Slashdot Mirror
Donald Trump Is Sworn In As the 45th US President (reuters.com)
Donald Trump was sworn in as the 45th president of the United States on Friday, succeeding Barack Obama and taking control of a divided country in a transition of power that he has declared will lead to "America First" policies at home and abroad. Reuters reports: As scattered protests erupted elsewhere in Washington, Trump raised his right hand and put his left on a Bible used by Abraham Lincoln and repeated a 35-word oath of office from the U.S. Constitution, with U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts presiding.
Nobody rushing the stage shouting "You are the greatest monster in human history!" while blasting away?
He made a lot of bold promises based on a lot of questionable data.
However he did win, even though most of the media said he never had a chance, so who knows, he is literally just so crazy that it might work. Or we are going be be doomed.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
That didn't take long. Keep thinking everyone who disagrees with you is a Nazi.
He's been sworn in for almost an hour now and no nuclear war....exceeding expectations.
Less H1-b fraud/abuse, more regular employment for those that want it, and a climate where anyone can succeed - not just those that identify correctly.
Even if one opposes him, one should be hoping for success.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Now watch the the EB Green Card cap being abolished. If all the H1Bs get Greencards salaries will go up as they will start jumping around.
**Life is too short to be serious**
Or should we call him 'Pussy-Grabber-in-Chief'?
Personally I prefer 'President Pussy-Grabber', and I encourage everyone so inclined to refer to him as such whenver possible.
All his supporters had to work today.
News for Nazis
This. Garbage like this is exactly why Trump won the election. I hope you're pleased with yourself.
Bill Clinton was sitting near the font and there were several women within hands reach (not including his wife obv.).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
But I thought all his supporters had their jobs taken by illegals?
It amazes me that people continue to believe Trump is impulsive. There's nothing impulsive about anything Trump does; it's all extremely calculated. If I didn't know better I was say the press were in collusion to spread that myth in order to make people underestimate Trump, but as usual Occam's razor applies and the press are just full of idiots.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I was going to respond by correcting every point since you didn't manage to get anything right but... instead I'll just say I hope you can find someone to give you a hug today. Good luck! Hope you feel better soon!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I watched him take the oath of office.
He looked grim.
Or impatient.
Or maybe annoyed.
Im Irish and from what I've seen, there has been an enormous smear campaign against him especially from CNN and all the way back to Jeb Bush who tried to destroy him and fell flat on his face. There's nothing wrong with putting your country first and America's prosperity is good for Europe. My only concern is that he has establishment enemies, liberal extremelist enemies, and radical islamic fundamentalist enemies. The secret service need to be up to the task. I believe he is a good man for the most part.
No, Nazis are a specific brand of racial and religious supremacy. And you can say that Trump is a bad person without saying he's a Nazi (he'd be a really bad one, seeing as how his daughter converted to Judaism).
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
So you're saying Trump won the election because people think he's a Nazi?
The U.S. is almost equally divided after every Presidential election. Why is it that this phrase is only trotted out when a Republican is sworn in?
I'm also quite certain that Trump isn't at all likely to invade Russia heading into a winter, so there is that, too.
I think my major concern with the next few years is that he's a bit of a loose cannon. You don't want a loose cannon who's obviously quite sensitive when pushed on things negotiating with other countries or making impulsive decisions that are hard to undo. I doubt he'd start a war (intentionally) but I really think he has to lay off the late-night Twitter. Telegraphing exactly what bothers you to your adversaries isn't a smart move. Sure, you can argue it's all a show, but some of the anger he's displayed with the press, his critics, etc. show that it's very hard to hide his feelings and just keep quiet.
Here's what I'm mainly worried about -- now that Trump's President, the gloves come off of every single loud-mouthed, opinionated angry citizen who loves to moan and complain. By providing an example of "acceptable" behavior via his constant personal attacks on people, I think he's going to signal to everyone that they no longer need to be civil to one another. I know a lot of people who just aren't happy unless they're railing loudly against anyone and anything. Having that be the starting point for any discussion or debate for the next 4 or 8 years is going to lead to further retrenchment of people into their respective camps. I for one can't stand engaging with people who come out swinging, looking for a fight on every little thing...it's just not a personality type I'm interested in dealing with. The world's complex enough already and life's short, so why waste processor cycles arguing pointlessly?
One thing I did like about the Obama years was that he was a very approachable President. Even when the political rancor was at its worst, with a few exceptions he took the high road in these arguments. I doubt we're going to see that very much anymore -- it's going to be years of angry press conferences and sound bites.
No really. Some people think America is great because, but it really is a shit hole. I mean really, mass shootings are a regular occurrence, crime is high despite having the largest prison population in the world.
Violent crime is pretty much at an all-time low. Reading the news is a bit misleading on this score.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Crime_Victim_Chart.gif
I switched on the radio to hear the evening PM programme (I live in the UK).
You didn't need to tell us where you lived. We knew by your ridiculous spellinge.
No, he won because the Democratic Party is too busy tripping over their hypocritical statements and actions. You know, the party of inclusion that can't wait to have 60+ sitting congresspersons "boycott" the inauguration of the president that they now have to work with. Their candidate for president was even there, and tweeting about working together. Yet these petty and petulant asshats can't see that the inauguration is a celebration of the institution, and not of the man being sworn in.
The divisiveness only continues to get worse as long as these douchebags can't see that they are the ones perpetuating the problem.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
We religiously defend the separation of church and state here in the US (except for Christianity).
The United States is three times the size of India.
If you're talking about population. India is by far the world's largest democracy.
If you're talking about land size. Canada is the world's largest democracy. (unless you consider Russia democratic- then it is).
If you're talking about weight of the average person then... yes... in that scenario, the US is the largest democracy.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
So you think Israel should just unilaterally abandon the Two STate Solution and start colonizing Palestinian territory? I'm generally a supporter of Israel, but those illegal settlements are deliberately provocative.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Absolutely agree, Hillary was endeavoring to establish a new Cold War with Russia. Over largely baseless accusations, and actions that utterly pale in comparison to what America has done to its rivals and even its allies.
Meanwhile, folks think rich always want war. And perhaps certain wars benefited oil moguls, etc. But Trump is a real estate billionaire. Hotels, resorts, properties. War is NOT GOOD for those type of businesses. First off, tourism plummets, second their buildings are often destroyed. So I suspect that Trump will be far less likely to engage in armed conflict.
I'd be very curious, and laugh my butt off if he stopped our bombings. What would the Democrats say if Trump went 4 years without bombing any countries.
But he won the game. And that was the point. And had it been about the popular vote. Trump would of campaigned differently, focused only on the large cities. And since he would of got almost all of the rural votes by default, he'd only have to swing a few points in a couple of cities. And he could of easily won the popular vote.
But what point is there in winning a few million more votes in California to be popular if it doesn't help you get elected?
No, he won because the Democratic Party is too busy tripping over their hypocritical statements and actions. You know, the party of inclusion that can't wait to have 60+ sitting congresspersons "boycott" the inauguration of the president that they now have to work with. Their candidate for president was even there, and tweeting about working together. Yet these petty and petulant asshats can't see that the inauguration is a celebration of the institution, and not of the man being sworn in.
The divisiveness only continues to get worse as long as these douchebags can't see that they are the ones perpetuating the problem.
I'm sure that the Democrats will show all the support and understanding to Trump that the Republicans showed to Obama.
The fact that there's a whole shitload of stupid people out there doesn't change the fact that those people are wrong.
I am not mad at people like you because Clinton lost. I am unconcerned that we have different politics. And I don’t think less of people like you because you vote one way and I vote another. I think less of people like you because you watched an adult mock a disabled person in front of a crowd and still supported him. I think less of you because you saw a man spouting clear racism and backed him. I think less of you because you listened to him advocate for war crimes, and still thought he should run this country. I think less of people like you because you watched him equate a woman’s worth to her appearance and got on board. It isn’t your politics that I find repulsive. It is your personal willingness to support racism, sexism, and cruelty. You sided with a bully when it mattered and that is something I will never forget. So, no people like you and I won’t be “coming together” to move forward or whatever. Trump disgusts me, but it is the fact that he doesn’t disgust people like you that will stick with me long after this election.
So ... Brits were Nazis, Americans were Nazis, Japanese were Nazis... pretty much everyone was Nazi by that definition, at least at some point of history.
Whew. I guess the Germans are finally off the hook now that they're basically like everyone else.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Trump is certainly *different* from previous Presidents and major candidates in important ways. Some good differences, some bad, and some with both good and bad aspects. We'll see what happens. I've been wrong when I predicted what Obama and Bush Jrs presidencies would be like, so I'm not going to try to predict Trump - we just have to wait and see.
Bad includes his seemingly impulsive Twitter comments to "fight back" against criticism. He probably should have ignored Meryl Streep, for example.
Good includes the fact that he's not dependent on campaign contributors like almost all major politicians are.
We'll just see where the roulette ball lands. I'll oppose any bad policies he proposes and support any good ones.
We did this to ourselves. No matter what it feels like, the fact is our system of government has functioned (and continues to function) exactly as designed. If Mr. President Trump is not likely to make America whole again, the task falls to us, the citizenry of this (long great and still great) nation. We must oppose insanity with calm and deliberate purpose, not with incohate and aimless rage.
This post +++++++
You mean like the Tea Party tantrums of 2009? I didn't forget about those. Did you?
Place something witty here
Actually, the "whole world" mostly agrees that Trump is a somewhere between an incompetent buffoon and a despicable nazi. It's only your little echo chamber in the US that thinks different.
For those that don't know what that is, here is the entirety of the text of that clause
No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.
Trump is NOT in violation of this clause. And it is a hillarious claim coming from anyone that voted for Hillary, who would have been actually in violation of this clause, with the Clinton Foundation.
Typically, all "Gifts" from foreign heads of state are property of the US Government and are placed in the public trust.
What this poster is trying to say, is that Trump cannot rent his hotel rooms out to people because that is a "gift".
Here is the definition:
a salary, fee, or profit from employment or office.
I wonder where all these people were when Hillary was SoS and Bill was being paid by all those rich Arab Princes and Kings for giving speeches. Why suddenly they are "horrified" that Trump owns a business that might rent a hotel room to a prince, but said nothing for 4 years while the Clinton's enriched themselves.
Hypocrites.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Oh, it works, if my discussions with friends who voted for Hillary are any measure. Every last one of them conceded Hillary's weaknesses, but insisted she was a better pick than misogynistic, homophobic, racist Trump. And I can't really blame them for that opinion based on how much the media drilled that impression in. But while I agree that there are people who voted for the Great Pumpkin specifically because of the exaggerated and hysterical rhetoric used by the media, I think Hillary's defeat primarily came from her campaign's smugness about victory. The final weeks before the election, the message was consistently "Hillary's got this one, and Trump doesn't stand a chance." What hubris! What stupidity! That basically told all her supporters that it wasn't critical they get out and vote, while telling Trump's just how desperate the situation was.
But then, Hillary's campaign was a series of mismanaged debacles.
They are all true statements. I wouldn't expect Trump voters to care much about the truth though.
That's why he won. You keep calling people stupid and deplorable if they happen to live in the middle of the country. What a hateful person you are.
When I take an objective look at the policies of President Trump, they differ significantly from those of Nazi Germany.
Trump doesn't bring in Nazi Germany's policies, definitely, but let's not kid ourselves here when he retweets people who are very open Nazi supporters. He may not be directly peddling their beliefs, but he sure as hell doesn't shy away from them either, and I'd have thought people who be a little more opposed to that. I'm German as well as American, and I still have a little chest in my attic that contains the Nazi papers for my grandmother, proving her "racial purity" and "ability to support the fatherland through childbirth". Next to that are the papers that notify her her husband was executed for "violations of peace and order", with his protesting. It serves as a nice reminder sometimes, what we were all collectively lucky enough to avoid. It's really not a sexy time period to have lived in, and I really would have thought that'd be more of a detriment to people who champion being against the Soviet Union and Russia, places with an absolutely awful record on human rights and standards of living. Ahhhh, but that's not a problem for people today either, eh?
isolationism and self-sufficiency
For the US, these don't really work. Think about it; what are our greatest industries? If you said agriculture, entertainment, and the dominance of the tech industry, you'd be correct. What use is a ridiculous surplus, movies, and a strong control of the industry if there's no use to sell them too? What exactly are we going to do with the ridiculous excess of corn we make every year if nobody wants to buy it?
The emphasis on greater border security, including the building of physical barriers, also backs up the idea that America won't be trying to expand its borders beyond where they are today. These are well-established borders, and have been for a very long time.
Fully agree. Once we collectively realized what asses we were to the Native Americans, thankfully, we (mostly) left behind our expansionist bullshit. I both think and hope we keep it that way. Fortunately, Obama was pretty in favor of border enforcement, as was Hillary Clinton, and virtually every other Democrat. The debate is about what we do with people who've lived in our own country for years but don't have our citizenship; it's probably worth noting that many people born, raised, and died in America also lack these papers or documents proving their citizenship except for maybe a birth certificate.
Actually enforcing long-standing immigration and border regulations is not "racism", as some people appear to incorrectly believe. These regulations apply to all people, regardless of race or other such attributes.
Not sure who this was aimed at, but Obama most definitely enforced immigration rules, and he even gets shit for that from some Democrats. If he let too many people stay, better ring up Bush, Bush Sr, or Reagan, because they all enforced their rules less than he did. (Regan even gave those criminal immigrants a permanent stay, clearly he must've been from Lithuania and only pretended to be an American and isn't really one)
Based on everything we've seen so far, President Trump's administration is actually putting the interests of all Americans first and foremost. This is the first time we've seen this in many decades.
The first comment I think you're flat out wrong. When you get past the Goldman-Sachs guy who wants to lower regulations on his industry, the EPA guy who wants to sue himself and then set precedent for stupid standards for his industry, and the president who wants to get insider deals for hiiiiiis industry, we can maybe start with Republicans & Trump repealing an act that will kill tens of thousands of people, or a guy who wants to concentrate on publicity stunts and shows focusing on his own glory i
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
In today's newspaper there's an article that says the new administration still has 3500 (out of 4000) political positions to fill, far more than previous administrations. Has Trump been taken by surprise by his own success?
That would be India. Over a billion people with democratic elections.
Only slightly more corrupt than the US.
This is obviously some strange usage of the word "slightly" that I wasn't previously aware of.
That is the icon of the democratic party on the banner for this story. While Trump has been known to have held both sides of most matters lately, I have yet to see him call himself a democrat - and he most certainly did not have their endorsement to run for president.
Trump 2004:
"In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat," Trump told CNN's Wolf Blitzer in a 2004 interview. "It just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans. Now, it shouldn't be that way. But if you go back, I mean it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats. ...But certainly we had some very good economies under Democrats, as well as Republicans. But we've had some pretty bad disaster under the Republicans."
I think he doesn't really have any basic idealogical underlings beyond what makes him money and keeps him in the public eye. I would not be surprised if he pisses off both parties equally. Depending on how that is done it can be good or bad.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
No, I think Palestine should have taken the Two State solution offered by Israel a few years ago, but refused and went on a rampage over it.
The problem is, you think that Palestine wants a two state solution, and they don't. It has been offered, repeatedly, and they keep refusing.
And I wonder why you don't mention the Palestinians "Illegally" launching rockets into Israel. Or the time that Israel pulled its settlements out of Gaza, only to have them turned into rocket launching sites. I'm talking functioning industry and farms being walked away from and turning back into desert because ... Palestinians don't want anything the Jews had built.
Palestinians are functionally incapably of peace at this time.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
The United States is three times the size of India.
If you're talking about population. India is by far the world's largest democracy. If you're talking about land size. Canada is the world's largest democracy. (unless you consider Russia democratic- then it is). If you're talking about weight of the average person then... yes... in that scenario, the US is the largest democracy.
Actually, your last point is technically wrong. Mexico is. So now we don't even have that one :/
Make America Great(er in mass) again!
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
I hear this argument every election. "I don't mind political opponents, but this time it's just too far."
Yet it always turns out that the speaker is simply trying to rationalize his/her dislike of political opponents, and does not want to admit it to himself/herself.
But, if you are to dislike some group, Trump supporters are an easy choice. I don't care so much about all the stuff you said (alot of it was overblown by media), but rather that it took about 14 seconds to realize that Trump was full of shit and about as trustworthy as Putin or Baghdad Bob. Anyone that believes that guy after having listened to him for more than 1 minute has more than earned the ridicule.
Yes. ONLY Israel supports a two-state solution. The Palestinian authorities support the destruction of Israel and extermination of Jews. The Arab world as well. And much of Europe.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
I seem to remember shortly after Obama was inaugurated that Republican members of congress made it their goal to make him a failed president, opposed him in every action, voted against anything he supported and basically did everything in their power to oppose anything and everything he tried to do. It's interesting that those same republicans and their supporters now get their panties in a wad when the shoe is on the other foot.
It's all fine and dandy to want cooperation and working together but that requires that both sides do it. The republican's made it clear that this divided government thing is the way things will run in the future. It's up to them to fix that by going across the aisle and working with democrats not steam rolling them.
Hamas needs no such excuses.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! OMG! That was a joke right? Wait... you were SERIOUS?!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! THATS EVEN MORE HILARIOUS!!!!
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
You have got to be joking, that was one of the more calculated tweets. He knew the press would react immediately to any criticism of anyone black. Except that Trump's criticism was accurate, so it actually weakened John Lewis (who was coasting on a history of civil rights support fifty some years ago until that point with no accountability for current inaction) and also made the press look stupid for fervently protesting against a valid point. Even black women in Atlanta (Lewis's district) agreed with Trump.
And you call that uncalculated... that tweet was carefully chosen in target to increase black support for Trump.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Slashdot says "Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!" - I don't know why but I'll split up the reply.
Yea right. And Timothy McVeigh wasn't a right wing Militia member that blew up a building and killed an entire daycare's worth of kids.
No-one has said they don't exist.
What he said was:
Because conservatives aren't as hateful and violent as liberals?
Which is correct.
This is the situation in the US:
source.
"Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil by Group, From 1980 to 2005, According to FBI Database"
Latino: 42%
Extreme left wing: 24%
Jewish: 7%
Islamic: 6%
Communist: 5%
Others: 16%
There is non specifically for right-wing, I don't know what others include, maybe they consider right-wing the norm/need no title and all 16% is right-wing? Even if that was the case the extreme left with 24% is more.
Here in Sweden our security police used to regard the left-wing as the biggest threat and the ratio between them and the right was 9:1 or higher. Last time I saw it they mentioned Islamic threat instead. I assume the left may be a bigger threat to the democracy but Islamic a bigger threat when it comes to deadly violence.
First, fuck your own face for calling me an idiot, when you don't know anything about me.
Second, right now it is the left that is being divisive. That's not to say that the right hasn't had a whole shitload of time of their own to be at fault for this too - but to fix it, people need to fucking stop already. Both parties, and all of their respective sycophants.
That includes you. You are part of the problem, right now, with that fucking incendiary partisan post.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Except for the perpetually angry leftist blacks, the average reasonable black citizen agreed with Trump.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I am not mad at people like you because Clinton lost. I am unconcerned that we have different politics. And I don’t think less of people like you because you vote one way and I vote another. I think less of people like you because you watched an adult mock a disabled person in front of a crowd and still supported him. I think less of you because you saw a man spouting clear racism and backed him. I think less of you because you listened to him advocate for war crimes, and still thought he should run this country. I think less of people like you because you watched him equate a woman’s worth to her appearance and got on board. It isn’t your politics that I find repulsive. It is your personal willingness to support racism, sexism, and cruelty. You sided with a bully when it mattered and that is something I will never forget. So, no people like you and I won’t be “coming together” to move forward or whatever. Trump disgusts me, but it is the fact that he doesn’t disgust people like you that will stick with me long after this election.
I'm surprised that you still get don't get this, but the election proved one thing that myself and others have suspected or claimed for years and people like you don't want to admit. The only "issue" that matters for the vast majority of Americans, and I'd put it at about 80% of the electorate, is whether there is a D or an R next to their name. Some of my old friends who are women could not possibly have cared less about anything bad that Trump did on the campaign trail but completely flipped out over both and real and imaginary things related to Hillary. Trump bragged about grabbing women in the crotch? No problem. But Hillary was tied, barely, to Benghazi where a grand total of 4 Americans died and this was the single biggest American foreign policy disaster ever. People really don't care much about anything except whether a candidate has a D or an R next to their name. Pretty much everything else is negotiable. Congressional races prove this every election. Most Congressional districts regardless of who holds them are no longer competitive for members of the other party. Most of the people who aren't party tied voted for Trump in this election because he told people what they wanted to hear - namely that they were victims of powers and forces beyond their control and only he could stand up to those powers. Given the monopoly the Democrats have had on victimhood it's kind of funny that Trump outflanked them on this.
so how would you describe the jerking, arm-clutched-to-the-chest motion he was making when he mocked the guy? what was the significance of it?
it sure reminded me of how kids in elementary school would mock 'retards'
perhaps there is some other meaning behind the motion that I am not aware of?
I think less of people like you because you watched an adult mock a disabled person in front of a crowd and still supported him.
I don't believe you.
I think less of you because you saw a man spouting clear racism and backed him.
1. [citation needed]
2. Islam isn't a race.
3. Illegal immigrants do not have a right to be in this country... by definition.
I think less of you because you listened to him advocate for war crimes, and still thought he should run this country.
If you mean that he would waterboard ISIS then I'm having a hard time feeling sorry for ISIS.
I think less of people like you because you watched him equate a woman’s worth to her appearance and got on board.
If your wife or girlfriend isn't fat and ugly then you may be a hypocrite.
If you think Hillary is better on this point-- considering that she enabled her husband's infamous behavior-- then you're a hypocrite.
It is your personal willingness to support racism, sexism, and cruelty.
1. [citation needed]
2. argumentum ad nauseam
You sided with a bully when it mattered and that is something I will never forget.
1. He's not.
2. Just because someone directly challenges you or your opinions or ideas doesn't make them a bully. The internet isn't a safe space.
So, no people like you and I won’t be “coming together” to move forward or whatever. Trump disgusts me, but it is the fact that he doesn’t disgust people like you that will stick with me long after this election.
Virtue signal received; we're reading you loud and clear.
Oh, it works, if my discussions with friends who voted for Hillary are any measure. Every last one of them conceded Hillary's weaknesses, but insisted she was a better pick than misogynistic, homophobic, racist Trump. And I can't really blame them for that opinion based on how much the media drilled that impression in. But while I agree that there are people who voted for the Great Pumpkin specifically because of the exaggerated and hysterical rhetoric used by the media, I think Hillary's defeat primarily came from her campaign's smugness about victory. The final weeks before the election, the message was consistently "Hillary's got this one, and Trump doesn't stand a chance." What hubris! What stupidity! That basically told all her supporters that it wasn't critical they get out and vote, while telling Trump's just how desperate the situation was. But then, Hillary's campaign was a series of mismanaged debacles.
Errrrr, Trump was spouting the "I'm going to win, just wait and see!" line much more than she was. I mean, you don't remember his constant Twitter posts raving about how wrong the polls are and how he was destined for victory? I don't mean to come off as aggressive, but I have to say I strongly disagree, that was... trumpeted... out by both parties. And if I may, many of those articles about her were written by newspapers with the evidence we had, whereas he personally engaged on his tirade with no evidence. I mean, I'm just saying...
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
. Trump has not expressed any racist statements; he expressed negative views of some illegal immigrants.
Of the top of my head, I remember Trump saying "Where is my African American?". Maybe that doesn't sound racist to you, but it sure does to a lot of people. Also, you seem to forget how he stated that the judge couldn't be fair in the Trump University case, because he was a Mexican. I'm sure there are more examples. His rhetoric was very racist at times. There is a reason white nationalists love him.
On the war crimes comment, I'm sure the person was referring to the time Trump said that killing the terrorists themselves wasn't enough. He would instruct the military to kill the families of terrorists too.
Trump is the first third party candidate to win an election.
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
No, I think Palestine should have taken the Two State solution offered by Israel a few years ago, but refused and went on a rampage over it.
The problem is, you think that Palestine wants a two state solution, and they don't. It has been offered, repeatedly, and they keep refusing.
And I wonder why you don't mention the Palestinians "Illegally" launching rockets into Israel. Or the time that Israel pulled its settlements out of Gaza, only to have them turned into rocket launching sites. I'm talking functioning industry and farms being walked away from and turning back into desert because ... Palestinians don't want anything the Jews had built.
Palestinians are functionally incapably of peace at this time.
How do you expect the Palestinians to be capable of peace while Israel is actively stealing land from ordinary Palestinians and giving it to Jewish Settlers?
Committing indefensible outrages against a population is an excellent way to turn that population to violence.
Israel is pursuing exactly the policy you'd expect they the leaders really wanted to kill the two-state solution with a bit of deniability.
I stole this Sig
you didn't answer the question at all.
it may be the same way he mocks able-bodied folks, but WHY does he do it in that particular manner? If not to mock the particular physical disability that some folks have? (including the reporter in question)
it seems pretty clear that the jerking, arm-clutched-to-the-chest motion is the same thing that elementary school kids do to make fun of disabled people. surely you aren't claiming it to be purely coincidental that he chose that very specific physical action.
if your argument is that he mocks able-bodied and disabled folks in the same way, by pretending they all have a physical disability of the arm and hand that causes muscle spasms, then you aren't really helping the case.
We're talking about EGO. We outweigh everyone else added together.
Did you not notice???
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Exactly what shit was she proposing to start?
The quote you're relying on is super weak:
As President, I will make it clear that the United States will treat cyberattacks just like any other attack. We will be ready with serious political, economic, and military responses.
"Military responses" can mean anything. The military has cyber-warfare capability, so a "military response" could simply be hacking them back. Supposedly, the email hacks were by the Russian _military_ intelligence service, in which case Clinton was proposing a military response to a military action. That's pretty reasonable. Do you seriously think she was planning a conventional military response to cyberattacks?
I don't see the evidence that she tried to *start* shit. I see an excellent case that she tried to *respond* to shit, and maybe it wouldn't be a good response (no way of knowing now), but not responding makes you a more appealing target.
I might add that the current president is also threatening to "start shit with an ICBM and submarine possessing nuclear power". After all, on an international stage, the amount of people for whom shit can get ruined, and the degree to which it can get ruined, is too horrifying to allow him a chance to do so. Don't sleep too easy.
If your wife or girlfriend isn't fat and ugly then you may be a hypocrite.
Would you believe that there are actually some people (some of them who are men even) who think women can have value beyond being wives or girlfriends?
Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
Mocking the diabled: Video, 45 seconds long: http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2...
Trump racism: Let's start with 1973 charges of discrimination in housing, then work forward to 2016 where he said the Central Park Five should go to jail DESPITE DNA evidence exonerating them, with all sorts of gems along the way. http://fortune.com/2016/06/07/... Oh... and then there's the famous quote about Mexicans. And suggesting a blanket ban on Muslims as a category.
Advocating for war crimes: March 2016, defending ordering the US military to commit war crimes of killing non-combatants that are family members of those in combat http://www.washingtontimes.com... Also advocates for waterboarding and worse in several interviews and speeches.
Regarding treatment of women: Ah, the famous "grab them by the pussy" video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Even black women in Atlanta (Lewis's district) agreed with Trump.
Uh -- correction: that link is to a story involving ONE black woman, who apparently was already a Trump supporter before this week.
And you call that uncalculated... that tweet was carefully chosen in target to increase black support for Trump.
And you have a poll or something to support that? No -- you have an anecdote from one black person who was already a Trump supporter. (So, even for this ONE person, there's no evidence cited of "increased black support.")
Now: what you say MIGHT be true of a few black voters, particularly local folks in the Congressman's district who are fed up with him. But there are people in every Congressional district in the country who are fed up with their Congressman. Outside of Atlanta, I'm pretty certain that all most liberal or moderate people (white or black) saw was a rich white dude attacking a Civil Rights Era hero on MLK day.
Thus, even IF your narrative is true and indicative of some minor loss of support for Lewis in his district, it's pretty certain that the tweet likely incited even more hatred among blacks against Trump for those outside of the district and unfamiliar with Lewis's record.
But did you vote for him in the general election? That's the problem most of us on the left have -- your guy lost in the primary, but most Republicans didn't switch to Clinton. If Romney or Jeb were the nominee, we on the left would be unhappy, but not panicked. Today's inaugural included a call for a loyalty pledge, and it was part of a broader theme that is quite literally terrifying. This isn't someone who is just putting in place different economic policies than I want or someone who disagrees with me on a given treaty or even whether we should go to war or not. Instead, Trump gave this speech... one that claims the richest nation on Earth with the most powerful military is somehow in terrible shape, one that announces that we are going to put ourselves first instead of trying to help the world come together as one. We've never been a humble nation, but we've tried to get beyond the arrogance of the 1950s where we thought we were better than everyone else. We tried desperately NOT to exercise extreme power when we became the only superpower after USSR collapsed. That policy went away today in favor of the USA trying to get the best in every situation instead of sharing our wealth with the rest of the world.
"From this moment on, it's going to be America First." "We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world -- but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first." "At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America, and through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other." -- President Trump, Inaugural Address
Wow -- you actually weren't even aware of that comment? And yet you came to this detailed defense of him here?
See -- here's the problem: it's not any one thing. It's a "preponderance of the evidence" thing. And I am far from a "leftist" -- I hate both major parties with a passion and found both major candidates this election to be some of the worst choices EVER.
But Trump is simply in a "different league" of problems. That's why people assume he made fun of a disabled guy. I've seen the Catholics for Trump propaganda before. Maybe it's true. But there are other details about the specific references Trump made that also make me doubt his claim. Personally, I'd give Trump's story that he wasn't actually intentionally making fun of a disability about 5% chance of being true.
And that's mostly because of Trump's other record. He doesn't get to have "the benefit of the doubt" in a case like this when he's been a bullying boorish jerk the rest of the time. And yes, he DOES behave like a jerk. He DOES behave like a bully to many people IN PUBLIC. (I hear he's nice to people in person. That's great. But it's not the persona on the campaign trail.) I personally don't care much about the disability issue -- the very fact that Trump tends to make fun of people rather than debate their issues is a MUCH bigger problem to me than whether or not he insulted a disabled person. (The latter obviously is still a significant issue if true, but again, it's the larger pattern that's concerning, rather than that one detail.)
It seems like you, like many people who ultimately voted for Trump, just decided that you're going to believe the talking points of his supporters that the rest of the media was lying. I fully believe a lot of the mainstream media also exaggerated a bunch of things too (though, to be fair, Trump frequently egged them into doing so by behaving increasingly outlandish to get attention).
I really am trying to give our new President a chance today. Really. I'll wait and see what he does over the next weeks and months. But it distresses me when someone who comes out so strongly as a Trump defender is then not even familiar with the fact that Trump has advocated war crimes!! To me, it shows how warped the message has gotten to many voters. (And yes, it occurs on both sides, but the disconnect from reality has started to increase significantly much more on one of them.)
No, actually, that's a tenet of a specific branch of Islam, not the religion as a whole. Yes, it is mentioned in the Koran, but using that as the basis for the ban would be akin to suggesting that all Jews want to implement the Jewish dietary laws across the USA or that all Christians favor stoning for adultery. As with all religions, not all Muslims are such fundamentalists.
-I don't care what you believe.
-Citation provided.
-since race is an artificial construct anyway, it's as good a word as any to describe bigotry against a distinct cultural ethnic group a more concise term is coined
-debatable; migration rights are largely seen as a basic human right. and they still have rights under the constitution, particularly in the area of due process, the constitution being a document that describes not just the relation between the government and citizen, but more accurately the government and any person subject to its authority.
-torture is a war crime
-so is retaliatory executions, even the uber-conservative and generally delusional Washington times agrees
-so is the targeting of families
-your views on women, looks, and what constitutes hypocrisy don't even merit a response. but I will say, you should start by looking up the definition of hypocrisy
-citation already provided
-Yes he is, though I can see how its hard for you to see, when you willfully ignore and dismiss everything he's done, as you have in the above mentioned topics.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
you're an idiot.
How is it fake if you admit that he mocked the disabled reporter?
And he didn't mock like "like he did able bodied" people.
We went into a pantomime of the mans disability.
Yes, he mocked a man with disabilities.
As for the racism...yes, he's racist:
He has said and done racist things, and gone so far as to blatantly appeal to the white nationalist movement (AKA, Nazis and kkk)
https://slashdot.org/comments....
A short and very incomplete list of completely racist things Trump has said or done:
-"theres one of my blacks"
-"mexico is sending us rapists"
-"laziness is a trait in blacks"
-"the judge is a Mexican"
-"they don’t look like Indians to me... They don’t look like Indians to Indians.”
-supports stop-and-frisk, as practiced by the NYPD (ie, unconstitutional and racially discriminatory), and wants it expanded nationwide, claiming it worked, contrary to all evidence
-Obama's birth certificate
-condoned the abuse and even beatings of multiple Black Lives Matter protesters and other minorities at his campaign rallies
-regularly engages in anti-Semitism
-treats his minority supporters as literal tokens
-treats minorities and racial groups as monolithic stereotypes
-thinks all African americans live in the inner city, are poor, without work, receiving welfare, and uneducated, and that the inner city is a hell hole
-saying 88% of white murders are committed by black folks
-repeating statements from white supremacists multiple occasions
-making blatant dog whistles to the alt-right, white supremacist crowd
-not condemning or distancing from white supremacists campaigning for him, including David Duke
-encouraged mob justice against the Central Park 5, and continues to insist they are guilty years after its proven otherwise, including spending 85k$ on full page ads in the paper advocating for their execution
-being sued by the federal government on multiple occasions for not renting to minorities
Hell, even when he claims to be trying to reach out, he's doing so in white communities and actually only repeating racist myths and stereotypes that are meant to appeal to white voters and make them feel better about voting for such overt racist.
His sons kept appearing on white supremacist radio programs..."accidentally".
Once may be an accident. Twice, you need to fire your booking agent. four times and counting? its no longer accidental or someone else's fault.
Donald Trump IS racist, regardless of the efforts of the ignorant to ignore it or explain it away.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
We have a pretty good voting system. There are some other options but each has it's pros and cons. None has a clear advantage over the other in the large scale.
This is wrong.
There are clear advantages of other voting systems over FPTP/plurality. Several criteria have been produced to compare voting systems (example comparisons here). Where criteria focus on specific (often worst-case) scenarios, voting simulations can help see the bigger picture. It can be shown that plurality necessarily devolves into a two-party system.
It is clear that plurality is a terrible system, even if there is no unanimous concensus on which replacement is the best.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.