Jump to content
MadonnaNation.com Forums

Trump / US politics thread 🚽


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 950
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

3 hours ago, Nightshade said:

At the risk of my own mental health (and losing my temper), I'll say this shit one more time. Bernie was not cheated. He barely did shit to campaign in the large delegate-rich southern states like Florida and Texas (until the very last minute) and Hillary built up her delegate lead to the point where he couldn't surpass her. Also, he had the whole damn campaign to win hyper-liberal California (nearly the last one to vote) and he still lost by a hefty margin.

Why don't you blame his lack of strategy or not starting his campaign sooner? Obama routed Hillary in 2008 because he had a plan. Bernie could have done the same but he ran a piss poor ground game. Don't you think the DNC was not in the Clinton's pockets in 2008 too? Obama broke through that. Bernie could not. And if Hillary was such a weak candidate, how could he possibly lose? Oh, that's right. Not enough debates? There were six that drew a cumulative 60 million+ viewers. They both gave most of the same answers over and over. What break through did you think was going to happen?

I love me some Bernie, but he's just as much an opportunist as Clinton. He joined the Democratic Party just to run for President. Why not run as an Independent? Everyone is always bashing the two-party system. I have no sympathy for someone who joins a club that they have never belong to and expects to be nominated to lead the party within 1 year of joining. At least have the common sense to acknowledge your lack of foresight and planning.

Thank you. Your response makes much more sense. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, MeakMaker said:

Thank you. Your response makes much more sense. 

No it doesn't. You'd have to be blind, deaf and stupid to not see that POPULISM was sweeping across the West, and that the Dems hitching their wagon to a Clinton was the worst idea possible. Dyed in the wool blue states didn't suddenly turn red for the fun of it, States that voted for Obama twice in a row didn't suddenly  just turn into Republican racists/sexists/xenophobes. A sizemic shift took place that the lazy, complacent Democrats didn't see coming. People wanted something different and had they the choice of Sanders or Trump, there's a MUCH bigger chance that the "different" they chose might have been Sanders... definitely NOT crooked Hillary, who was the chosen one from the start but offered absolutely nothing but the status quo and a vagina. And by all accounts, the Dems are still a complete ineffectual mess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kim said:

No it doesn't. You'd have to be blind, deaf and stupid to not see that POPULISM was sweeping across the West, and that the Dems hitching their wagon to a Clinton was the worst idea possible. Dyed in the wool blue states didn't suddenly turn red for the fun of it, States that voted for Obama twice in a row didn't suddenly  just turn into Republican racists/sexists/xenophobes. A sizemic shift took place that the lazy, complacent Democrats didn't see coming. People wanted something different and had they the choice of Sanders or Trump, there's a MUCH bigger chance that the "different" they chose might have been Sanders... definitely NOT crooked Hillary, who was the chosen one from the start but offered absolutely nothing but the status quo and a vagina. And by all accounts, the Dems are still a complete ineffectual mess.

This! 

Kim crack corn and I don't care

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kellyanne-conway-break-law-illegal-ivanka-trump-fashion-branc-product-endorse-live-tv-usp-resident-a7571621.html

Kellyanne Conway may have broken the law by endorsing Ivanka Trump's products on live TV

The senior presidential adviser appeared to be standing inside the White House press briefing room as she made her remarks

Jon Sharman 

Thursday 9 February 2017 15:34 GMT

One of Donald Trump's most senior advisers may have broken the law by endorsing his daughter's brands on live TV.  

Kellyanne Conway discussed the President's tweet to Nordstrom - one of the retailers that has dropped Ivanka Trump's products - on the Fox & Friends program. 

Mr Trump was accused of "abusing" the presidency after his public outburst about the company on Twitter, which was retweeted by the official @POTUS account.

Despite the furore shares in the chain of department stores, rose after his admonishment.

Ms Conway twice praised Ms Trump as a "very successful businesswoman", but said she had "obviously stepped away from it now".   

Later, she said: "Go buy Ivanka's stuff, is what I would say. It's a wonderful line, I own some of it. I'm going to give a free commercial here, go buy it today."

Ms Conway appeared to be standing inside the White House press briefing room as she made her remarks.

Larry Noble, the general counsel for the Campaign Legal Centre, a nonpartisan organisation based in Washington DC, immediately suggested she had broken the law.  

"Appears Kellayanne Conway may have just violated ban on Federal employee using public office for endorsement of product," he tweeted. 

The statute he cited, 5 CFR 2635.702, addresses the "use of public office for private gain". Part (c) states: "An employee shall not use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office to endorse any product, service or enterprise", except in certain circumstances.

Mr Trump had lashed out at Nordstrom after it dropped his daughter's line of apparel.

He tweeted: "My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person -- always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible".

Nordstrom, which previously sold 71 Ivanka Trump items, has not bought any stock for 2017 and currently has only three lines of her shoes on its website.

Press secretary Sean Spicer later said: "I think this was less about his family business and was an attack on his daughter.

"He ran for president, he won, he’s leading this country, and I think for people to take out their concern on his action or his executive orders, on members of his family, [then] he has every right to stand up for his family and applaud their business activities [and] their success."

The Independent approached the White House for comment but none was available at the time of publication.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Kim said:

No it doesn't. You'd have to be blind, deaf and stupid to not see that POPULISM was sweeping across the West, and that the Dems hitching their wagon to a Clinton was the worst idea possible. Dyed in the wool blue states didn't suddenly turn red for the fun of it, States that voted for Obama twice in a row didn't suddenly  just turn into Republican racists/sexists/xenophobes. A sizemic shift took place that the lazy, complacent Democrats didn't see coming. People wanted something different and had they the choice of Sanders or Trump, there's a MUCH bigger chance that the "different" they chose might have been Sanders... definitely NOT crooked Hillary, who was the chosen one from the start but offered absolutely nothing but the status quo and a vagina. And by all accounts, the Dems are still a complete ineffectual mess.

Yes I do agree with you and it's easy to blame this and that but specifically with Sanders something wasn't right. Hillary Clinton has always been such a polarising figure that the Democratic Party must have run out of options at that point. And if it's true Sanders joined the party so late in his political transition he wouldn't have been a credible candidate after all. 

Lets face it people want to see new faces. They want to see new policies. They're waiting for the saviour who is going to give them back the money they once had. Trump has promised a lot of things to his people. He did promise a wall and total Muslims shot down and a lot of people liked that but he also promised jobs and a much wider consideration towards the working class and those people fell into the trap. He won because he became the spokesperson for all those fed up, angry, forgotten people who have always blamed the government or globalisation for their money problems.  Needless to say, the fools will always believe the fool. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Hector said:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kellyanne-conway-break-law-illegal-ivanka-trump-fashion-branc-product-endorse-live-tv-usp-resident-a7571621.html

Kellyanne Conway may have broken the law by endorsing Ivanka Trump's products on live TV

The senior presidential adviser appeared to be standing inside the White House press briefing room as she made her remarks

Jon Sharman 

Thursday 9 February 2017 15:34 GMT

One of Donald Trump's most senior advisers may have broken the law by endorsing his daughter's brands on live TV.  

Kellyanne Conway discussed the President's tweet to Nordstrom - one of the retailers that has dropped Ivanka Trump's products - on the Fox & Friends program. 

Mr Trump was accused of "abusing" the presidency after his public outburst about the company on Twitter, which was retweeted by the official @POTUS account.

Despite the furore shares in the chain of department stores, rose after his admonishment.

Ms Conway twice praised Ms Trump as a "very successful businesswoman", but said she had "obviously stepped away from it now".   

Later, she said: "Go buy Ivanka's stuff, is what I would say. It's a wonderful line, I own some of it. I'm going to give a free commercial here, go buy it today."

Ms Conway appeared to be standing inside the White House press briefing room as she made her remarks.

Larry Noble, the general counsel for the Campaign Legal Centre, a nonpartisan organisation based in Washington DC, immediately suggested she had broken the law.  

"Appears Kellayanne Conway may have just violated ban on Federal employee using public office for endorsement of product," he tweeted. 

The statute he cited, 5 CFR 2635.702, addresses the "use of public office for private gain". Part (c) states: "An employee shall not use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office to endorse any product, service or enterprise", except in certain circumstances.

Mr Trump had lashed out at Nordstrom after it dropped his daughter's line of apparel.

He tweeted: "My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom. She is a great person -- always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible".

Nordstrom, which previously sold 71 Ivanka Trump items, has not bought any stock for 2017 and currently has only three lines of her shoes on its website.

Press secretary Sean Spicer later said: "I think this was less about his family business and was an attack on his daughter.

"He ran for president, he won, he’s leading this country, and I think for people to take out their concern on his action or his executive orders, on members of his family, [then] he has every right to stand up for his family and applaud their business activities [and] their success."

The Independent approached the White House for comment but none was available at the time of publication.

Poor Ivanka :( she must be starving now her business is not doing so well thanks to daddy's dodgey policies. But hey the government can help. The White House is coming to the rescue.. Soon we will have a number to call to help her like they do with charities for the homeless .:lmao:

It's outrageous how America has become a shamble of a country with Trump.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/9/conway-counseled-plugging-ivanka-trump-merchandise/

White House says Conway ‘counseled’ after promoting Ivanka Trump’s merchandise

By Dave Boyer - The Washington Times
Thursday, February 9, 2017

Trump_The_Latest_23705_jpg_96a05_s878x60

The White House said Thursday that presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway has been “counseled,” after urging viewers in a TV interview to buy products from the clothing line of presidential daughter Ivanka Trump.

“Kellyanne has been counseled, and that’s all we’re going to go on,” said White House press secretary Sean Spicer. He did not elaborate.

During an interview on Fox News earlier Thursday from the White House, Mrs. Conway told viewers, “Go buy Ivanka’s stuff.”

“I own some of it. I fully, I’m gonna just going to give a free commercial here,” she said. “Go buy it today everybody. You can find it online.”

Critics accused her of breaking federal ethics rules. She was responding to moves by Nordstrom’s and other stores to pull Ivanka Trump’s merchandise, which the White Househas said was politically motivated.

----

Sean Spicer sounds so uncomfortable :lmao:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Kim said:

No it doesn't. You'd have to be blind, deaf and stupid to not see that POPULISM was sweeping across the West, and that the Dems hitching their wagon to a Clinton was the worst idea possible. Dyed in the wool blue states didn't suddenly turn red for the fun of it, States that voted for Obama twice in a row didn't suddenly  just turn into Republican racists/sexists/xenophobes. A sizemic shift took place that the lazy, complacent Democrats didn't see coming. People wanted something different and had they the choice of Sanders or Trump, there's a MUCH bigger chance that the "different" they chose might have been Sanders... definitely NOT crooked Hillary, who was the chosen one from the start but offered absolutely nothing but the status quo and a vagina. And by all accounts, the Dems are still a complete ineffectual mess.

I totally agree with everything you said.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Roland Barthes said:

What a glorious day : ban dismissed by court, Ivanka by retailers and Trump having a massive tantrum. (and Conway being caught in the crossfires)

Yes! :D Was beyond dying for this beast to FINALLY have a loss...in this case major losses (as in plural)! Even if it's temporary, don't care... 'something' anything needed to happen which it hasn't since 11/8! Plz let this just be the beginning of much more and bigger loses for him and that shit repulsive team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Roland Barthes said:

What a glorious day : ban dismissed by court, Ivanka by retailers and Trump having a massive tantrum. (and Conway being caught in the crossfires)

Hoping this is the start of things to come re frustation and opposition for Trump.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL *Hopefully mean its a TEASER. Rosie's revenge!! :D Watch 'that' of all things be the thing that topples him over for good. I know he's barely human...maybe, but it is just not physically and mentally possible for anyone to live day after day after day in the White House sleeping 3 to 4 hours fighting with EVERYbody and every company etc etc...while being president of the US before you lose your f'king mind and/or have a massive coronary ! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

China U-turn is latest sign Trump may turn out to be a paper tiger

US leader has softened on a range of issues. Is he a bully who relents when challenged, or is he learning the limits of his power?

 
Xi Jinping and Donald Trump.
Xi Jinping and Donald Trump. The US president has confirmed the US commitment to the ‘One China’ policy. Photograph: Reuters

Is Donald Trump turning out to be a paper tiger? China’s rulers might be forgiven for thinking so after the US president performed a U-turn on Taiwan, but the shift did not come out of the blue.

Trump’s approach to a range of key international issues has softened significantly since he took office, suggesting a lurch towards conformity and away from disruption. His acceptance of the One China policy, under which Washington does not challenge Beijing’s claim to what it deems a breakaway province, was a stunning reversal, contradicting previous suggestions he would pursue closer ties with Taiwan.

The Chinese appear to have successfully applied considerable diplomatic pressure, insisting on a reaffirmation of existing US policy on Taiwan as a precondition for discussing issues closer to Trump’s heart, such as bilateral trade. Beijing made clear Taiwan was a red line. President Xi Jinping called Trump’s bluff. Trump blinked first.

The idea that Trump is all talk has been slowly gaining ground since his inauguration last month, though it contains an element of wishful thinking. In his first week in office Trump and his inner circle tried hard to demonstrate they were honouring controversial campaign promises such as restricting immigration from Muslim-majority countries.

But there have been a string of unmistakeable, Taiwan-like foreign policy shifts on substance, reaching beyond mere questions of tone and style. One is Trump’s revised attitude to expanded Israeli settlements. Another is his pledge to move the US embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv. Israel’s government, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, plainly believed Trump’s election meant a green light for unrestricted new building. But in an interview published on Friday by the Israel Hayom newspaper, Trump performed a volte-face, saying settlement construction was “not helpful” in advancing the moribund peace process. Trump also hedged on his embassy pledge. “It’s not an easy decision. It’s been discussed for so many years. No one wants to make this decision,” he said.

Advertisement

Trump’s inflammatory campaign pledges on other sensitive foreign policy are also being watered down. His warning to Japan and South Korea, Washington’s two most important Asian allies, that they should not rely so much on the US for their defence seems to have been forgotten. James Mattis, the new US defence secretary, spent last week in Seoul and Tokyo offering reassurances that the US was as reliable a friend as ever. In fact, Mattis went further, specifically promising Japan that the US military would defend the disputed Senkaku islands in the South China Sea from any Chinese encroachment. He also confirmed the deployment of a new missile defence system in South Korea.

Trump’s view on Nato has also been almost miraculously transformed. Before taking office he claimed it was obsolete. He has since told Nato’s secretary general that he is “strongly committed” to the alliance, a message repeated by Mattis and the CIA director, Mike Pompeo, during a visit to Turkey. Trump gave Britain’s Theresa May a similar assurance at the White House.

Following a pattern, Trump ignominiously backed down after a row with Australia’s prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, over a refugee resettlement deal. After Turnbull stood up to him, the “bully-in-chief”, as Australian commentators dubbed him, caved in. The deal is going ahead.

And despite vowing to shake up the United Nations and withdraw US funding, Trump’s new UN ambassador, Nikki Haley, lost no time in using the security council platform to clarify his administration’s attitude to Russia. Haley pinned the blame on Russia for a recent surge of violence in eastern Ukraine and warned sanctions would not be lifted until Moscow reversed its annexation of Crimea. “We do want to better our relations with Russia. However, the dire situation in eastern Ukraine is one that demands clear and strong condemnation of Russian actions,” Haley said.

The US condemnation punctured the narrative, popular among Trump’s opponents, that he is naively seeking an unconditional “reset” with Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president. Improved relations remain Trump’s goal. He continues to heap praise on Putin, a leader whose ruthlessness and killer instinct he says he respects.

Advertisement

But on Russia’s involvement in Syria and Afghanistan, on the perceived threat it poses to eastern Europe, and on the problems arising from Russian-linked cyber and information warfare, Trump’s approach has turned cautious of late. It is gradually moving into alignment with that of his predecessor Barack Obama and Nato.

Even on Iran, Trump’s bark has so far proved far worse than his bite. He reviles Tehran as the world capital of state-sponsored terrorism. His national security adviser, Michael Flynn, recently threatened unspecified military action after a rogue missile test. But Trump seems to have heeded advice from May and others that he cannot simply tear up the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, as he had vowed to do. The hot air in the White House has cooled, pending what it calls a “strategic review” of America’s Iran policy. Obama could not have put it better.

Is Trump learning on the job? Or is he just a bully who backs off when he encounters resistance? Given his volatility and unpredictability, it is possible he could reverse himself again on key policies, reverting to his more radical and destabilising ideas. So far, the responsibilities of office, and the complexities of the issues, do seem to be weighing more heavily on Trump’s outlook. Other national leaders and more experienced advisers like Mattis are exerting influence. And Trump, in office, is coming up against a sobering reality that faces all American leaders sooner or later: the limits of presidential power.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump's cabinet pick for Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price was confirmed today. What a delightful man! :scared:

Price called the SCOTUS marriage ruling a 'sad day' for marriage, scores a 0 on the Human Rights Campaign scorecard, opposes trans rights in schools, voted NO on reauthorizing the  Violence Against Women Act, voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation, voted NO on a bill to fight hate crimes based on sexual orientation, voted YES on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. He also supported gay-hating Atlanta Police Chief Kelvin Cochran in his 'religious freedom' battle. And there's more - read through. http://www.towleroad.com/2017/02/tom-price-lgbt-2/

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hector said:

Piers Morgan vs Jim Jefferies :jerry:

 

Pierse is one of the most revolting ppl to ever walk the earth. He must be booed wherever SHE goes! What a VILE bitch!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...