US Elections 2016

[niblick1874]

http://pastebin.com/XjteDsMm

[Jambo-Jimbo]

I thought he might actually tone it down a bit but **** me!

 

He is so easy to wind up, and remember he'll shortly have the nuclear codes, what possibly could go wrong.

 

Are the CIA going to assassinate him on live tv, or will he die in his sleep due to natural causes, likely heart attack.

 

Or slip in the shower.

 

:'>

[El Salvador]

1/10 must try harder. Back to troll school.

No trolling here, I'm just not one of the anti trump sheep.

 

He will be better than Obuma, you can take that to the bank.

[Notts1874]

No trolling here, I'm just not one of the anti trump sheep.

 

He will be better than Obuma, you can take that to the bank.

Tell me why it was a great press conference then. To me it seemed like incoherent drivel.

 

Tell me what he told us about how he is going to replace the ACA??

[jake]

Yes. He never behaved in front of the press like Mr Trump did today. Nor did such sordid allegations get put against him.

 

Every speech, public engagement and his manner just was Presidential.

 

Whether you agree with the content or his attitude and policies as president is a seperate issue.

 

Oh thats ok then obamas excused for dropping bombs every single day for his two terms.

26,000 bombs in his last year.

 

But thats not sordid.

 

Up is down and down is up.

[jake]

26,000 bombs that 500 bombs per week 70 a day 5 bombs per hour.

 

5 bombs per hour were dropped in 2016 by the amazing President Obama.

[Notts1874]

Can you please source where you are getting this information please Jake.

 

Its not that I don't believe you but these claims hold more sway if you let us know where you are quoting from.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Oh thats ok then obamas excused for dropping bombs every single day for his two terms.

26,000 bombs in his last year.

 

But thats not sordid.

 

Up is down and down is up.

 

I'm not sure how the total count of bombs dropped brings the reputability of the Presidency down, but jake's number appears to be correct.

 

http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2017/01/05/bombs-dropped-in-2016/

 

The vast majority were dropped on Daesh in Iraq and Syria. 

[Notts1874]

Checked it and Jake's figure is correct.

 

So anybody know how Trump is going to replace ACA following that press conference??

[Janbo1874]

.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Are the CIA going to assassinate him on live tv, or will he die in his sleep due to natural causes, likely heart attack.

 

I realize you're joking, but if and when the knives really come out for Trump it will be obvious.  Unless something drastically changes before the inauguration, he'll be committing impeachable offenses as soon as he takes office with his business entanglements.  All that has to happen is that the House and the Senate GOP come to consensus that they're done with him and then get the conservative media will go along with them.  A few Senate investigations, articles of impeachment, a few well-placed wind up remarks to get him to explode on camera, and he'll be out of office and under indicted for criminal offenses so fast your head will spin.

 

The stuff this week about him being compromised by Russian intelligence looks a lot like his congressional GOP enemies laying the groundwork in case they decide he needs the push.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Checked it and Jake's figure is correct.

 

So anybody know how Trump is going to replace ACA following that press conference??

 

He doesn't know and doesn't care.  As with Obama, the big fight will be in Congress, then Trump will put his stamp on it.

[Maple Leaf]

26,000 bombs that 500 bombs per week 70 a day 5 bombs per hour.

 

5 bombs per hour were dropped in 2016 by the amazing President Obama.

He dropped the bombs on the enemies of the United States.

 

That's what the Commander-in-chief of the armed forces is supposed to do.  Not one member of the US government, in either party, has complained that he dropped too many bombs.  You seem to be alone on this issue.

[Notts1874]

He doesn't know and doesn't care. As with Obama, the big fight will be in Congress, then Trump will put his stamp on it.

I think there is little he actually cares about apart from himself, but is that different from many other office holders?

 

My original point was that his press conference was like a 16 year old blagging an oral exam very badly.

[Maple Leaf]

No trolling here, I'm just not one of the anti trump sheep.

 

He will be better than Obuma, you can take that to the bank.

I didn't take you long to run out of constructive comments and resort to insults.

 

Anyone who doesn't like Trump is a sheep?  Got it!

[Notts1874]

I didn't take you long to run out of constructive comments and resort to insults.

 

Anyone who doesn't like Trump is a sheep? Got it!

I will wait patiently for his constructive reasons as to why he thought it was a great press conference.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

I think there is little he actually cares about apart from himself, but is that different from many other office holders?

 

My original point was that his press conference was like a 16 year old blagging an oral exam very badly.

 

It was indeed a train wreck, but I think Trump's indifference to the details of governance is at levels we haven't seen since perhaps Harding, possibly before.  GWB was famous for leaving everything to his cabinet but Trump seems to be even less interested than him.

[jake]

He dropped the bombs on the enemies of the United States.

 

That's what the Commander-in-chief of the armed forces is supposed to do. Not one member of the US government, in either party, has complained that he dropped too many bombs. You seem to be alone on this issue.

 

If im alone on the issue of dropping bombs at the rate of 5 an hour then the world really has gone mad.

[jake]

Checked it and Jake's figure is correct.

 

So anybody know how Trump is going to replace ACA following that press conference??

 

Wow !

 

Checked jakes figures after implying he was lying and now dismiss dropping bombs as a side issue.

[Maple Leaf]

If im alone on the issue of dropping bombs at the rate of 5 an hour then the world really has gone mad.

You might be right about the world having gone mad.

 

I suspect that FDR, when he was Commander-in-Chief in the USA, dropped many more bombs per hour on America's enemies than Obama.  Maybe Lyndon B. Johnson too.

[Notts1874]

Wow !

 

Checked jakes figures after implying he was lying and now dismiss dropping bombs as a side issue.

Didn't imply anything just asked for your source. Somebody else pointed me in the right direction before you did.

 

As other posters have said Obama is the Commander in Chief and his primary duty is to protect Americans across the world.

 

Anyway can you shed any light on how Trump will replace ACA from today's press conference? This thread is about the 2016 election and its ramifications rather than Obama isn't it?

 

PS Best not to speak about yourself in 3rd person you sound a bit like Trump did today.

[Ulysses]

Here's a piece from Frankie Boyle about Pishy Diaper Guy and Guant?namo.

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/11/donald-trump-guantanamo?CMP=twt_gu

 

 

"Of course, who really knows with Trump? When you consider that he looks like the warning label on cocaine and talks like someone trying to recall the last moments of a car crash, few of his pronouncements can be taken at face value. Translating Trump is like trying to work out why a newborn baby is crying. He might well make good on his promise to restock Guant?namo, or we might get lucky and he?ll be too busy building a pyramid."

 

 

[jake]

I'm not sure how the total count of bombs dropped brings the reputability of the Presidency down, but jake's number appears to be correct.

 

http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2017/01/05/bombs-dropped-in-2016/

 

The vast majority were dropped on Daesh in Iraq and Syria.

 

My figures were not correct they were less than the figures released .

 

Also it does not include special forces operations which took place in 80%.

Thats right 80% of the worlds nations.

When figures were shown for one week ....one week there was 180 special forces missions.

 

 

Also authorised by obama the bugging of merkel.

Which he apologised for.

 

Of all the answers which surprised me yours did UA.

You're not sure why a president reputation should suffer for inflicting violence.

Are you aware of the numbers of civilians killed by drones alone.

Are you aware of the amount of children whose flesh and bones have been broken and burnt during his 8 years in which not one day passed without an act of violence.

 

Did you know under obamas presidency that more immigrants than ever before were deported.

 

 

How does any of that not deserve criticism.

 

I am baffled .

[Craig Gordons Gloves]

No trolling here, I'm just not one of the anti trump sheep.

 

He will be better than Obuma, you can take that to the bank.

 

I'm generally curious about why you think Trump will be better.  What's your reasoning on this? What also makes someone an anti-Trump sheep? 

 

I appreciate you said you're not trolling, so taking your comments at face value - i'd like to understand the above questions. 

[jake]

Didn't imply anything just asked for your source. Somebody else pointed me in the right direction before you did.

 

As other posters have said Obama is the Commander in Chief and his primary duty is to protect Americans across the world.

 

Anyway can you shed any light on how Trump will replace ACA from today's press conference? This thread is about the 2016 election and its ramifications rather than Obama isn't it?

 

PS Best not to speak about yourself in 3rd person you sound a bit like Trump did today.

 

Yes it is a thread about the US elections.

Which has included a variety of posts.

 

Nice little dig at the end which only shows me you resort as do others like you to snide insults.

Its quite obvious i was quoting your original snidey implication.

 

That seems to be the only argument from people like you .

Little insults .

[Notts1874]

Yes it is a thread about the US elections.

Which has included a variety of posts.

 

Nice little dig at the end which only shows me you resort as do others like you to snide insults.

Its quite obvious i was quoting your original snidey implication.

 

That seems to be the only argument from people like you .

Little insults .

Just offering a little advice. Not sure how that is snidey but hey ho.

 

What are your thoughts on Trump's idea to replace ACA that he outlined in detail today?

 

Obama has gone now Trump is the future. Give us your thoughts on the man Jake.

[jake]

Oh and by the way notts.

If you think that i think trump will be any better ive no idea.

The American Health Act is far from perfect and if as trump states he will replace it we can only judge that when its known what that will be.

 

In the meantime i wont be fawning over obama .

I wont be taking a side because i perceive it to be better when the actual facts say its not.

There is nothing to suggest a democrat or tepublican president will be any different.

We may as well live in a one party state in the uk or the us as there are no real discernible differences.

 

Hope this clears it up and perhaps you will learn to be less of a snide.

 

Just a little advice there sonny.

 

Nobody likes snidey folk .

Edited January 11, 2017 by jake

[jake]

Didn't imply anything just asked for your source. Somebody else pointed me in the right direction before you did.

 

As other posters have said Obama is the Commander in Chief and his primary duty is to protect Americans across the world.

 

Anyway can you shed any light on how Trump will replace ACA from today's press conference? This thread is about the 2016 election and its ramifications rather than Obama isn't it?

 

PS Best not to speak about yourself in 3rd person you sound a bit like Trump did today.

 

Can you clarify which american lives were at risk during obamas 8 years .

Apart from the nearly 3 thousand servicemen and women who lost their lives .

 

Can you explain which cities were most under threat which excused the dropping of 26,000 bombs .

Mostly in syria and iraq.

 

Thanks in advance.

Edited January 11, 2017 by jake

[Notts1874]

Oh and by the way notts.

If you think that i think trump will be any better ive no idea.

The American Health Act is far from perfect and if as trump states he will replace it we can only judge that when its known what that will be.

 

In the meantime i wont be fawning over obama .

I wont be taking a side because i perceive it to be better when the actual facts say its not.

There is nothing to suggest a democrat or tepublican president will be any different.

We may as well live in a one party state in the uk or the us as there are no real discernible differences.

 

Hope this clears it up and perhaps you will learn to be less of a snide.

 

Just a little advice there sonny.

 

Nobody likes snidey folk .

Wasn't Donald asked today to explain how he would replace ACA? He told us vaguely when it might or might not happen but not what he would replace it with. Correct?

 

Didn't he say previously he would repeal ACA on day 1 of his administration?

 

Lets be honest Donald doesn't have a clue what he is going to do.

 

Not been called sonny for a while by the way. My great uncle was called Sonny. He was a whaler is the South Atlantic but I digress.

[elvoys]

What to believe though?

 

Who to believe?

 

Ok some of the websites that i think you are referring to are far out.

 

We are all guilty of believing the news that suits our views.

 

Do you not think that we are lied to by so called trusted news media ?

 

The more i read about the Syrian situation the more i question my views.

Does any of the so called fake news not make you at least question whats actually going on.

The whole msm two months back were basing the huge massacre reports on journalists basically held hostage outside Eastern Allepo (zero eye verifiable eye witnesses) and a guy in his room in Coventry who calls himself an 'Observatory'. Meanwhile after the assorted rebels (aka jihadists and islamists ) were booted out the mother of all Xmas trees and parties (20k people) goes on downtown, and not picked up by a single msm source. They are completely compromised and have the nerve to blame 'fake news' for the mistrust.

[Notts1874]

Can you clarify which american lives were at risk during obamas 8 years .

Apart from the nearly 3 thousand servicemen and women who lost their lives .

 

Can you explain which cities were most under threat which excused the dropping of 26,000 bombs .

Mostly in syria and iraq.

 

Thanks in advance.

You know that neither you or I can answer that pal. I'm sure there was plenty Intel available to the correct people.

 

No need to thank me Jake..we barely know each other.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

My figures were not correct they were less than the figures released .

 

Also it does not include special forces operations which took place in 80%.

Thats right 80% of the worlds nations.

When figures were shown for one week ....one week there was 180 special forces missions.

 

 

Also authorised by obama the bugging of merkel.

Which he apologised for.

 

Of all the answers which surprised me yours did UA.

You're not sure why a president reputation should suffer for inflicting violence.

Are you aware of the numbers of civilians killed by drones alone.

Are you aware of the amount of children whose flesh and bones have been broken and burnt during his 8 years in which not one day passed without an act of violence.

 

Did you know under obamas presidency that more immigrants than ever before were deported.

 

 

How does any of that not deserve criticism.

 

I am baffled .

 

Special forces operations are not nearly as dramatic as they sound.  My cousin's husband was a liaison between regular troops and special forces in Iraq -- he made it clear that what we think of as "special forces" (Navy SEALs, Green Berets, Army Rangers, etc.) aren't what the Pentagon means by that.  Special forces are often non-combat troops engaged in intelligence, alliance building, translation and interpreting, psy-ops, propaganda, all that.  So while it's not necessarily a *good* thing that the US has special forces operating in 80% of the world's nations, it's not altogether surprising.

 

Of course Obama should come in for criticism, as should all of US foreign policy which has been far too interventionist and imperialist for my entire life.  But the one military operation I don't have a strong objection to right now is our campaign against Daesh, a murderous band of reactionary nihilists.  Yes, I am aware of how disastrous our military interventions can be, particularly since Daesh would almost certainly never had existed had we not both invaded Iraq and then horribly botched the occupation.  (I did as much as I knew how to do to stop the Iraq war in the first place, and was told I was a stupid hippie and a sheep for doubting that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.)

 

However...

 

Under Obama the US has committed violence around the world but with highly limited missions.

Under GWB the US committed huge levels of violence around the world and botched most of it.

Under Clinton the US committed a low and steady level of violence around the world.

Under GHWB the US committed violence in a series of targeted invasions with mixed effects.

Under Reagan the US sponsored violence in every corner of the globe and committed plenty of our own.

Under Carter the US committed a severely limited level of violence but the CIA was still active and murderous in Latin America.

 

And so on...

 

Calling out Obama as a uniquely problematic President because the US committed violence on his watch is about like criticizing him for being a male President.

 

But none of this is what the original comment was about, which was how he personally comported himself in public while President.  Obama took the office and the optics of the office very seriously, far moreso than GWB or Clinton before him.  His state appearances and dinners were without fail flawlessly executed and respectful.  When delivering his public addresses his words were meticulously considered and delivered with grace and panache.

 

By contrast Trump is, in his public appearances, meandering, petty, sordid, and vindictive.

 

Policy is more important than appearance, certainly, but Obama in his person and his bearing has conducted himself with grace and class.

[jake]

Wasn't Donald asked today to explain how he would replace ACA? He told us vaguely when it might or might not happen but not what he would replace it with. Correct?

 

Didn't he say previously he would repeal ACA on day 1 of his administration?

 

Lets be honest Donald doesn't have a clue what he is going to do.

 

Not been called sonny for a while by the way. My great uncle was called Sonny. He was a whaler is the South Atlantic but I digress.

 

Sorry for that.

You nipped my heid.

South Atlantic whaler.

 

Grrrrrrrrrrr .

I love whales.

[jake]

The whole msm two months back were basing the huge massacre reports on journalists basically held hostage outside Eastern Allepo (zero eye verifiable eye witnesses) and a guy in his room in Coventry who calls himself an 'Observatory'. Meanwhile after the assorted rebels (aka jihadists and islamists ) were booted out the mother of all Xmas trees and parties (20k people) goes on downtown, and not picked up by a single msm source. They are completely compromised and have the nerve to blame 'fake news' for the mistrust.

 

I was just reading about that.

The canadian journalist who called the guardian and the bbc liars for their reporting of syria.

[Notts1874]

Sorry for that.

You nipped my heid.

South Atlantic whaler.

 

If I'm being honest Jake I nipped your heid on purpose a little bit but I'm sure you knew that.

 

It was a living for him and in that day and age it didn't have the stigma it rightly does now.

 

Finally a bit of genuine advice. Don't get so wound up on a football forum about something you can do nothing about. I know the best I can do is to just laugh at and mock Trump until he royally arses it up.

 

Grrrrrrrrrrr .

I love whales.

[Notts1874]

Not sure what happened with that quote.........fake quote.

[jake]

You know that neither you or I can answer that pal. I'm sure there was plenty Intel available to the correct people.

 

No need to thank me Jake..we barely know each other.

 

Im sure there was plenty of intel.

 

As im sure the region that had most bombs dropped on them were in fact important geopolitically in regards to oil.

 

I remember when we were all saved from saddams weapons of mass destruction.

 

Although to be fair his troops went into an imaginary hospital and killed babies.

 

That is coincidentally what happened over a hundred years ago when those horrible spaniards did the same to imaginary kids in an imaginary hospital.

The good old US bombed the spanish navy who obviously wanted to pick a fight with their wooden ships.

 

Its just a coincidence that american firms took over cubas white gold.

 

Known as sugar.

[jake]

Special forces operations are not nearly as dramatic as they sound. My cousin's husband was a liaison between regular troops and special forces in Iraq -- he made it clear that what we think of as "special forces" (Navy SEALs, Green Berets, Army Rangers, etc.) aren't what the Pentagon means by that. Special forces are often non-combat troops engaged in intelligence, alliance building, translation and interpreting, psy-ops, propaganda, all that. So while it's not necessarily a *good* thing that the US has special forces operating in 80% of the world's nations, it's not altogether surprising.

 

Of course Obama should come in for criticism, as should all of US foreign policy which has been far too interventionist and imperialist for my entire life. But the one military operation I don't have a strong objection to right now is our campaign against Daesh, a murderous band of reactionary nihilists. Yes, I am aware of how disastrous our military interventions can be, particularly since Daesh would almost certainly never had existed had we not both invaded Iraq and then horribly botched the occupation. (I did as much as I knew how to do to stop the Iraq war in the first place, and was told I was a stupid hippie and a sheep for doubting that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.)

 

However...

 

Under Obama the US has committed violence around the world but with highly limited missions.

Under GWB the US committed huge levels of violence around the world and botched most of it.

Under Clinton the US committed a low and steady level of violence around the world.

Under GHWB the US committed violence in a series of targeted invasions with mixed effects.

Under Reagan the US sponsored violence in every corner of the globe and committed plenty of our own.

Under Carter the US committed a severely limited level of violence but the CIA was still active and murderous in Latin America.

 

And so on...

 

Calling out Obama as a uniquely problematic President because the US committed violence on his watch is about like criticizing him for being a male President.

 

But none of this is what the original comment was about, which was how he personally comported himself in public while President. Obama took the office and the optics of the office very seriously, far moreso than GWB or Clinton before him. His state appearances and dinners were without fail flawlessly executed and respectful. When delivering his public addresses his words were meticulously considered and delivered with grace and panache.

 

By contrast Trump is, in his public appearances, meandering, petty, sordid, and vindictive.

 

Policy is more important than appearance, certainly, but Obama in his person and his bearing has conducted himself with grace and class.

 

And your post in a nutshell is whats wrong with politics and the electorate.

 

You defined his success by saying hes a good actor and after dinner speaker.

 

Look UA im not trying to be the republican here but wrong is wrong.

 

Forgive me but i have at least 26,000 reasons for saying obama was the latest in a long line of presidents who were at the beckoned call of those with real power.

 

I wont be applauding him on anything.

[jake]

Not sure what happened with that quote.........fake quote.

 

This isnt a football thread.

 

I like arguing about politics .

 

Yes i admit i bite.

I try not to insult even though ive had to contend with the likes of makeral who constantly implies im a racist.

 

Anyway yes trumps a ticket but the narrative of msm makes me instinctively question.

[FWJ]

What does the President of Russia make of this hotel-room story?

 

I'd love to hear Putin on the Ritz.

[JamboX2]

Oh thats ok then obamas excused for dropping bombs every single day for his two terms.

26,000 bombs in his last year.

 

But thats not sordid.

 

Up is down and down is up.

Btw, my point covers the fact his presidency is hardly up there with FDR's in the last sentence. However, that wasn't the point. Was Trump today acting in a Presidential manner? No. Has he ever acted in that way? No.

 

He shows zero dignity or decorum. Obama did.

 

You can be dignified and enact poor policies when it comes to government. Look at Regan. Very presidential. Still had the Iran Contra fiasco and the Grenadan invasion.

[JamboX2]

Special forces operations are not nearly as dramatic as they sound. My cousin's husband was a liaison between regular troops and special forces in Iraq -- he made it clear that what we think of as "special forces" (Navy SEALs, Green Berets, Army Rangers, etc.) aren't what the Pentagon means by that. Special forces are often non-combat troops engaged in intelligence, alliance building, translation and interpreting, psy-ops, propaganda, all that. So while it's not necessarily a *good* thing that the US has special forces operating in 80% of the world's nations, it's not altogether surprising.

 

Of course Obama should come in for criticism, as should all of US foreign policy which has been far too interventionist and imperialist for my entire life. But the one military operation I don't have a strong objection to right now is our campaign against Daesh, a murderous band of reactionary nihilists. Yes, I am aware of how disastrous our military interventions can be, particularly since Daesh would almost certainly never had existed had we not both invaded Iraq and then horribly botched the occupation. (I did as much as I knew how to do to stop the Iraq war in the first place, and was told I was a stupid hippie and a sheep for doubting that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.)

 

However...

 

Under Obama the US has committed violence around the world but with highly limited missions.

Under GWB the US committed huge levels of violence around the world and botched most of it.

Under Clinton the US committed a low and steady level of violence around the world.

Under GHWB the US committed violence in a series of targeted invasions with mixed effects.

Under Reagan the US sponsored violence in every corner of the globe and committed plenty of our own.

Under Carter the US committed a severely limited level of violence but the CIA was still active and murderous in Latin America.

 

And so on...

 

Calling out Obama as a uniquely problematic President because the US committed violence on his watch is about like criticizing him for being a male President.

 

But none of this is what the original comment was about, which was how he personally comported himself in public while President. Obama took the office and the optics of the office very seriously, far moreso than GWB or Clinton before him. His state appearances and dinners were without fail flawlessly executed and respectful. When delivering his public addresses his words were meticulously considered and delivered with grace and panache.

 

By contrast Trump is, in his public appearances, meandering, petty, sordid, and vindictive.

 

Policy is more important than appearance, certainly, but Obama in his person and his bearing has conducted himself with grace and class.

Spot on UA.

[jake]

Btw, my point covers the fact his presidency is hardly up there with FDR's in the last sentence. However, that wasn't the point. Was Trump today acting in a Presidential manner? No. Has he ever acted in that way? No.

 

He shows zero dignity or decorum. Obama did.

 

You can be dignified and enact poor policies when it comes to government. Look at Regan. Very presidential. Still had the Iran Contra fiasco and the Grenadan invasion.

 

Can you be dignified and bomb people to protect business interests .

Or are we still kidding on its for the greater good .

Or for the protection of american life.

Or for the defence of its mainland.

 

 

Btw is it only oil rich countries who defy american business interest with bad human rights that are bombed or do they bomb other evil regimes ?

 

Silly question.

 

Maybe its to protect against terrorism.

Nah cant be or theyd have bombed the Saudis .

 

You might gauge success on good after dinner speakers i dont.

And if trumps your measure dont count me in.

[J.T.F.Robertson]

What does the President of Russia make of this hotel-room story?

 

I'd love to hear Putin on the Ritz.

 

No' three bad. 

[jake]

Btw, my point covers the fact his presidency is hardly up there with FDR's in the last sentence. However, that wasn't the point. Was Trump today acting in a Presidential manner? No. Has he ever acted in that way? No.

 

He shows zero dignity or decorum. Obama did.

 

You can be dignified and enact poor policies when it comes to government. Look at Regan. Very presidential. Still had the Iran Contra fiasco and the Grenadan invasion.

 

Ah FDR.

One of the originals.

Leader of the american navy which bravely blew the wooden ships of spain apart.

 

It wasnt for black gold though(oil)

But for whit gold (sugar)

 

Well rewarded he was

[jake]

FDR the president who opposed anti lynching legislation.

[Zico]

.

[elvoys]

Btw, my point covers the fact his presidency is hardly up there with FDR's in the last sentence. However, that wasn't the point. Was Trump today acting in a Presidential manner? No. Has he ever acted in that way? No.

 

He shows zero dignity or decorum. Obama did.

 

You can be dignified and enact poor policies when it comes to government. Look at Regan. Very presidential. Still had the Iran Contra fiasco and the Grenadan invasion.

I would argue that after the burning down of one of his embassies, an ambassador and three others killed (40 rescued) to go on TV, basically apologise to a swathe of people who were burning and killing across the world cos of a pretty historically accurate video, blame this barbarism on said videos' provocation' then cook up tax charges against the maker of the video to appease these loons was pretty undignified. That and a few other instances of similar appeasement aside I generally admired his show of character.

[westbow]

 

 

Trump going to be another 9/11 style conspiracy theory magnet. Still, it keeps the loons on their laptops and away from the general population.

[I P Knightley]

What does the President of Russia make of this hotel-room story?

I'd love to hear Putin on the Ritz.

Super duper!