If you want people to embellish your baseless "reality" where Obama was train wreck for the economy is suggest you join your Russian comrades on Breitbart.

---

Nope it cost my business alot of money to stay compliant to all federal regulations. Obama passed so many regulations it would make your head spin if you owned a business. Plus it was constantly changing with all his executive orders. So instead of hiring people I was spending money on bull**** regulations. One of the reasons why I regretted voting for him the first time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

I'd hate to break it to you, but you probably weren't uncomfortable with Obama because of his impact on the economy. It probably had more to do with believing a false narrative that he was a Kenyan born, Muslim, terrorist that was establishing Sharia law across the US and systematically destroying the economy from the inside out for the glory of Allah.

All data I've seen suggests that Obama had a positive impact on the economy (at least as a whole, obviously different industries will grow and shrink with changing policy). Job growth was up. Unemployment was down. He bailed out the auto industry (which i disagreed with at the time) and saved potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs and had the bailout money paid back before he left office. If you want people to embellish your baseless "reality" where Obama was train wreck for the economy is suggest you join your Russian comrades on Breitbart.

---

Nope, seeing as my FIL and MIL had a thriving business until 2011 (AFTER Obama opened up the NAFTA floodgates) and had to shutter their business because of their contracts moving to Mexico, I do not like him. He had no positive impact on the economy, all he did was give the banks money that could have gone elsewhere. The too big to fail needed to fail. These banks need to be broken up and monitored every step of the way. No president will do that, however.

Unemployment was not down, (I used to be one of those ADP Data miners that the government uses. I know how it works.) The unemployment numbers do not include those that stopped looking, or ended up taking jobs making less than they did originally. They also do not take into account people that were forced to take on part time jobs to just make ends meet.

Sorry, taking one full time job and making it three part time jobs does not count as job growth.

Why the hell would someone taking a job that pays less than their previous job be considered unemployed? Having a lower paying job is 1,000,000x better than remaining unemployed unless you're in a situation where you're not financially dependent on future paychecks. Also, the decline in available workforce can easily be explained by more and more baby boomers reaching retirement and leaving the work force. That's a statistic that will continue to shrink regardless of who is in office until the baby boomers are no longer a relevant age group to report on. To claim that Obama had absolutely no positive impact on the economy is just such a stupidly narrow opinion that you should be embarrassed for yourself.

According to Bloomberg, Obama had a slightly positive impact on the economy. Nothing, great and nothing horrible. Shows a good break down of the pros and cons of his administration.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...cord-stacks-up

The New Yorker gave a pretty decent overview on the successes and failures of Obama's economy, and came to a similar conclusion of Bloomberg, saying "Looking at this record, most fair-minded people would surely give Obama a positive report card."

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-c...-an-assessment

(I'm not sure if the New Yorker has any significant bias, so I'll throw in another)According to CBS, "In dollars and cents terms, President Obama’s record parallels his mild campaign slogan eight years ago: solid but unspectacular."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/barack-o...y-a-mixed-bag/

Hell, even Fortune, who has been extremely critical of Obama's economy concedes he did some good things for the economy

http://fortune.com/2016/01/12/obama-economy-charts/


Or are you gonna tell me that your in-laws are more credible sources on economic impact of presidential policies?

...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greendragon2000

Nope, seeing as my FIL and MIL had a thriving business until 2011 (AFTER Obama opened up the NAFTA floodgates) and had to shutter their business because of their contracts moving to Mexico, I do not like him. He had no positive impact on the economy, all he did was give the banks money that could have gone elsewhere. The too big to fail needed to fail. These banks need to be broken up and monitored every step of the way. No president will do that, however.

Unemployment was not down, (I used to be one of those ADP Data miners that the government uses. I know how it works.) The unemployment numbers do not include those that stopped looking, or ended up taking jobs making less than they did originally. They also do not take into account people that were forced to take on part time jobs to just make ends meet.

Sorry, taking one full time job and making it three part time jobs does not count as job growth.

---

Wait a minute. The bank bailouts were enacted under Bush, not Obama. Obama bailed out the Auto industry and that saved millions of jobs.

...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brandonc204

Bush started the auto bailouts, Obama wrapped them up once he took office. It was a true bipartisan mess.

The bank bailouts were all G.W though. lol

---

True, but the Bush administration was simply writing them checks and asking nothing in return. Obama did the restructuring. Bush bailed them out and Obama fixed them.

Policy matters and you won't find hardly anyone that actually thought GW Bush did anything right. It lost the Republicans the house, Senate and President for his failures. Problem for Democrats is Trump's policies are rock solid and it terrifies them. Why they are on a mission to smear him on a non existing Russian connection. I mean he just attacked Syria in response to the chemical weapons attack. Keep up the good work Mr President.

There is a giant list of things that are terrifying people about Trump's policies, but the daft idea of them being "solid" is not on that list.

Keep the spin up comrade!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Policy matters and you won't find hardly anyone that actually thought GW Bush did anything right. It lost the Republicans the house, Senate and President for his failures. Problem for Democrats is Trump's policies are rock solid and it terrifies them. Why they are on a mission to smear him on a non existing Russian connection. I mean he just attacked Syria in response to the chemical weapons attack. Keep up the good work Mr President.

---

Trumps policies are 'rock solid'? Iol. Is that why the supreme court keeps knocking down his travel ban? Is that why he can get a replacement for Obama care passed? Is that why we are now going to pay for his wall? Is that why land owners on the border are saying we don't want a wall?
Yet when Obama bombed republicans complained.

That attack just cost us 50 million dollars in cruise missles alone... Yet we are gonna cut taxes. Where is all this cash for everything he has promised, plus another war now gonna come from?

I thought having better relations with Russia was a good thing in your opinion. Well, he just blew that one out of the water as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swirvin'Birds

Trumps policies are 'rock solid'? Iol. Is that why the supreme court keeps knocking down his travel ban? Is that why he can get a replacement for Obama care passed? Is that why we are now going to pay for his wall? Is that why land owners on the border are saying we don't want a wall?
Yet when Obama bombed republicans complained.

That attack just cost us 50 million dollars in cruise missles alone... Yet we are gonna cut taxes. Where is all this cash for everything he has promised, plus another war now gonna come from?

I thought having better relations with Russia was a good thing in your opinion. Well, he just blew that one out of the water as well.

---

1st. Supreme Court has not ruled on that yet. That was federal courts from liberal states that will probably be disbarred.

2nd. Obamacare took two years, Trump almost replaced it in two months but the bill needs some work.

3rd. Wall will be payed for by Mexican government. But it will take time and pressure on them to make them bend.

4th. Obama bombed no one on Assad regime inside Syria, he drew a red line and Assad crossed it. Obama did nothing. Lol

5th. We have so many missiles stock piled that 59 missiles isn't **** lol.

6th. Democrats are hypocrites to the core, is Trump a agent of Putin like they say or are you scared he is pissing them off? So confused at the stance of Democrats it seriously changes daily anymore. All Trump did was spank assad like a child putting him back in line. Unlike Obama who did well nothing about anything. ��

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

1st. Supreme Court has not ruled on that yet. That was federal courts from liberal states that will probably be disbarred.

---

Iirc, 2 of the 4 judges that ruled on the first ban were conservatives. Not sure about the 2nd ban.

Quote:

---

4th. Obama bombed no one inside Syria

---

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
OMFG
*deep breaths*
*wipes tear away*
Holy **** man, you have to warn people before you do something like that.

In 2016, Obama dropped 26,171 bombs. The majority of those bombs were dropped in Iraq and Syria. One of the biggest criticisms that Republicans had on Obama was that he was was too liberal in his use of bombings and getting involved in foreign issues.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...6-obama-legacy

Quote:

---

he drew a red line and Assad crossed it. Obama did nothing. Lol

---

They reached a diplomatic solution. Syria agreed to turn over and destroy their chemical weapons. He didn't do "nothing". He tried to stay out of yet another foreign crisis like every/most Republicans wanted him to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

1st. Supreme Court has not ruled on that yet. That was federal courts from liberal states that will probably be disbarred.

2nd. Obamacare took two years, Trump almost replaced it in two months but the bill needs some work.

3rd. Wall will be payed for by Mexican government. But it will take time and pressure on them to make them bend.

4th. Obama bombed no one inside Syria, he drew a red line and Assad crossed it. Obama did nothing. Lol

5th. We have so many missiles stock piled that 59 missiles isn't **** lol.

6th. Democrats are hypocrites to the core, is Trump a agent of Putin like they say or are you scared he is pissing them off? So confused at the stance of Democrats it seriously changes daily anymore. All Trump did was spank assad like a child putting him back in line. Unlike Obama who did well nothing about anything. ��

---

That's right. Trump has been threatening to take it to the Supreme court. Problem for Trump is this will likey change nothing as it will be either deadlocked in which case the lower court ruleing stands or it will not be taken up by the supreme court in which case the 9th circut decision stands. No one is going to be disbared and it stands almost no chance of being overturned.

The wall will not be paid for by Mexico. Even the POTUS has stopped using that line. He knows they won't and thats why that line isn't used anymore. It's complete B.S. fantasyland.

The republicans have had 8 years to get thier **** together to repeal and replace the ACA. Trump doesn't even want his name attached to it. He didn't and hasn't done ****. He's too busy being the most vacationy, golfy POTUS in U.S. presidental history.

Top republicans opposed striking Syria under Obama. Now that Trump has done it they praise the attack. Heck, we don't even have proof the Syrian government ordered the chemical attack. It makes no sense for Assad to do this and the only side that it benefits is the rebels and ISIS who Assad is fighting.

The U.S. military will ask for replacements. What, you think that was a freebie?

You mean a hypocrite like yourself that said Hillary was going to get us into a war with Russia and Trump would soothe relations which is a good thing and are now you are praising the attack and sticking it to Russia?
Trump is the biggest hypocrite of them all. Trump durring his campaign. " The U.S. cannot be the policeman of the world" Many examples to show it. Why do you not hate him for it?

He is Putins pet. Notice that we have no smart assed tweet attacks from Trump pointed at Putin and Russia.

I have a feeling if Putin has more dirt besides golden showers on Trump we are about to see it.

BTW: If you don't think Obama tried to do the same thing in 2013 you need to follow this link.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/09/0....html?referer=
Difference is he tried to do it the way a U.S. president is supposed to ask for a military intervention. It was even in response to a chemical attack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Wall will be payed for by Mexican government. But it will take time and pressure on them to make them bend.

---

The Mexican government has no reason to fund this wall. And stating that they will eventually "bend" is an exceedingly arrogant thing to say.

I do not think that American companies should use illegal immigrants for cheap labor. I think that doing such a thing reduces the amount of jobs that should be going to Americans who should get paid a fair amount for it. I think that hiring of illegals are bad for the economy and society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john21wall

I do not think that American companies should use illegal immigrants for cheap labor. I think that doing such a thing reduces the amount of jobs that should be going to Americans who should get paid a fair amount for it. I think that hiring of illegals are bad for the economy and society.

---

Well that's all fair and well, but would you be willing to accept the tripling, quadrupling or even quintupling of price in groceries that would come from that?
If you replace every single immigrant "slave" with a fairly paid American(but do note what "American" actually means, it includes all of South America and all of North America and stretches from Chile to Canada), If you'd pay US wages for every single of those that'd dramatically increase the price of the wares that those people produce because it's not like you'd see any real increase in productivity and they're going to pass the price increase off to the end customer.
It's either that or making US citizens work for the same slave wages that the immigrants do, and boy would that result in unions and strikes...