# Donald Trump



## Leo Whitepaw (Jun 9, 2018)

Yay, another debate thread! 
Donald Trump; A tosspot and a madmad who shouldn't be in chage of a country thats almost as big as his ego, OR; THE HERO THE WORLD NEEDS?


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Batman isn't the hero Gotham wants; he's the hero Gotham _needs_. 

Donald Trump is the hero America wants, but he's the_ opposite_ of what it needs.


----------



## Ginza (Jun 9, 2018)

Can we not?? Seriously. This is the dumbest, and most obvious fucking bait thread I’ve ever seen.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Ginza said:


> Can we not?? Seriously. This is the dumbest, and most obvious fucking bait thread I’ve ever seen.


Well, I got my Batman joke in!


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

Tempted to make a Hillary Clinton thread..


----------



## ellaerna (Jun 9, 2018)

@Leo Whitepaw, dear, I think it would do you best to search for these things before posting. Most of this is all "been there, argued that".


----------



## Ginza (Jun 9, 2018)

ellaerna said:


> @Leo Whitepaw, dear, I think it would do you best to search for these things before posting. Most of this is all "been there, argued that".



Not only is this comment correct ^^

But also..

We have soooo many political threads burning here rn. So many people are at each other’s throats, and incapable of even basic human empathy. Let’s try not to make the environment any more hostile than it already is.


----------



## Leo Whitepaw (Jun 9, 2018)

ellaerna said:


> @Leo Whitepaw, dear, I think it would do you best to search for these things before posting. Most of this is all "been there, argued that".


Damn decade or so old site too full of shez so nothing original can happen ._.


----------



## ellaerna (Jun 9, 2018)

Ginza said:


> Not only is this comment correct ^^
> 
> But also..
> 
> We have soooo many political threads burning here rn. So many people are at each other’s throats, and incapable of even basic human empathy. Let’s try not to make the environment any more hostile than it already is.


Eh, I feel like there's really only maybe 2 or 3 right now. Which is still 2 or 3 more than most people can stand.


----------



## ellaerna (Jun 9, 2018)

Leo Whitepaw said:


> Damn decade or so old site too full of shez so nothing original can happen ._.


I'm sorry we're so old and argumentative.
Though "is Donald Trump good or bad" isn't exactly original content. That was a fire started back when he was campaigning for the Republican seat.


----------



## Ginza (Jun 9, 2018)

ellaerna said:


> Eh, I feel like there's really only maybe 2 or 3 right now. Which is still 2 or 3 more than most people can stand.



That’s true, but over the course of this month, we’ve had far too many. This is a furry forum, not a political debate forum. It’s exhausting, and having personally had someone dox and harass me (thankfully that dude is gone now) over political threads on this site, I’m not keen on them. All we do there is screech “NAZI!!” and “SJW!!”

I’m a member of over 10+ different forums. Not a single one is so discordant and filled with such vitriol.


----------



## Leo Whitepaw (Jun 9, 2018)

Ginza said:


> I’m a member of over 10+ different forums. Not a single one is so discordant and filled with such vitriol.


I'll take that as a compliment


----------



## ellaerna (Jun 9, 2018)

Ginza said:


> That’s true, but over the course of this month, we’ve had far too many. This is a furry forum, not a political debate forum. It’s exhausting, and having personally had someone dox and harass me (thankfully that dude is gone now) over political threads on this site, I’m not keen on them. All we do there is screech “NAZI!!” and “SJW!!”
> 
> I’m a member of over 10+ different forums. Not a single one is so discordant and filled with such vitriol.


I'd like to point out that I was one of the people getting called "SJW" on a thread about you, hun.  It's not really confined to political threads.
The CoC thing was a huge cluster fuck tho.



Leo Whitepaw said:


> I'll take that as a compliment


Hey, now. Tis I who am the number one forum ruiner, not you.


----------



## Ginza (Jun 9, 2018)

ellaerna said:


> I'd like to point out that I was one of the people getting called "SJW" on a thread about you, hun.  It's not really confined to political threads.
> The CoC thing was a huge cluster fuck tho.
> 
> 
> Hey, now. Tis I who am the number one forum ruiner, not you.



That’s fair enough- I too was called a SJW on here a few days ago lmao. I think even you could get a chuckle out of that one xD


----------



## ellaerna (Jun 9, 2018)

Ginza said:


> That’s fair enough- I too was called a SJW on here a few days ago lmao. I think even you could get a chuckle out of that one xD


Was it a new member? had to be a new member.


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 9, 2018)

Hero.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 9, 2018)

I support him...

Career politicians had their chance for a long time.
The people voted otherwise this time...


----------



## Ginza (Jun 9, 2018)

ellaerna said:


> Was it a new member? had to be a new member.



No!! That’s the funny part  It was an old time member here lmao


----------



## Infrarednexus (Jun 9, 2018)

He's the most entertaining president in the history of America.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> I support him...
> 
> Career politicians had their chance for a long time.
> The people voted otherwise this time...



As somebody from another nation, I can understand why career politicians are viewed as a privileged class of people who haven't known what it is to not know where their next meal is coming from.
I can't understand why somebody who was born into a billionaire family is considered a preferable alternative, though. 

It's a bit like being fed up with Mayor Quimby and deciding to let Mr Burns run Springfield.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> As somebody from another nation, I can understand why career politicians are viewed as a privileged class of people who haven't known what it is to not know where their next meal is coming from.
> I can't understand why somebody who was born into a billionaire family is considered a preferable alternative, though.
> 
> It's a bit like being fed up with Mayor Quimby and deciding to let Mr Burns run Springfield.




Correction,
he was born into a millionaire family and turned it into billions...

People just need to get over the fact that the electoral college gave him the presidency for 4 years...

Liberals will have their chance again in 2020 to get their voice out.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> As somebody from another nation, I can understand why career politicians are viewed as a privileged class of people who haven't known what it is to not know where their next meal is coming from.
> I can't understand why somebody who was born into a billionaire family is considered a preferable alternative, though.
> 
> It's a bit like being fed up with Mayor Quimby and deciding to let Mr Burns run Springfield.


People on the Left have learned little of why he was voted into office these two years. Come 2020 and they don't actually understand why and work on their failures, he will be reelected in 2020. I will guarantee it.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

He represents the lack of sophistication in the lower classes, the uneducated, and the desperate. And it goes to show that if you're desperate enough, you'll vote for truly vile individuals to try and get some positive (or what you hope will be positive) change. 

unfortunately, Muslims aren't actually flooding the country with terrorism, Mexicans aren't actually stealing all the jobs, and the climate actually is changing, and it actually is worrisome for someone to say "grab em by the pussy." 

The main reason the economy is bad right now for lower class and working class people is because the manufacturing sector left the country. Because unbridled capitalism doesn't give a crap about you and your family. 

Which is why we need progressive politics who understand that and will punish corporations that ship jobs overseas and evade taxes and violate worker rights.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> People on the Left have learned little of why he was voted into office these two years. Come 2020 and they don't actually understand why and work on their failures, he will be reelected in 2020. I will guarantee it.



If that's true, and it happens again, neighbor may well then against neighbor, the riots will be even worse, and a civil war may develop.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> If that's true, and it happens again, neighbor may well then against neighbor, the riots will be even worse, and a civil war may develop.


Riots because someone's candidate didn't win. People need to fucking grow up and deal with it like an adult.


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> If that's true, and it happens again, neighbor may well then against neighbor, the riots will be even worse, and a civil war may develop.



I’m gonna say that’s a bit hyperbolic, lol.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> He represents the lack of sophistication in the lower classes, the uneducated, and the desperate. And it goes to show that if you're desperate enough, you'll vote for truly vile individuals to try and get some positive (or what you hope will be positive) change.
> 
> unfortunately, Muslims aren't actually flooding the country with terrorism, Mexicans aren't actually stealing all the jobs, and the climate actually is changing, and it actually is worrisome for someone to say "grab em by the pussy."
> 
> ...




Did Obama's progressiveness change anything in 8 years?


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> If that's true, and it happens again, neighbor may well then against neighbor, the riots will be even worse, and a civil war may develop.




I know who the winning side would be...


----------



## Joni (Jun 9, 2018)




----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> Riots because someone's candidate didn't win. People need to fucking grow up and deal with it like an adult.



If by deal with it you mean calmly accept the will of the majority installing what is essentially an immature despot into office again, no, it is very unlikely people will simply "deal with it," nor do I think they should. Violence and war may become the only available option at that point.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> Did Obama's progressiveness change anything in 8 years?



It changed a few things for the better, yes. Unfortunately he was not actually progressive enough - he did not tap down on the oil sector enough, he engaged in war in the Middle East, and did not do a very good job with socialized healthcare, but a lot of that was because of the insurance lobby and republicans.


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> People on the Left have learned little of why he was voted into office these two years. Come 2020 and they don't actually understand why and work on their failures, he will be reelected in 2020. I will guarantee it.



Eh it’s really hard with a group disenfranchised group of people.

Trump was telling them what they wanted to hear, he gave them hope that he’d bring their dying jobs back, and etc.

Democrats said retraining for newer jobs was the way to go and well the disenfranchised didn’t really want to hear that. 

Trump might win again, though.  Not going to argue there.  Pendulum politics says the president will usually (Not always) get two terms.  So saying Trump will win again is like saying water is wet just about.



Ramjet556 said:


> Did Obama's progressiveness change anything in 8 years?



Eh.  Obama wasn’t really that progressive. 

His most progressive thing was healthcare and that was still heavily catered to corporations.  Yeah not that progressive.

Edit:  He talked like he was going to be progressive though, but never really delivered.


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> If that's true, and it happens again, neighbor may well then against neighbor, the riots will be even worse, and a civil war may develop.


I'm not intimidated. Also, that's not going to convince me to vote otherwise in 2020 just so these people don't try to kill me.


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Jun 9, 2018)

A dangerous mental defective unfit to lead. It belongs in a madhouse, not the White House.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> People on the Left have learned little of why he was voted into office these two years. Come 2020 and they don't actually understand why and work on their failures, he will be reelected in 2020. I will guarantee it.



I think part of it is schadenfreude; I think the people who support him enjoy the feeling that electing him upsets people who they perceive as being 'on the left'.

Given the events of the past 2 years, including the appointment of a new head of the CDC who believed AIDS is God's punishment upon gay people, if you do know the true secret that Trump will win in 2020 you need to share it and help stop his reelection; this is real people's lives and not a massive trolly joke.



Ramjet556 said:


> Did Obama's progressiveness change anything in 8 years?



Yes. Let's talk about social progress for gay people since so many of us furries are lgbt.


-Crimes motivated against people because of their sexuality became classified as hate crimes, allowing for harsher sentencing. 
-Gay people can now marry across the entire US.
-The ban on HIV travelers was lifted. Previously some of the world's top HIV researchers had been banned from entering the US because they themselves were infected. 
-Don't ask don't tell ended. 
-Trans people could serve in the military now. (Trump subsequently reversed this)


----------



## Skychickens (Jun 9, 2018)

I’m on the fence. Once in awhile he does things I really support and I think needed done. 

Other times I’m like ~.~


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> If by deal with it you mean calmly accept the will of the majority installing what is essentially an immature despot into office again, no, it is very unlikely people will simply "deal with it," nor do I think they should. Violence and war may become the only available option at that point.


He was democratically elected. Deal with it.


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 9, 2018)

Ill add that I am a bit cynical about the whole “Trump got voted for this reason” and such anyway.

I’d honestly prefer to see the democrats get a good “get out to vote” campaign for all the democrats who always  sit out to vote every year.  It’s hard to get them to vote.

Republicans  talk like “Trump won because he was a non career politician.”

Yet I live in Mississippi a heavily republican state.  In 2015 we had a governor race against Phil Bryant (a career republican) and Robert Grey (a democratic hard working middle class truck driver  who’d never set foot in politics in his life).

Phil Bryant won in a landslide.

  Where was the we need a non experienced politician then?  Oh yeah he wasn’t republican.

The thing is.  The stubborn dividedness has always been here.  I’ve lived in Mississippi 25 years and I never remembered a time where liberals weren’t disliked a lot here.  So why bother with them?  They’re going to hate us no matter.  It’s the culture.

As said democrats always have the problem of having a good portion of people not even get up to go vote.  I’d rather figure out how to get them out, than worry about whether I can change the opinions of people who will likely never like us/ or not vote for us even if they do respect us anyway.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> He was democratically elected. Deal with it.



Bahgdaddy made a mistake here anyway. Trump was not elected by a majority. 
His rival got 48% of the votes, while he only got 46%. 

United States presidential election, 2016 - Wikipedia


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> Bahgdaddy made a mistake here anyway. Trump was not elected by a majority.
> His rival got 48% of the votes, while he only got 46%.
> 
> United States presidential election, 2016 - Wikipedia


She only won the popular vote with a 55% meetup on voting day. Your point is?


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> She only won the popular vote with a 55% meetup on voting day. Your point is?



Merely that democracy isn't simple majority rule anyway. The current democratic system in the US currently places far more importance on the views of people in areas that are likelier to be socially conservative. 

In the future, with the anticipated demographic changes that are expected to occur in the US (higher city populations), this effect will reverse and Republicans may discover that they are unable to win the presidency even if most of the voters chose them.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> Merely that democracy isn't simple majority rule anyway. The current democratic system in the US currently places far more importance on the views of people in areas that are likelier to be socially conservative.
> 
> In the future, with the anticipated demographic changes that are expected to occur in the US (higher city populations), this effect will reverse and Republicans may discover that they are unable to win the presidency even if most of the voters chose them.


The Electoral College is there to prevent mob rule. It's working as intended.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> Bahgdaddy made a mistake here anyway. Trump was not elected by a majority.
> His rival got 48% of the votes, while he only got 46%.
> 
> United States presidential election, 2016 - Wikipedia




You do know how electoral college works right?

If you took out California,who would more then likely vote for a Mr. Potato head with a blue cap with a D on it vs a Republican.
Donald would have won the popular vote too..


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> The Electoral College is there to prevent mob rule. It's working as intended.



So if Donald Trump were to lose the election 2020, in spite of winning the most votes, would you consider that an example of mob rule being defeated?



Ramjet556 said:


> You do know how electoral college works right?
> 
> If you took out California,who would more then likely vote for a Mr. Potato head with a blue cap with a D on it vs a Republican.
> Donald would have won the popular vote too..



Did you know if you ignored everybody who didn't vote for Vermin Supreme then Vermin Supreme would have won?


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> So if Donald Trump were to lose the election 2020, in spite of winning the most votes, would you consider that an example of mob rule being defeated?


No. If he loses as how the Electoral College works, he lose. There is nothing more to it. Popular vote doesn't matter, no matter who gets the most votes. 

Mob rule, aka, popular vote is not how you win an election in the US. If the US actually was a Democracy then Hillary would indeed have won back in 2016. But it's not. It's a Republic.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> No. If he loses as how the Electoral College works, he lose. There is nothing more to it. Popular vote doesn't matter, no matter who gets the most votes.
> 
> Mob rule, aka, popular vote is not how you win an election in the US. If the US actually was a Democracy then Hillary would indeed have won back in 2016. But it's not. It's a Republic.



Then why is your answer 'no' ?

You just made an argument *for* why a candidate losing in the electoral college, even if they do win the popular vote, is an example of a republic defeating mob rule.


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> No. If he loses as how the Electoral College works, he lose. There is nothing more to it. Popular vote doesn't matter, no matter who gets the most votes.
> 
> Mob rule, aka, popular vote is not how you win an election in the US. If the US actually was a Democracy then Hillary would indeed have won back in 2016. But it's not. It's a Republic.



Wait you just said Trump won democratically earlier. 

Now you’re saying the US isn’t actually a democracy?


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

AppleButt said:


> Wait you just said Trump won democratically earlier.
> 
> Now you’re saying the US isn’t actually a democracy?



My theory is that Trump's supporters don't care how he wins so long as he wins.

In 2016 people thought the electoral college would cause Trump to lose, and Trump was vociferously criticising the electoral college as a corrupt institution; he even said he wouldn't recognise the result of the election if he lost.

Trump was criticising the electoral college all the way back in 2012. x3 
He only started praising it after he won because of it. 

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/266038556504494082


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

AppleButt said:


> Wait you just said Trump won democratically earlier.
> 
> Now you’re saying the US isn’t actually a democracy?


He won democratically as the US allows. Through the Electoral College. A Republic is still a form of Democracy, which is what I was referencing. I know how the US' election system works. 



Fallowfox said:


> Then why is your answer 'no' ?
> 
> You just made an argument *for* why a candidate losing in the electoral college, even if they do win the popular vote, is an example of a republic defeating mob rule.


TL;DR: The popular vote doesn't matter.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> He won democratically as the US allows. Through the Electoral College. A Republic is still a form of Democracy, which is what I was referencing. I know how the US' election system works.
> 
> 
> TL;DR: The popular vote doesn't matter.



So if Donald won the popular vote, but lost the electoral college, would you view this as an example of the electoral college working as it should do.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> So if Donald won the popular vote, but lost the electoral college, would you view this as an example of the electoral college working as it should do.


I am pretty sure I stated that earlier.


Yakamaru said:


> No. If he loses as how the Electoral College works, he lose. There is nothing more to it. Popular vote doesn't matter, no matter who gets the most votes.



~Edit~
Oh, and that Tweet? It was 6 years ago. People's minds can easily change in that time, so moot point.


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> So if Donald won the popular vote, but lost the electoral college, would you view this as an example of the electoral college working as it should do.


 Yeah, but it would suck... Trump himself said the college was bullshit, but ironically it's what made him win.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> Yeah, but it would suck... Trump himself said the college was bullshit, but ironically it's what made him win.



Yeah, I agree it is ironic. A lot of Trump's supporters defend the institution of the electoral college even though Trump himself was very clear about how unfair he thought it was.

Do you think Trump will be a man of his word and change the electoral college to make it fairer?



Yakamaru said:


> I am pretty sure I stated that earlier.


That's what's confusing me. Your answer disagreed with your argument.

Do you not see that? I assumed it was just because my English hadn't come across clearly enough the first time.


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> Yeah, I agree it is ironic. A lot of Trump's supporters defend the institution of the electoral college even though Trump himself was very clear about how unfair he thought it was.
> 
> Do you think Trump will be a man of his word and change the electoral college to make it fairer?


 Dunno, I guess he's going to take advantage of the system that allowed him to win.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> Dunno, I guess he's going to take advantage of the system that allowed him to win.



I think he will too. 

I think that tells us everything we need to know about whether Trump and his supporters actually value democratic ideals.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> That's what's confusing me. Your answer disagreed with your argument.
> 
> Do you not see that? I assumed it was just because my English hadn't come across clearly enough the first time.


What do you not understand with my statements? The Electoral College works as intended. Popular vote doesn't matter.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> What do you not understand with my statements? The Electoral College works as intended. Popular vote doesn't matter.



I asked you to consider the situation where the electoral college causes Trump to lose. I asked you if that would be an example of the electoral college preventing mob rule- as it was intended to do. 

You said 'no'.


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> I think he will too.
> 
> I think that tells us everything we need to know about whether Trump and his supporters actually value democratic ideals.


 I think democracy has a lot of problems tbh. Just because I voted for him, doesn't make me a supporter of everything he says and does; he happened to be in my best interests.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> So if Donald Trump were to lose the election 2020, in spite of winning the most votes, would you consider that an example of mob rule being defeated?
> 
> 
> 
> Did you know if you ignored everybody who didn't vote for Vermin Supreme then Vermin Supreme would have won?



Because the vote would consist of California,New York,Illinois,
Pennsylvania,Texas,and Florida...

You could basically just do the election in those six States and find out who would win the popular vote...

Tell the rest of the 44 to go fuck themselves according to you I guess...

Oh and furthermore,this is what Donald has said about gay marriage...

www.politico.com: Trump says he's 'fine' with legalization of same-sex marriage


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> I asked you to consider the situation where the electoral college causes Trump to lose. I asked you if that would be an example of the electoral college preventing mob rule- as it was intended to do.
> 
> You said 'no'.


I said no to mob rule. It will always be a thing, no matter where the pendulum swings. Mob rule however as far as the US is concerned, aka, the popular vote, is irrelevant.

Trump campaigned to win Electoral votes.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 9, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> I think democracy has a lot of problems tbh. Just because I voted for him, doesn't make me a supporter of everything he says and does; he happened to be in my best interests.




Exactly this...

I for one am not to hot on his tariffs to bring back industry to the US...
I think that can be done by incentives to make business more attractive in the US...

Tax cuts and making the government smaller is what needs to happen to get the public sector to strive...


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> He was democratically elected. Deal with it.



This is the part where I remind you to attempt to engage in serious debate instead of personal attacks. It will improve people's ability to interact with you, because otherwise such comments do not generate intelligent debate. Unless, there was something else you meant by, "deal with it?" At which point do I stop dealing with an immoral, fascist, sexist, racist, and corrupt president?


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> I said no to mob rule. It will always be a thing, no matter where the pendulum swings. Mob rule however as far as the US is concerned, aka, the popular vote, is irrelevant.
> 
> Trump campaigned to win Electoral votes.



The electoral college is a holdover from the slavery era. It needs to be abolished. It purpose is to prevent despots and corrupt leaders from making it to office, so clearly it has failed.


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> immoral, fascist, sexist, racist, and corrupt


 You want to engage in a buzzword debate instead?


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 9, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> You want to engage in a buzzword debate instead?



He forgot Nazi,can't forget that jem!!



BahgDaddy said:


> The electoral college is a holdover from the slavery era. It needs to be abolished. It purpose is to prevent despots and corrupt leaders from making it to office, so clearly it has failed.




So according to you because of how you feel,it over trumps (pun intended) millions of votes and dozens of States that wouldn't have a say in the matter if it was up to you...

How cute


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> This is the part where I remind you to attempt to engage in serious debate instead of personal attacks. It will improve people's ability to interact with you, because otherwise such comments do not generate intelligent debate. Unless, there was something else you meant by, "deal with it?"


If I wanted to insult and/or throw personal attacks I would make myself crystal clear. I am telling you to be an adult and deal with it, like I would tell everyone else. You can't always get what you want. It's how reality works.



BahgDaddy said:


> At which point do I stop dealing with an immoral, fascist, sexist, racist, and corrupt president?


You have a couple of months until midterms. I hope you can do better than this.


----------



## MarquisofGIF (Jun 9, 2018)

As a mexican person myself i have a little bit of hard feelings about his comment toward us, i feel America do not deserve to have this kind of person in the white house because his actions and certain comments that are not worthy of The President of United States, i think that to be a president you must have a code of honor, you have to be a role model and a inspiration for american people to feel proud to be americans and i respect and love american people very much, they have been very nice people to me so far, most of my good friends are americans, i owe my job to americans (i work with Progressive car  insurance) and most of my childhood is made by american culture and the fact that this person represents your country it kinda cringes me, because we have to be fair, Donald Trump is trying to look at the interests of his people and trying to raise up the amount of job in the country, i have to admit that he is at least trying to, i do agree with the wall thing and i know many people disagree with me, most mexicans if not all sees the wall as the symbol of the president's words aganist México but i disagree, i must admit that he went too far with his comments but i also disagree and despise the ilegal immigration thing. Why? Because it is not fair.

Living as a American citizen is a honor, a reward form the moment you born and many mexicans want to live the American dream though it takes a process and oyu need documents in order to live up in a country that is not yours anymore. And Ilegal immigrants are taking the jobs from american workers to give them to their families (i THINK they don't even pay taxes), and SOME of them (not all like Trump said) are in fact criminals and they are giving the true LEGAL immigrants a bad name. I do have to recognize that Trump had a good idea to stop ilegal immigration although he should avoid certain words.

Raising up the prices of steel and aluminium of America allies is also a bad move but i will notget in detail about it. I don't like Trump as a person because he is too unpredictable, too egocentric, and i PERSONALLY think is a bit hypocrite, giving allies a raise up of the american products but licking the balls of Kim Jong Un it bugs me a bit. Of course what a mexican like me would know about the subject? Only what i've seen in the News. So if you think i have a wrong point or i say nonsense, please let me know and have a educated discussion.


----------



## MarquisofGIF (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Mexicans aren't actually stealing all the jobs,.


I believe some ilegals do, not all of them but some are taking the jobs for less payment, i could be wrong though.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Jun 9, 2018)

MarquisofGIF said:


> As a mexican person myself i have a little bit of hard feelings about his comment toward us, i feel America do not deserve to have this kind of person in the white house because his actions and certain comments that are not worthy of The President of United States, i think that to be a president you must have a code of honor, you have to be a role model and a inspiration for american people to feel proud to be americans and i respect and love american people very much, they have been very nice people to me so far, most of my good friends are americans, i owe my job to americans (i work with Progressive car  insurance) and most of my childhood is made by american culture and the fact that this person represents your country it kinda cringes me, because we have to be fair, Donald Trump is trying to look at the interests of his people and trying to raise up the amount of job in the country, i have to admit that he is at least trying to, i do agree with the wall thing and i know many people disagree with me, most mexicans if not all sees the wall as the symbol of the president's words aganist México but i disagree, i must admit that he went too far with his comments but i also disagree and despise the ilegal immigration thing. Why? Because it is not fair.
> 
> Living as a American citizen is a honor, a reward form the moment you born and many mexicans want to live the American dream though it takes a process and oyu need documents in order to live up in a country that is not yours anymore. And Ilegal immigrants are taking the jobs from american workers to give them to their families (i THINK they don't even pay taxes), and SOME of them (not all like Trump said) are in fact criminals and they are giving the true LEGAL immigrants a bad name. I do have to recognize that Trump had a good idea to stop ilegal immigration although he should avoid certain words.
> 
> Raising up the prices of steel and aluminium of America allies is also a bad move but i will notget in detail about it. I don't like Trump as a person because he is too unpredictable, too egocentric, and i PERSONALLY think is a bit hypocrite, giving allies a raise up of the american products but licking the balls of Kim Jong Un it bugs me a bit. Of course what a mexican like me would know about the subject? Only what i've seen in the News. So if you think i have a wrong point or i say nonsense, please let me know and have a educated discussion.


What you said was very reasonable and agreeable. You made excellent points on both ends.


----------



## MarquisofGIF (Jun 9, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> What you said was very reasonable and agreeable. You made excellent points on both ends.



Thank you, Donald Trump is a controversial figure, from the rumors about Russia internvention to the elections, the ban of people of muslim countries, the controversial comments about mexicans and immigration, his known mysoginy and sexism, challenge the leader of North Korea with his "big nuclear button", forcing car companies to move out from Mexico to go back to the US, and ultimately raising the prices of Metal and aluminium to American allies... well, i do not know what the president is trying to achieve, perhaps all in the end have good results i hope, but this movements are just... i don't know, randomly executed in my opinion, i know he is a business man but the White House is not another business to run, we are talking about the most powerful country, the life of many citizens, their lifestyle and products they consume, the morals you have to prove as the PRESIDENT nonetheless. Trump, America is not your personal Trump Tower, people have morals and many if not most americans would be better candidates than you sir.


----------



## Saiko (Jun 9, 2018)

I don’t particularly care about the electoral college system right now. I’m more bothered that the country elected someone with zero political experience. That alone disqualified him for me, and I think he keeps proving again and again that I was right.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> I said no to mob rule. It will always be a thing, no matter where the pendulum swings. Mob rule however as far as the US is concerned, aka, the popular vote, is irrelevant.
> 
> Trump campaigned to win Electoral votes.



You're not really addressing my question. It don't know if it's  because you're not a native English speaker and contradiction you made isn't linguistically apparent to you.

Suffice to say the logically consistent answer to my question would have been 'yes'. Have a think about it?



Yakamaru said:


> If I wanted to insult and/or throw personal attacks I would make myself crystal clear. I am telling you to be an adult and deal with it, like I would tell everyone else. *You can't always get what you want.* It's how reality works.
> 
> 
> You have a couple of months until midterms. I hope you can do better than this.



I'm not sure if this is intentional, or just coincidental.
But, Interestingly this was the song Donald chose to play when he won.

It's a famous Rolling Stone song.

The Rolling stones repeatedly told Donald Trump he didn't have permission to use their Music at his Rallies, describing his as a 'Moron'.
www.bbc.co.uk: Rolling Stones say no to Donald Trump 

Odd little Fun-Fact there.




Ramjet556 said:


> Because the vote would consist of California,New York,Illinois,
> Pennsylvania,Texas,and Florida...
> 
> You could basically just do the election in those six States and find out who would win the popular vote...
> ...




Obviously the issue of the electoral college is a pretty wide discussion.
Suffice to say though, demography of the US is changing and in the next decades the electoral college is predicted to become biased in favour of democratic presidents.

Can you predict what the people currently defending it will think of it then?


Regards LGBT rights, I think it is woeful that the best thing that can be said of Trump is that he hasn't removed Gay Americans' right to marry.

He has removed Trans Americans' right to serve.
He has appointed a new head of the CDC who thinks AIDS is a punishment on gays 'from God'.


If you care about LGBT Americans, you've got to support a different candidate for 2020. It doesn't matter if it's A republican or a democrat- just somebody who isn't prepared to facilitate a regress in this key social progress that has been made for LGBT Americans.


----------



## Simo (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> It's a famous Rolling Stone song.
> 
> The Rolling stones repeatedly told Donald Trump he didn't have permission to use their Music at his Rallies, describing his as a 'Moron'.
> www.bbc.co.uk: Rolling Stones say no to Donald Trump



Well, they're not US citizens, but I'd much rather have Mick Jagger or Keith Richards, as president!


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> You want to engage in a buzzword debate instead?



I know what they mean and I've used each word precisely and understand the definitions and reasons why I've used each word. I doubt the same can be said for your unsophisticated verbiage.


----------



## Simo (Jun 9, 2018)

Also, I think Lou Reed would have been a good president, but sadly, he passed away. Seems like he would have been both iconically cool, and down to earth. And he would have a presidential motocycle, instead of a limo, that'd be fun. Meh, these dowdy golfing dolts we get are boring. I wanna Rock'n'Roll president.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> If I wanted to insult and/or throw personal attacks I would make myself crystal clear. I am telling you to be an adult and deal with it, like I would tell everyone else. You can't always get what you want. It's how reality works.
> 
> 
> You have a couple of months until midterms. I hope you can do better than this.



Yaka, why do you have a habit of being a nice guy for a brief period, and then reverting immediately back to an insult disaster the instant a serious debate emerges? Nothing you've said here has any intellectual substance and is in fact  essentially a long way of saying "suck it up, buttercup," like a high school dropout from the south. 

This back and forth, hot and cold behavior is extremely manipulative and dishonest. If you refrained from this activity people would be able to take you more seriously - it makes any sort of previous apology from you look contrived and conceited.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

The elephant in the room is that there is a tight covariance between users who support trump and users who post content asking us to engage in debates about the extent of the holocaust, to defend the ethnic identity of europe, or who think being called a Nazi is a 'badge of honour'. 

We have to refrain from using words like 'racist', even when they are completely justified, because these words trigger them.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

MarquisofGIF said:


> I believe some ilegals do, not all of them but some are taking the jobs for less payment, i could be wrong though.



They do create competition for lower paying jobs, this is true. Ironically this is simply a function of free market enterprise, something conservatives claim to love.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> The elephant in the room is that there is a tight covariance between users who support trump and users who post content asking us to engage in debates about the extent of the holocaust, to defend the ethnic identity of europe, or who think being called a Nazi is a 'badge of honour'.
> 
> We have to refrain from using words like 'racist', even when they are completely justified, because these words trigger them.



Sort of like how using the word zoophile will often make actual zoophiles fly off the deep end too.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Yaka, why do you have a habit of being a nice guy for a brief period, and then reverting immediately back to an insult disaster the instant a serious debate emerges? Nothing you've said here has any intellectual substance and is in fact  essentially a long way of saying "suck it up, buttercup," like a high school dropout from the south.
> 
> This back and forth, hot and cold behavior is extremely manipulative and dishonest. If you refrained from this activity people would be able to take you more seriously - it makes any sort of previous apology from you look contrived and conceited.


Telling you to grow up and deal with shit like an adult is an insult? Cute, really.



Fallowfox said:


> You're not really addressing my question. It don't know if it's  because you're not a native English speaker and contradiction you made isn't linguistically apparent to you.
> 
> Suffice to say the logically consistent answer to my question would have been 'yes'. Have a think about it?


I addressed it. You just didn't like the answer.


----------



## MarquisofGIF (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> They do create competition for lower paying jobs, this is true. Ironically this is simply a function of free market enterprise, something conservatives claim to love.



Ilegals shouldn't work in America in the first place, i know it sounds cold and heartless but if a mexican family is struggling with lack of money then why is America's problem? If they want to work in America there's process to be done and make things properly, and if they can't do the process do something else. Mexicans are not wetbacks leeching off the american jobs, we are not bad people, but crossing the border ilegally and evading authorities like Immigration and expect a nice house and a job for that, bro that ain't cool, and i'm mexican myself, i don't even been in America before but if i'm going to or even live on it, i would like to be a model american citizen and pay all my taxes in time to help the country i'm living in. Not all ilegals are criminals, i know but crossing the border and having overstaying visas is correct?


----------



## Ginza (Jun 9, 2018)

Oh no! It looks like everyone here has lost their way  No worries, I’ll direct y’all in the right direction ————> PoliticalForum.com - Forum for US and Intl Politics

It’s an honest mistake really, the layouts are almost identical.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> Telling you to grow up and deal with shit like an adult is an insult? Cute, really.
> 
> 
> I addressed it. You just didn't like the answer.



Since your manner of speaking has suddenly devolved to gradeschool level, I will ignore you for the remainder of the thread unless you have coherent, rational statements to make. 


MarquisofGIF said:


> Ilegals shouldn't work in America in the first place, i know it sounds cold and heartless but if a mexican family is struggling with lack of money then why is America's problem? If they want to work in America there's process to be done and make things properly, and if they can't do the process do something else. Mexicans are not wetbacks leeching off the american jobs, we are not bad people, but crossing the border ilegally and evading authorities like Immigration and expect a nice house and a job for that, bro that ain't cool, and i'm mexican myself, i don't even been in America before but if i'm going to or even live on it, i would like to be a model american citizen and pay all my taxes in time to help the country i'm living in. Not all ilegals are criminals, i know but crossing the border and having overstaying visas is correct?



Yeah, but our immigration system is very muddled, discriminatory, and lengthy. Lawyers and massive amounts of paperwork, legal fees, and time may be required. Yes, that's what they should do, but we don't live in an ideal world. 

Yet in all my life of being a lower working class scrounger, I've never had a Mexican "take my job." Hmmm?


----------



## Infrarednexus (Jun 9, 2018)

Ginza said:


> Oh no! It looks like everyone here has lost their way  No worries, I’ll direct y’all in the right direction ————> PoliticalForum.com - Forum for US and Intl Politics
> 
> It’s an honest mistake really, the layouts are almost identical.


Wow. It looks just like FAF!


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> Telling you to grow up and deal with shit like an adult is an insult? Cute, really.
> 
> 
> I addressed it. You just didn't like the answer.



Yes, because you're implying that you think the person you're talking to is a child.  Talking down to other adults like they are children is rude and you wouldn't like it if somebody did it to you.


It says a lot about the mentality of Trump's base that they routinely respond to other people in this way.

I've seen examples where Trump is rightly criticised on the basis that he's making it harder for Trans people who are worried about the job discrimination that they face in their daily lives, or gay people worried about a CDC administrator that thinks HIV is a divine punishment.

The responses to these valid concerns are usually something callous like 'Grow up; Trump's going to win harder next time, Deal with it!'.

Do you care about the actual policies or do you just care about 'owning' people you've been told are your enemies?


----------



## MarquisofGIF (Jun 9, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Since your manner of speaking has suddenly devolved to gradeschool level, I will ignore you for the remainder of the thread unless you have coherent, rational statements to make.
> 
> 
> Yeah, but our immigration system is very muddled, discriminatory, and lengthy. Lawyers and massive amounts of paperwork, legal fees, and time may be required. Yes, that's what they should do, but we don't live in an ideal world.
> ...




If the immigration system is muddled, discriminatory and lenghy, shame on them but is a step that has to be done nonetheless. Also if a mexican don't "take yer job" probably is because ilegals have another target, who knows?


----------



## Galatur René (Jun 9, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> People on the Left have learned little of why he was voted into office these two years. Come 2020 and they don't actually understand why and work on their failures, he will be reelected in 2020. I will guarantee it.


I hope he isn't re-elected. I'm not even going to go into the politics on this one. I will merely say that his election and many of the things that he has done or is purported to have done, whether you agree that he has done them or not, has caused so many people that I know in the LGBTQ community who are from the South to go into panic attacks and even attempt suicide, including one of my very close family members, that such is reason alone for me to hope he's not elected again in 2020.
I don't want to debate whether he is good or bad. 
I don't want to talk about him. 
I just want to pretend he doesn't exist because of the damage this whole debate of Trump vs not Trump has done to the safety and stability of people that I hold dear.


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 9, 2018)

Galatur René said:


> I hope he isn't re-elected. I'm not even going to go into the politics on this one. I will merely say that his election and many of the things that he has done or is purported to have done, whether you agree that he has done them or not, has caused so many people that I know in the LGBTQ community who are from the South to go into panic attacks and even attempt suicide, including one of my very close family members, that such is reason alone for me to hope he's not elected again in 2020.
> I don't want to debate whether he is good or bad.
> I don't want to talk about him.
> I just want to pretend he doesn't exist because of the damage this whole debate of Trump vs not Trump has done to the safety and stability of people that I hold dear.


 I believe you clicked on the wrong thread.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 9, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> You're not really addressing my question. It don't know if it's  because you're not a native English speaker and contradiction you made isn't linguistically apparent to you.
> 
> Suffice to say the logically consistent answer to my question would have been 'yes'. Have a think about it?
> 
> ...




As far as his appointment to the CDC....
Well the guys an asshole IMO,but maybe he's actually good at his job?
He doesn't have any power beyond what his job consist at the CDC,so fuck his personal opinion....
Food for thought??

As far as what's been changed to serve;

mobile.nytimes.com: Trump Approves New Limits on Transgender Troops in the Military

"The policy recommendation that President Trump approved flatly states that “transgender persons who require or have undergone gender transition are disqualified from military service.” But it also largely gives the Pentagon the ability to make exceptions where it sees fit."



I think it's in the best interest to leave political correctness aside on this one and leave it up to top level command to decide...

JMO...Probably not a popular one,but I don't give a fuck...


----------



## Galatur René (Jun 9, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> I believe you clicked on the wrong thread.


I did. I had a morbid curiousity and now I have a morbid fear.
And now I am gone from this thread.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> As far as his appointment to the CDC....
> Well the guys an asshole IMO,but maybe he's actually good at his job?
> He doesn't have any power beyond what his job consist at the CDC,so fuck his personal opinion....
> Food for thought??
> ...



You know, I've noticed that it's almost always racists and homophobes who say "maybe he's an asshole, but at least he's good at his job!" and "we should just leave it up to top level command." I bet if they were kicking straight people out, or alt right supporters, the tune would be different. 

Actually. We've already seen when the tune gets different on here.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 9, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> Wow. It looks just like FAF!



It would be better if it was FAP


----------



## verneder (Jun 9, 2018)

Do we REALLY need a thread about trump?


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 9, 2018)

verneder said:


> Do we REALLY need a thread about trump?


 Yes.


----------



## verneder (Jun 9, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> Yes.


Huh.


----------



## Lexiand (Jun 9, 2018)

I log in to this forum
The first thing I see is a thread named Donald Trump


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 9, 2018)

SveltColt said:


> I log in to this forum
> The first thing I see is a thread named Donald Trump


 And now the next person who does will too because I bumped it.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 10, 2018)

SveltColt said:


> I log in to this forum
> The first thing I see is a thread named Donald Trump


I've been banned for a day and I come back to this?

Mandatory Picture Post


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 10, 2018)

This thread giveth me a headache.


----------



## Ginza (Jun 10, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> This thread giveth me a headache.



Which is a shame as it never even had to exist. For some reason though, this place seems to love its dumpster fires


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 10, 2018)

Ginza said:


> This place seems to love its dumpster fires


Apparently the heat from it warms people's hearts


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 10, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> You know, I've noticed that it's almost always racists and homophobes who say "maybe he's an asshole, but at least he's good at his job!" and "we should just leave it up to top level command." I bet if they were kicking straight people out, or alt right supporters, the tune would be different.
> 
> Actually. We've already seen when the tune gets different on here.




Honestly me and you aren't far apart where we think this end game is...

2020 will be interesting...


----------



## Rochat (Jun 10, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> He's the most entertaining president in the history of America.


Without a doubt. I'm pretty lib, but - lowkey - I'm kinda glad Trump got elected. It's been a nonstop shit storm and I have not been disappointed.  I understand now why the guy was on TV. There is not a boring moment. I still laugh at Scaramucci's comments towards Bannon.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 10, 2018)

People talk alot about Trump and America while the EU is running around on fire.

But you know... We just got to focus on the US


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 10, 2018)

Ginza said:


> Which is a shame as it never even had to exist. For some reason though, this place seems to love its dumpster fires



But....But.... 

Fire gives me substance...


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 10, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> Honestly me and you aren't far apart where we think this end game is...
> 
> 2020 will be interesting...



Let's swap countries, I want Trudeau, he's sexy.


----------



## Ginza (Jun 10, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Let's swap countries, I want Trudeau, he's sexy.



BahgxTrudeau fanfic OwO ?


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 10, 2018)

Ginza said:


> BahgxTrudeau fanfic OwO ?


Who cares? AlexJonesxMarazhu best ship ever


----------



## Lexiand (Jun 10, 2018)




----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 10, 2018)

SveltColt said:


>


I demand to see your browser history

And don't pull a fast one :V


----------



## Ginza (Jun 10, 2018)

SveltColt said:


>



Why did I laugh so hard at this qwq


----------



## Lexiand (Jun 10, 2018)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> I demand to see your browser history
> 
> And don't pull a fast one :V


----------



## Casey Fluffbat (Jun 10, 2018)

SveltColt said:


> View attachment 33806



The scroll bar looks neglected.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 10, 2018)

SveltColt said:


> View attachment 33806


Boring like my grandma..


IF I HAD ANY! >:U


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 10, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Let's swap countries, I want Trudeau, he's sexy.



See,
I once ask someone what and how does the government fix anything?

Well someone said,haven't you seen your government fix a road?

No I said...

Oh well yeah sure,haven't your seen your own government at work?

No?...

What?

Oh well you see the government is who actually takes care of you....

Oh,I said?


Sure....Haven't you've seen Justin Trudeau on the highway?

Wat?I said..

Yeah sure,that's how government works....

Hell....
I saw Justin Trudeau himself fill in a pothole for the common good,and with the wave of his flashy hair solidified the tar that was laid on the pavement by the man himself...

Pure leadership I tell ya


----------



## Misha Bordiga Zahradník (Jun 10, 2018)

I have a disdain for trump, but can we just not?


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 10, 2018)

www.smh.com.au: Crowd cheered Trump quote. Then speaker told them it was Obama.


----------



## Lexiand (Jun 10, 2018)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> Boring like my grandma..
> 
> 
> IF I HAD ANY! >:U







:V


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 10, 2018)

SveltColt said:


> :V




 
Svelt.. You're a literal God you are! V:
I shall make a shrine in your honor!


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 10, 2018)

www.nytimes.com: Trump Says He’s Likely to Back Marijuana Bill, in Apparent Break With Sessions

Guess what. He's for legalizing your weed.


----------



## Fallowfox (Jun 10, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> As far as his appointment to the CDC....
> Well the guys an asshole IMO,but maybe he's actually good at his job?
> He doesn't have any power beyond what his job consist at the CDC,so fuck his personal opinion....
> Food for thought??
> ...



The fact he has power in the CDC is precisely the problem Ramjet.

There has been massive progress recently in the US towards testing people for HIV and facilitating HIV research in the US etc.
The CDC needed strong leadership to continue this, not somebody who secretly supports people dying from HIV for religious reasons. :\ 
(not to mention this guy has previously been caught fabricating evidence in scientific studies; he made-up evidence to try to make it look like his 'cures' for HIV worked)


You've got to put your political allegiances aside and make decisions about who to vote for that are based on how real people's lives are affected.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 10, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> www.nytimes.com: Trump Says He’s Likely to Back Marijuana Bill, in Apparent Break With Sessions
> 
> Guess what. He's for legalizing your weed.




Saw that a couple days ago...

My reaction:

Cha Ching!!!!


----------



## Friskyaa123 (Jun 10, 2018)

I still think the gay frogs.............. and "drain the swamp", he's trying to be subtle he doesn't like us..........


mehhhhh, an LGBT person with a nice healthy stable relationship is way more secure in sexuality (even if Trump is straight) than I BAD HAIRDO HETERO CAVEMAN, TWO WOMEN SUPERMODEL TROPHY WIFE PORN STAR TROPHY MISTRESS flol

yup sorry Trump, sometimes certain versions of 'straight' look a little mentally ill to me.......... maybe 'has to be straight and confirm it' compounds mental illness and can we just use /that/ as an LGBT platform?


----------



## pandasayori (Jun 10, 2018)

tl;dr 
I’m not fond of him or government in general. That’s where I’m leaving it at for this discussion


----------



## Friskyaa123 (Jun 10, 2018)

and then they argue, some people will dislike a president but still say he was a good 'leader', even if they disagreed on policies the person will admit that they knew how to run a country in an organized way? He's not even THAT kind of good leader, lol


----------



## Telnac (Jun 10, 2018)

Trump wasn't my first choice (Scott Walker) nor my second (Ted Cruz) but he's grown on me. I see the way he brought Little Rocket Man to the negotiating table when no one else could. He's playing hardball with allies and enemies alike, which I think paradoxically will ultimately end with lower tariffs not higher ones because our trading partners realize they have more than lose by pursuing protectionist policies than we do. No, I don't think we'll get a wall but I think Congress will give him the tools, resources and technology he needs to ensure better border security through improved electronic monitoring and apprehension of those who do try to cross illegally.

Yeah, his tweets are cringe-worthy but IMO he's accomplished more in a 16 months than Obama did in 8 years.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 10, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> The fact he has power in the CDC is precisely the problem Ramjet.
> 
> There has been massive progress recently in the US towards testing people for HIV and facilitating HIV research in the US etc.
> The CDC needed strong leadership to continue this, not somebody who secretly supports people dying from HIV for religious reasons. :\
> ...



I'm about as worried for the CDC directing domestic policy as I am the Department of Forestry declaring nuclear war.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Jun 10, 2018)

Rochat said:


> Without a doubt. I'm pretty lib, but - lowkey - I'm kinda glad Trump got elected. It's been a nonstop shit storm and I have not been disappointed.  I understand now why the guy was on TV. There is not a boring moment. I still laugh at Scaramucci's comments towards Bannon.


What makes him so fun to watch is that he doesn't care what his opponents say about him. He just brushes it off his shoulder and keeps going. He has no filter and always speaks his mind regardless off how much backlash he gets. He's always on twitter making fun of Hillary and CNN for all the crap they do and the way angry people react from it makes me laugh my ass off.

One thing I admire about him is his willingness to pick fights with corporations and organizations that normal citizens would be terrified of messing with. He will criticize them to his hearts content and get away with it with a goofy grin on his face. 

The man just doesn't give a shit like other candidates do, and that's why so many people pay attention to him. Rant about him all you want, but you can't deny that he at least knows how to put on a show for a crowd.


----------



## Leo Whitepaw (Jun 10, 2018)

Has anyone shared this video yet? I can't be asked to crawl through the past 6 pages to check =P


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 11, 2018)

Unbelievable moment in history right here.
A dialogue is the first step in getting anywhere.

Here's hoping the two can strike an agreement for peace on the Korean Peninsula.


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 11, 2018)

Dat handshake though. XD


----------



## MrTrump (Jun 11, 2018)

Hello,  My name is MrTrump ....Ha ha


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 12, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> Unbelievable moment in history right here.
> A dialogue is the first step in getting anywhere.
> 
> Here's hoping the two can strike an agreement for peace on the Korean Peninsula.


I'm glad this is happening. Because it would be nice to see N.Korea liberated


----------



## TrishaCat (Jun 12, 2018)

I voted for Jill Stein.
I do not like Trump.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 12, 2018)

www.theglobeandmail.com: Trump and Kim Jong-un sign document after summit; details not yet released

www.politico.com: Trump, Kim sign 'comprehensive' document

North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un has pledged that “the world will see a major change” after signing a document with U.S. President Donald Trump early Tuesday afternoon, following unprecedented talks between the two leaders.

Trump called the document “pretty comprehensive” and claimed North Korean denuclearization would begin "very quickly" although it was not immediately clear what was in the missive.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 12, 2018)

FUUUUUUCK! I missed watching the Summit! I had intended to watch it as it went live. :V


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 12, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> FUUUUUUCK! I missed watching the Summit! I had intended to watch it as it went live. :V



All the important parts so far...


----------



## Friskyaa123 (Jun 12, 2018)




----------



## Ramjet (Jun 12, 2018)

Frisky1753 said:


>



It's sad, I really did like Steven until his jump on the everything anti-Trump train...

As far as the G7 summit, I'm from Canada and totally agree with Trump!!!Canada has imposed over 200% tariffs on over quota milk that over meets supply for years.Most every other country subsidizes their dairy industry, we instead "supply manage".Only the big industry dairy producers within Canada get to fill the quota first, leaving both small producers within Canada and foreign producers in the dust...

That's not fair trade, and Trumps calling bullshit....


----------



## CatTheHyena (Jun 12, 2018)

At this point all I want for America, is for shit to stop hitting the fan. I see so much paranoia and fear from the people around me it drives me nuts. I was talking to my 12 year old cousin the other day and she was talking about an assembly they had on safety procedures if there is a school shooter. What really bugged me was the fact that she said she was looking around each of her classrooms for places to hide or escape and she was happy about finding some "really good" hiding spots. Like, no kid should have to actively think about where they should hid in case someone comes to shoot up the school. it just makes me really sad. I'm glad they're teaching them what to do and all but I wish it wasn't necessary.


----------



## Friskyaa123 (Jun 12, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> It's sad,I really did like Steven until his jump on the everything anti-Trump train...
> 
> As far as the G7 summit,I'm from Canada and totally agree with Trump!!!
> 
> ...



they /had/ a 'train' though


----------



## Connor J. Coyote (Jun 12, 2018)

Leo Whitepaw said:


> Yay, another debate thread!
> Donald Trump; A tosspot and a madmad who shouldn't be in chage of a country thats almost as big as his ego, OR; THE HERO THE WORLD NEEDS?



Welp, here's a news flash for ya, dude - the 2016 US election is now over, and (I'm afraid to tell you) that debating about his character isn't going to change any of that.. we've already voted, and we need to move on, to other things. ☺


----------



## Friskyaa123 (Jun 12, 2018)

proof Trump is autistic

he like trains


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 12, 2018)

Frisky1753 said:


> proof Trump is autistic
> 
> he like trains


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 12, 2018)

Wow!!!

Watching Trump talk live and 3 big things so far is Kim agreeing to destroy the ICBM Engine testing site and a total denuclearization route committed.
Biggest thing though is Trump will stop those war games with Seoul!!

www.theguardian.com: Trump-Kim summit: president says US 'will be stopping the war games' – live


----------



## Friskyaa123 (Jun 12, 2018)

lol


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1006470871396028416


----------



## Sagt (Jun 12, 2018)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974315033994788865
Edit: Got rid of what I was going to say, since this video speaks for itself about how the mainstream opinion on certain stances is made.


----------



## Oblique Lynx (Jun 12, 2018)

I don't mind Trump. He's done some stupid things, but he at least gets some things right. Wouldn't mind having him as the leader of my country


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 12, 2018)

Lcs said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974315033994788865
> Edit: Got rid of what I was going to say, since this video speaks for itself about how the mainstream opinion on certain stances is made.



Doing anything as a democrat is considered a sin in this country That’s nothing new.

I’ll give Trump a chance on this though.  Hopefully the whole NK thing gets solved. 

However, something just feels weird about it.  I dunno.


----------



## Sagt (Jun 12, 2018)

AppleButt said:


> Doing anything as a democrat is considered a sin in this country That’s nothing new.
> 
> I’ll give Trump a chance on this though.  Hopefully the whole NK thing gets solved.
> 
> However, something just feels weird about it.  I dunno.


One of the things that bothers me is that it was less than a year ago that the Trump cultists were defending him for antagonising Kim Jong Un and escalating the conflict with threats.

These same faces I saw with these positions now believe open dialogue and peaceful resolution is the best option.


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 12, 2018)

Lcs said:


> One of the things that bothers me is that it was less than a year ago that the Trump cultists were defending him for antagonising Kim Jong Un and escalating the conflict with threats.
> 
> These same faces I saw with these positions now believe open dialogue and peaceful resolution is the best option.



Seems like I remember a time they hated Russia, too.

Doesn’t seem to be the case anymore, lol.


----------



## Some Moron (Jun 12, 2018)

Trump is the best meme of all time.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 12, 2018)

Here's the whole summit between NoKo's Kong Jong Un and United States' Donald Trump.





I don't mind commentary as long as they don't interrupt.

~Edit~
I said that the summit would happen as planned. It went pretty well too, from the looks of it. Which is good for stability in the entire region.

Predictions for the next 6 years: 

For Russia, there will be things going on with them too, but ultimately they will be invited to trade as well. First escalation then deescalation(as per how Putin's been doing it for years). Relations start improving as Russia is invited to join in trade, joint ops and other common bonding actions. Sanctions will be dropped towards Russia at some point. 

For NoKo, denuclearization. Trade and tourism starts to slowly flow as NoKo slowly gets looser on its Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism. SoKo and NoKo starts talking properly again. 

Those are my predictions that are Trump-/US-related.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 12, 2018)

Shane McNair said:


> These two have the weirdest relationship ever...
> 
> Around this time last year, they were hurling childish playground insults at each other and basically threatening nuclear war. And now, they're meeting on friendly terms, having a chat, and making nice.
> 
> Also, lol @ at Dennis Rodman.




Oh man that was sooooooo cringe


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 12, 2018)

Lcs said:


> One of the things that bothers me is that it was less than a year ago that the Trump cultists were defending him for antagonising Kim Jong Un and escalating the conflict with threats.
> 
> These same faces I saw with these positions now believe open dialogue and peaceful resolution is the best option.



That's what brought this to the table in the first place...

This is going back to a time you kids don't understand, an age of peace through strength..

Appeasement never works.
Decades of sanctions and crap deals of appeasement through both Democrat & Republican administrations have done nothing...

Trump's hard talk was the line in the sand that no other administration was willing to do, it worked...Kim blinked.

Also keep in mind it was Kim who wanted this meeting.


----------



## Saiko (Jun 12, 2018)

As I recall, a major factor in this was NK accidentally collapsing their testing facility (because, surprisingly enough, nuking a mountain is bad for the mountain). I think this whole thing is primarily us letting them save face in exchange for their cooperation.


----------



## Gem-Wolf (Jun 12, 2018)

He is a dangerous idiot with a low IQ


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Jun 12, 2018)

I may have to actually eat my hat over some of the things Trump is achieving. Denuclearization, reuniting North and South Korea and opening up NK to trade and possibly tourism. He still failed to address many illegal acts with NK but I think Trump's approach to befriending your enemy first _then _addressing the issues is a wise thing to do.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 13, 2018)




----------



## Ciderfine (Jun 14, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> Tempted to make a Hillary Clinton thread..


Do it, I will write a campaign check for you if you do.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jun 14, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> Here's the whole summit between NoKo's Kong Jong Un and United States' Donald Trump.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I won't deny Trump did a good thing here but I think you may be gilding the lily on how far this is going to go. We are talking about North Korea here.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 14, 2018)

www.vox.com: Trump just struck a shockingly weak deal with North Korea



> But despite the pomp and circumstance, experts say that Trump’s agreement with Kim is more of a symbolic achievement than a substantive one. They’re also concerned that Trump has conceded far too much to Pyongyang without receiving enough — if anything — in return.
> 
> The agreement’s language is apparently more vague and less demanding of North Korea’s denuclearization program than previous agreements the US has had with the country. Some see Trump’s decision to halt joint US-South Korean military exercises as a huge and unreciprocated giveaway to Kim.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 14, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


>



It's really hard for me to take loud, obnoxious and verbally unpolished people seriously, especially when they have a history of factual and science denial, including but not limited to climate change denial.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jun 14, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> It's really hard for me to take loud, obnoxious and verbally unpolished people seriously, especially when they have a history of factual and science denial, including but not limited to climate change denial.


He watches Breitbart religiously so I'd take anything "factual" from Yaka with a grain of salt.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 14, 2018)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> I won't deny Trump did a good thing here but I think you may be gilding the lily on how far this is going to go. We are talking about North Korea here.


They've already signed the deals. Once stability returns to the Korean Peninsula, North Korea might see the much-needed economic growth they've pretty much missed due to the Authoritarian nature of the NoKo regime.

In close to 70 years NoKo and SoKo are finally starting to talk. Kim's visit to the US is going to be entertaining to watch. :3



BahgDaddy said:


> It's really hard for me to take loud, obnoxious and verbally unpolished people seriously, especially when they have a history of factual and science denial, including but not limited to climate change denial.


He's a New York City businessman. He may be crude, but he speaks his mind whenever he pleases and gets things done. He's politically incorrect, which is why so many voted for him and support him.

He's rocking the boat of the elite, and they hate it.



Ovi the Dragon said:


> He watches Breitbart religiously so I'd take anything "factual" from Yaka with a grain of salt.


Lmao. I read Breitbart once in a while, I won't deny that. Doesn't mean they are wrong, considering they often quote everything from Washington Post to CNN themselves.

I would recommend you stop dismissing those you disagree with, or have you learned nothing these past months you've been on Discord?

It's this sort of dismissal of those you disagree with that got Trump into the White House to begin with.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 14, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> They've already signed the deals. Once stability returns to the Korean Peninsula, North Korea might see the much-needed economic growth they've pretty much missed due to the Authoritarian nature of the NoKo regime.
> 
> In close to 70 years NoKo and SoKo are finally starting to talk. Kim's visit to the US is going to be entertaining to watch. :3
> 
> ...



Ovi can dismiss whomever he pleases. Telling him to refrain from this behavior is a debate squelching tactic and an attempt at free speech suppression. 

If he is a NY businessman, he is already an elite. Why is he a better elite than the other elite, and what is this elite you refer to? Perhaps it is the caricature of the west coast intellectual elites. These people are so terrible they've created a mega economy on par with most countries. 

Political incorrectness is one thing. Outright denial of factual evidence on a consistent basis is another entirely.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jun 14, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> They've already signed the deals. Once stability returns to the Korean Peninsula, North Korea might see the much-needed economic growth they've pretty much missed due to the Authoritarian nature of the NoKo regime.
> 
> In close to 70 years NoKo and SoKo are finally starting to talk. Kim's visit to the US is going to be entertaining to watch. :3
> 
> ...


Every time you show a news story it's always Breitbart. Ya can't pull wool over my eyes. And yes Breitbart has a history of sharing bullshit. Like apparently Obama supports ISIS or is a damn Kenyan


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 14, 2018)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> Every time you show a news story it's always Breitbart. Ya can't pull wool over my eyes. And yes Breitbart has a history of sharing bullshit. Like apparently Obama supports ISIS or is a damn Kenyan


When was the last time I shared a Breitbart article? Feel free to quote me, mate. Should be pretty easy to find the post I've made on the forum.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jun 14, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> When was the last time I shared a Breitbart article? Feel free to quote me, mate. Should be pretty easy to find the post I've made on the forum.



forums.furaffinity.net: Free speech, and why it is important

http://forums.furaffinity.net/threa...partnership’-with-social-media-firms.1588008/

Gonna keep searching but not only have I seen you share it here I've seen you share it on Discord. Stop with the bullcrap.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jun 14, 2018)

forums.furaffinity.net: Right To Try another thread where yaka first posts breitbart before any other news site


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jun 14, 2018)

This one seems recent forums.furaffinity.net: North And South: Potential Unity


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jun 14, 2018)

forums.furaffinity.net: ANTIFA Furries do you want me to keep going? You get your "news" from trash. Some things are true but a ton of it is just propaganda by the right.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 14, 2018)

Ovi the Dragon said:


> forums.furaffinity.net: Free speech, and why it is important
> 
> http://forums.furaffinity.net/threa...partnership’-with-social-media-firms.1588008/
> 
> Gonna keep searching but not only have I seen you share it here I've seen you share it on Discord. Stop with the bullcrap.


I use Breitbart in some instances, CNN, BBC, +++ in others. It depends on the topic and whether or not I have the stomach to read the drivel a lot of them write.

Are the articles incorrect though? Just because someone uses different sources doesn't mean you are to dismiss what they are saying, something that you currently are doing.

Last link you have was from 2016 by the way. First one from March of this year, including other sources.



Ovi the Dragon said:


> forums.furaffinity.net: Right To Try another thread where yaka first posts breitbart before any other news site





Ovi the Dragon said:


> This one seems recent forums.furaffinity.net: North And South: Potential Unity





Ovi the Dragon said:


> forums.furaffinity.net: ANTIFA Furries do you want me to keep going? You get your "news" from trash. Some things are true but a ton of it is just propaganda by the right.


I use Breitbart in those instances to compare with other outlets. In some cases because they are the only ones who actually report on the issue. Or did that fact completely pass you by? 

Just because I use Breitbart at times doesn't mean you should dismiss what I say/argue for. "You use X source, so what you're saying doesn't matter".

But go ahead, feel free to dismiss those you disagree with. Continue down the road that the Left have been going down for many years now.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jun 14, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> I use Breitbart in some instances, CNN, BBC, +++ in others. It depends on the topic and whether or not I have the stomach to read the drivel a lot of them write.
> 
> Are the articles incorrect though? Just because someone uses different sources doesn't mean you are to dismiss what they are saying, something that you currently are doing.
> 
> ...


Yeah yeah. You share Breitbart links on Discord too without the long winded effort of grabbing other articles to try to get people to keep taking you seriously. If a normal person looks at Breitbart for a second everyone can see the bias and the propaganda. This isn't a Breitbart debate thread, but I just thought people should know the type of source you look at for "news" before they start taking everything you say seriously.


----------



## Filter (Jun 14, 2018)

I'm a classical liberal, and I support Trump. He's pragmatic, he scaled back a few detrimental governmental restrictions (something I'd like to see more of), and even gave us a sizeable tax break. Was he my first choice? No. Do I think he's doing a good job? Yes. For the most part. The economic outlook is positive, we're paying more attention to domestic issues, and I'm glad that he hasn't been as hawkish or authoritarian as Obama and Bush. Clinton would have picked up where they left off.


----------



## WithMyBearHands (Jun 14, 2018)

Biiiiiiitch I got so many memes for this


----------



## WithMyBearHands (Jun 14, 2018)

On topic tho.  I am disgusted with how he acts, carries himself, and treats others.  Dude needs to be put down like Old Yeller.

On the other hand, there are some things I agree with him on.  I will totally take back all the shit I talked on his policies if it actually ends up helping America.  I’m not that proud.  But I’m also not that hopeful.


----------



## Dongding (Jun 15, 2018)

I like Trump because I live in Canada and your guys' presidents are like, our #1 pass-time. All we have is smelly ass Trudeau.


----------



## Simo (Jun 15, 2018)

He's mean, nasty rude. If i had kids, he's not what i wanna them to see. 

with that,

this is what i hear in Baltimore, in a mix, or outta car window


----------



## Simo (Jun 15, 2018)




----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 15, 2018)

Some people...


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 15, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> www.vox.com: Trump just struck a shockingly weak deal with North Korea




I love this...

Weren't you guys like 6 months ago saying Trump was on a war path to WW3 and all that jazz?

The document is quite clear.
As long as Pyongyang is having progressive dialogue with the US the war games stop...
Seems legit right?

I mean the only reason to have these games is to practice a military offensive agaisnt NK.Seems pretty reasonable to me to take this off the table to establish trust with the regime...
Also as Trump stated these drills are very very expensive.Aren't liberals always crying how much money is wasted on the military?

I guess that's just it though,you guys want him to fail...
If bombs start dropping you'd have people here and the Hollywood elite laughing their asses off on late night stating, hahaha we told you so, as millions of people are killed in Japan and South Korea...

Maybe the lot of you should take a look in the mirror sometime and do a little soul searching to see where your real priorities lie...


----------



## Misha Bordiga Zahradník (Jun 15, 2018)




----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 15, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> I love this...
> 
> Weren't you guys like 6 months ago saying Trump was on a war path to WW3 and all that jazz?
> 
> ...


*MOST *of the left will continue to hate trump no matter how hard he tries because he's a white male


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 15, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> I love this...
> 
> Weren't you guys like 6 months ago saying Trump was on a war path to WW3 and all that jazz?
> 
> ...


I will just say this: Midterms will be hilarious to watch. And so will 2020 be.


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 15, 2018)

WithMyBearHands said:


> On topic tho.  I am disgusted with how he acts, carries himself, and treats others.  Dude needs to be put down like Old Yeller.
> 
> On the other hand, there are some things I agree with him on.  I will totally take back all the shit I talked on his policies if it actually ends up helping America.  I’m not that proud.  But I’m also not that hopeful.



Same. 

I think he’s pretty cool for trying to work with NK. 

It’s just hard to be too excited about it because well it’s NK and anything can happen. 

And it’s really hard for me to tell if people around are actually excited about this whole NK thing, or if it’s just because “Fuck yeah, Trump!  Woohoo!”


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 15, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> I love this...
> 
> Weren't you guys like 6 months ago saying Trump was on a war path to WW3 and all that jazz?
> 
> ...



Most of your post is emotional tugging and lacks significant substance to warrant my attention. 

I'm much more interested in why these peace talks have evolved, mostly it seems because NK and SK have reached agreements on their own without the US doing much more than takin credit for it... like we do with most things. 



Yakamaru said:


> I will just say this: Midterms will be hilarious to watch. And so will 2020 be.



And that's the problem in our country, too many people view it as a a spectator sport. Much of this is due fo intellectual simplicity and lack of maturity, as well as a sort of religious devotion to political parties and people instead of principles. So, people who think it will be hilarious, should be criticized as being intellectual unsophisticated and highly problematic to civilized democracy.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 15, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Most of your post is emotional tugging and lacks significant substance to warrant my attention.
> 
> I'm much more interested in why these peace talks have evolved, mostly it seems because NK and SK have reached agreements on their own without the US doing much more than takin credit for it... like we do with most things.
> 
> ...




The talks between Kim and Moon came after Trump's maximum pressure campaign, not before...

Kim's running out of money and he needs sanction pressure to be relieved....


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 15, 2018)

AppleButt said:


> Same.
> 
> I think he’s pretty cool for trying to work with NK.
> 
> ...


Denuclearization in the Korean Peninsula is going to give millions upon millions of people the ability to sleep at night without the fear of a possible nuke being dropped in their backyard.

The 3 previous Presidents also had their chance to deal with North Korea, including officially naming Jerusalem the capital of Israel. They just kicked the ball further down the road instead on both topics. Now that the US have a POTUS who does things(and primarily from his campaign promises and vows), they attack him regardless of what it is. 

I do not find what he does surprising. He is doing what he set out to do in accordance with his campaign manifesto. Even if it's not listed it's a good guide of what he will do/change in the future depending on what kind of topic/issue occurs.

Going to be interesting to see how Putin and Russia is dealt with though..


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 15, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Most of your post is emotional tugging and lacks significant substance to warrant my attention.




Btw....


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1003709048557064199
I rest my case...


----------



## Infrarednexus (Jun 15, 2018)

WithMyBearHands said:


> Dude needs to be put down like Old Yeller



If there's one thing I will never forget from Donald Trumps presidential career, it's that he brought out the absolute worst in people. People are encouraging that he should be killed (even in this thread). I've seen TV skits and rap songs about it along with the endless twitter posts that no one seems to be bothered with. Some are even going after his wife and children,harassing and stalking them only for the sake of upsetting Trump.

*I didn't support Obama during his campaign, but I would be disgusted if I heard someone saying that he should be killed and/or family attacked*. This sort of behavior is unacceptable from anyone, regardless of their alignment or what they believe. If your upset by Trump and his actions, then how about you civilly explain it without encouraging violence against him like some degenerate savage. When did you find yourself fit to decide who lives and who dies in over something like politics? Best you keep that hateful shit to yourself.


----------



## WithMyBearHands (Jun 15, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> If there's one thing I will never forget from Donald Trumps presidential career, it's that he brought out the absolute worst in people. People are encouraging that he should be killed (even in this thread). I've seen TV skits and rap songs about it along with the endless twitter posts that no one seems to be bothered with. Some are even going after his wife and children,harassing and stalking them only for the sake of upsetting Trump.
> 
> *I didn't support Obama during his campaign, but I would be disgusted if I heard someone saying that he should be killed and/or family attacked*. This sort of behavior is unacceptable from anyone, regardless of their alignment or what they believe. If your upset by Trump and his actions, then how about you civilly explain it without encouraging violence against him like some degenerate savage. When did you find yourself fit to decide who lives and who dies in over something like politics? Best you keep that hateful shit to yourself.


Wow #triggrd

Also *you’re 
But thanks for playing, show them what they’ll be leaving with, Gary!


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 15, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> Btw....
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1003709048557064199
> I rest my case...



Oddly enough I don't trust a random Twitter poll supposedly purporting that people would willingly not give credit where credit is due. 

It's these sort of trollish, unsophisticated tactics that often make it difficult to take right wing politics seriously. 

Further, the fact that this poll could be, in any way, taken seriously by anyone indicates that a significant portion of the populous is rather, to put it lightly, quite barbaric in their thinking capacities.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 15, 2018)

Infrarednexus said:


> If there's one thing I will never forget from Donald Trumps presidential career, it's that he brought out the absolute worst in people. People are encouraging that he should be killed (even in this thread). I've seen TV skits and rap songs about it along with the endless twitter posts that no one seems to be bothered with. Some are even going after his wife and children,harassing and stalking them only for the sake of upsetting Trump.
> 
> *I didn't support Obama during his campaign, but I would be disgusted if I heard someone saying that he should be killed and/or family attacked*. This sort of behavior is unacceptable from anyone, regardless of their alignment or what they believe. If your upset by Trump and his actions, then how about you civilly explain it without encouraging violence against him like some degenerate savage. When did you find yourself fit to decide who lives and who dies in over something like politics? Best you keep that hateful shit to yourself.



Are we forgetting that Trumpsters are the same people who invented Pizzagate, called Michelle Obama an ape in various manners, and had a pretend black lynching of President Obama when he was elected? And made up the Kenyan birth certificate and insulted supposed Muslim allegiance as well. 

Difference is, this stuff was all made up. Whereas Trump is a legitimately despicable individual. 

I still don't approve of death threats and classless insults. I suggest we not stoop to his level.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 15, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Oddly enough I don't trust a random Twitter poll supposedly purporting that people would willingly not give credit where credit is due.
> 
> It's these sort of trollish, unsophisticated tactics that often make it difficult to take right wing politics seriously.
> 
> Further, the fact that this poll could be, in any way, taken seriously by anyone indicates that a significant portion of the populous is rather, to put it lightly, quite barbaric in their thinking capacities.




Are you serious???

WATCH THE VIDEO!!
You think someone made it up???
LMAO

The only one using emotion tactics here is you, remember your gun control thread?
Your just using diversion tactics here to avoid answering questions, and its showing...

Now let me ask you....
If the shoe was on the other foot and it was a conservative talk show host with a conservative audience and Hillary won the election and was in the same boat, what your opinion of the audience be?


----------



## Ginza (Jun 15, 2018)

WithMyBearHands said:


> Wow #triggrd
> 
> Also *you’re
> But thanks for playing, show them what they’ll be leaving with, Gary!


----------



## WithMyBearHands (Jun 15, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> Are you serious???
> 
> WATCH THE VIDEO!!
> You think someone made it up???
> ...


Still shitty bc I hate them both equally.  My local ballot only had those two and I didn’t feel like writing in anyone else.  I scrubbed my hands with steel wool and rubbing alcohol when I got home the same as id have done if I’d voted for Trumplethinskin


----------



## WithMyBearHands (Jun 15, 2018)

Ginza said:


> View attachment 34146


That’s why it’s funny


----------



## Cawdabra (Jun 15, 2018)

Ginza said:


> View attachment 34146


I love that image. The text perfectly fits that face.


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 15, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> Btw....
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1003709048557064199
> I rest my case...



Let’s not pretend the other side wouldn’t have been as tribal had Obama done the same thing.


----------



## JJOHNSONFAN (Jun 15, 2018)

yea but..... trump or trudeau?


----------



## Cawdabra (Jun 15, 2018)

JJOHNSONFAN said:


> yea but..... trump or trudeau?


----------



## Infrarednexus (Jun 15, 2018)

Cawdabra said:


>


Ah, Ben Garrison. A really talented artist if I do say so myself.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 15, 2018)

Cawdabra said:


>


Ben Garrison is <3.


----------



## JJOHNSONFAN (Jun 15, 2018)

Cawdabra said:


>




welcome to trudeau! bunch of lies, broken promisses and being a chickenshit and flooding the country w refugee's that should go back where they came from

as i say about our anthem! OH CANADA! THE HOME OF IMAGRANTS AND LIBERALS


----------



## Dongding (Jun 15, 2018)

He's undoing decades of Canadian diplomacy and economic viability. The trade tariff thing was the best news I've heard in a long time. Maybe we'll stop exporting all of our resources and producing products instead.

Edit: Canada should build a wall around our country...


----------



## JJOHNSONFAN (Jun 15, 2018)

Dongding said:


> He's undoing decades of Canadian diplomacy and economic viability. The trade tariff thing was the best news I've heard in a long time. Maybe we'll stop exporting all of our resources and producing products instead.
> 
> Edit: Canada should build a wall around our country...



yea but they are liberals.... they wont give shit to the people and keep everything for them selfs


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 15, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> Are you serious???
> 
> WATCH THE VIDEO!!
> You think someone made it up???
> ...



I would have a similarly negative view of such a badly worded and ill intentioned poll. It's easy to get wrong answers deliberately on such a poll. It's also a small sample size - the audience of one show?

The only diversion tactic I'm using is refusing to lend credence to complete intellectual garbage. Find me a poll from Gallup or Pew and I will listen to you. Until then you've lost my attention.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 15, 2018)

JJOHNSONFAN said:


> yea but they are liberals.... they wont give shit to the people and keep everything for them selfs



Hey, didn't know you had an account here. o_o

I'm a liberal by the way. I like to think I care about other people and what goes on in this world and the country. It's unfair to assume people are x, y, or z because of their political affiliation.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 15, 2018)

AppleButt said:


> Let’s not pretend the other side wouldn’t have been as tribal had Obama done the same thing.




The small minority right wing morons who were calling Obama an ape and such, yup no arguement there absolutely...
General (more centrist) conservatives though, I have my doubts..


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 15, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> I would have a similarly negative view of such a badly worded and ill intentioned poll. It's easy to get wrong answers deliberately on such a poll. It's also a small sample size - the audience of one show?
> 
> The only diversion tactic I'm using is refusing to lend credence to complete intellectual garbage. Find me a poll from Gallup or Pew and I will listen to you. Until then you've lost my attention.




I'm not quoting this audience as a tell all, hell some of them probably voted yes just for haha's....

The original point that you seem to miss is that this behavior seems to be acceptable on your side...

Could you imagine if Rush Limbaugh had the same poll on his talk show with Hillary at the helm? You'd hear it on every MSM site...
Your side does it?.....Deafening silence......


----------



## Rant (Jun 15, 2018)

Yes! Let the fires burn! Burn all of FAF!!


----------



## WithMyBearHands (Jun 15, 2018)

Cawdabra said:


>


Take away the title and it looks like really weird gay smut


----------



## WithMyBearHands (Jun 15, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> The small minority right wing morons who were calling Obama an ape and such, yup no arguement there absolutely...
> General (more centrist) conservatives though, I have my doubts..


Idk my dad was pretty “centrist” and he still thinks it’s okay to use the N word


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 15, 2018)

WithMyBearHands said:


> Idk my dad was pretty “centrist” and he still thinks it’s okay to use the N word



Does he do rap battles?

If so maybe he can get away with it


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 15, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> I'm not quoting this audience as a tell all, hell some of them probably voted yes just for haha's....
> 
> The original point that you seem to miss is that this behavior seems to be acceptable on your side...
> 
> ...



Well, I'm not sure why you're talking to me then,  because I'm as quick to criticize my side when they behave immaturely as when the other side does it. It cheapens the process and is an unsophisticated debate tactic that should not be used. 

It's fair to say the right is fairly quick to introduce personal attacks and religious apologetics, though. 

Additionally, I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh, nor any other talk show. I consider it imprudent to subject myself to only one person's opinions (vitriolic ones at that) for any substantial duration of time.


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 15, 2018)




----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 16, 2018)

WithMyBearHands said:


> Take away the title and it looks like really weird gay smut


Speaking of weird gay smut.. There's a Putin x Trump one out there. With Putin as the sub. :V



Dongding said:


> He's undoing decades of Canadian diplomacy and economic viability. The trade tariff thing was the best news I've heard in a long time. Maybe we'll stop exporting all of our resources and producing products instead.
> 
> Edit: Canada should build a wall around our country...


Every country should have a wall up towards countries that are known to have illegals flowing in. For Israel for instance it's reduced the amount of illegals flowing in by like 95%, but I will have to find a more accurate number as I only remember a rough estimate.

~Edit~
Just checked. It's at 99% apparently.
www.politifact.com: GOP senator says Israel border fence cut illegal immigration


----------



## Nakita (Jun 22, 2018)

...why?


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 23, 2018)

I think the real question that needs to be answered here is what would Donald Trump's Fursona be??


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 23, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> I think the real question that needs to be answered here is what would Donald Trumps Fursona be??


A golden pheasant.


----------



## GarthTheWereWolf (Jun 23, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> I think the real question that needs to be answered here is what would Donald Trumps Fursona be??



Corn


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 23, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> A golden pheasant.








Hahahahhahaha


----------



## Nakita (Jun 23, 2018)

Ramjet556 said:


> I think the real question that needs to be answered here is what would Donald Trump's Fursona be??


This boi 


https://imgur.com/4zMBPV6


----------



## DarkoKavinsky (Jun 23, 2018)

Oh goody this thread went as I expected.

To be brutally honest.  The USA political sector could pull a Saints Row Four —as in solve cancer or world hunger — and  people  would still be declaring that trump deserves a sniper rifle lobotomy and his immediate family be disposed in a similar fashion to what went down in Russia post ww1.

But that’s the thing. People are pissed because trump came out of basically nowhere and won a rigged election.

Mainly because the people do have a say despite what a few major corrupt  cities like LA or NYC say. 

Never has a president ever gotten so much negative media coverage from the get go. It’s to the point of toxic fucking absurdity.

It’s this division that made me get out of politics as it’s petty bullshit.  

This guy isn’t fucking hitler. He’s just a typical New Yorker. I’ve met New Yorkers. They’re brash crash and speak their minds and don’t give a shit.

Have you people thought that maybe people took a chance on Trump because he’s not a corrupt politician from a dynasty of baggage and bullshit? 

I’m sick of the same song being played on the record player. Granted trump ain’t my tune, but it sure beats what ever the fuck we’ve been listening too on repeat since Bush Senior.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 23, 2018)

Trump might not be a corrupt politician, but he is now. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just trying to invent excuses so their dumbass voting decisions stand up to reason. The only reason people voted for Trump was because America is full of racist, intolerant, bigoted assholes. Sure, people will say "I hated Hillary. But almost any person, if they voted for Trump, and you talk to them long enough, they're going to reveal some sort of prejudice or stupidity along the way.


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 23, 2018)

Leo Whitepaw said:


> Yay, another debate thread!
> Donald Trump; *A tosspot and a madmad* who shouldn't be in chage of a country thats almost as big as his ego,* OR; THE HERO THE WORLD NEEDS?*



Neither... he's the President of the United States of America.  Debate closed...   



BahgDaddy said:


> Trump might not be a corrupt politician, but he is now. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just trying to invent excuses so their dumbass voting decisions stand up to reason. The only reason people voted for Trump was because America is full of racist, intolerant, bigoted assholes. Sure, people will say "I hated Hillary. *But almost any person, if they voted for Trump, and you talk to them long enough, they're going to reveal some sort of prejudice or stupidity along the way.*



I voted for Trump.  Didn't vote for Hillary because I hate her, but because I didn't want someone who should be in jail to be President of my country.  Trump wasn't my first pick, but he ended up being the only one left.  And he wasn't responsible for the deaths of four people or for illegally using his own server to send and receive classified documents.  Not to mention the whole question of her physical and mental well-being.  I also lived through the whole "bimbo eruption" thing... no, absolutely no.  We don't need a key player in that anywhere near the White House.

Talk about a big gator in the swamp.......

Oh, by the way, BahgDaddy:  Your first line doesn't make logical sense.  I won't chalk it up to stupidity.  Because I think you made an honest mistake, something that just made it through editing.  An easy fix.  Now that I've pointed it out.  Here is what it should read:  "Trump *might not have been* a corrupt politician, but he is now."  Not that I agree with that assessment, however.


----------



## Troj (Jun 23, 2018)

I originally said greater prairie chicken, until realizing golden pheasant was the better choice.


----------



## ZeroVoidTime (Jun 23, 2018)

Kit H. Ruppell said:


> A dangerous mental defective unfit to lead. It belongs in a madhouse, not the White House.


To late he already turned the White House into Mad House. After reading this thread entirely it is an absolute inferno of vitriol from both sides.


----------



## PimpNuttz (Jun 23, 2018)

ZeroVoidTime said:


> To late he already turned the White House into Mad House. After reading this thread entirely it is an absolute inferno of vitriol from both sides.


Then can't we all just agree that he's an idiot and let that be? It's painfully obvious some folks here are dead set in their beliefs despite the facts so what the hell is the point; political discourse is completely fucked.


----------



## Deleted member 112695 (Jun 23, 2018)

As a laissez-faire capitalist, I am happy with some of Trump’s policies (not his tariffs though).


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Jun 23, 2018)

Eh.. All I care is that the economy of the US is improving, Trump is a businessman, not a politician...


----------



## PimpNuttz (Jun 23, 2018)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> Eh.. All I care is that the economy of the US is improving, Trump is a businessman, not a politician...


And all I care about is good Rap music, but instead of Method Man or KRS-One I have to tolerate talentless dickheads like this guy:






Yeah, no. Fuck that logic.


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 23, 2018)

PimpNuttz said:


> Then can't we all just agree that he's an idiot and let that be? It's painfully obvious some folks here are dead set in their beliefs *despite the facts* so what the hell is the point; political discourse is completely fucked.



And what "facts" would they be?

These facts?:


----------



## PimpNuttz (Jun 23, 2018)

Roose Hurro said:


> And what "facts" would they be?
> 
> These facts?:


lawl


----------



## GarthTheWereWolf (Jun 23, 2018)

Sorry democrats. The outlook for 2020 doesn't look good:






I couldn't resist. Found this picture to be too funny. I'll leave now XD


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 23, 2018)

PimpNuttz said:


> lawl



Do you find this amusing?:


----------



## Ginza (Jun 23, 2018)

PimpNuttz said:


> Then can't we all just agree that he's an idiot and let that be? It's painfully obvious some folks here are dead set in their beliefs despite the facts so what the hell is the point; political discourse is completely fucked.



So... “can’t we all just agree that my opinion is correct and drop the subject”?

Sorry bud, that’s not how anything in this world works. Until you can prove he’s an idiot, or the other side can disprove it, neither of you are right.


----------



## DarkoKavinsky (Jun 23, 2018)

How about y’all be fucking retarded and what this recent election has shown is the failings of the duopoly of a two party  system  has plagued this land since the turn of the century.

Maybe just maybe, both options were shit because they’ve always been shit, but it’s just now one can see the ivory tower is constructed out of shit. Because the ivory turned to just be mold and the tower is so full of itself and self replicating it’s peak is in the clouds so we now just noticed how much shit is dripping from the tower... of shit!

Maybe I’m fucking sick of coke or Pepsi. Maybe a want an RC cola or a refreshing tea, maybe a pint of whiskey. But fuck many of your assholes alternatives of Comrade lenin’s Vodka. That shit got exported out of corpses of the CCCP for a reason Yeah know!


----------



## PimpNuttz (Jun 23, 2018)

Ginza said:


> So... “can’t we all just agree that my opinion is correct and drop the subject”?
> 
> Sorry bud, that’s not how anything in this world works. Until you can prove he’s an idiot, or the other side can disprove it, neither of you are right.


N'aww what happened Ginza, I thought we was cool! You liked a couple posts and now suddenly you got buyers remorse 'cuz I turned out to be one a dem uppity types?
Dat's okay doe, it's all love fam. <3


----------



## Ginza (Jun 23, 2018)

PimpNuttz said:


> N'aww what happened Ginza, I thought we was cool! You liked a couple posts and now suddenly you got buyers remorse 'cuz I turned out to be one a dem uppity types?
> Dat's okay doe, it's all love fam. <3




We’re still cool mate. I argue politics, but I like the person behind them -w-

But I’m an asshole either way :3 love it, or hate it. You seldom find people who feel in between about me


----------



## HuskyLover101 (Jun 25, 2018)

I think President Trump is doing a fine job. The job market is increasing, we've finally made peace with North Korea after 50 years and so far he's delivered on his promises of putting America first which we desperately need! A lot of foreign manufacturing has returned to our soil, for example. Chrysler moved all it's production from Mexico back to the States opening hundreds of good paying middle class jobs with benefits and retirement options.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 25, 2018)




----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 26, 2018)

Okami_No_Heishi said:


> View attachment 34699



Hate to break it to you, but your "facts" don't add up:

www.businessinsider.com: Here's how much debt the US government added under President Obama


----------



## Sagt (Jun 26, 2018)

Roose Hurro said:


> Hate to break it to you, but your "facts" don't add up:
> 
> www.businessinsider.com: Here's how much debt the US government added under President Obama


Maybe you should reread the graphic. It says that he reduced the *annual deficit *that he *inherited.
*
He came into office during an economic recession that he had to deal with, and so consequentially the debt rose, just as it did in pretty much every country during this time. However, over his presidency the rate at which debt rose was massively reduced.


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 26, 2018)

*"With those facts in mind, the size of the debt increase is quite staggering."*

And yet, our total debt nearly doubled.  So, tell me, just what benefit did Obama's "reduction" give us?  It's quite pointless to point out that someone "reduced the deficit" to no avail.

And about those jobs:

www.newsmax.com: Obama Tells Another 'Whopper' — He Did Not Create 12.8 Million Jobs


----------



## Sagt (Jun 26, 2018)

Roose Hurro said:


> *"With those facts in mind, the size of the debt increase is quite staggering."*
> 
> And yet, our total debt nearly doubled.  So, tell me, just what benefit did Obama's "reduction" give us?  It's quite pointless to point out that someone "reduced the deficit" to no avail.
> 
> ...


To no avail? Uh, I think you'd think otherwise if the deficit remained so high, or even rose further. And again, the reason the debt rose by so much is because they were deficit spending to combat the recession.

I feel as if you're purposefully ignoring the context here.


----------



## Sagt (Jun 26, 2018)

I'll be fair and point out the deficit reduction is nothing too magical, given that it's in-line with what happened to other similarly developed countries after the worst of the recession passed.

It does bother me that you were initially doubting that the deficit fell, though. Also, that you didn't just say "Oops, I misinterpreted that. My bad." after I pointed out the difference.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 26, 2018)

Roose Hurro said:


> Hate to break it to you, but your "facts" don't add up:
> 
> www.businessinsider.com: Here's how much debt the US government added under President Obama


Well here is one for you. Obama spent $30 million dollars in his 8 years as President being flown around by Air Force one. In 8 years. Trump spent that on Air Force One his first 6 months as President!


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 26, 2018)

Lcs said:


> To no avail? Uh, I think you'd think otherwise if the deficit remained so high, or even rose further. And again, the reason the debt rose by so much is because they were deficit spending to combat the recession.
> 
> I feel as if you're purposefully ignoring the context here.


Trump supporters always miss the point.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 26, 2018)

Ginza said:


> So... “can’t we all just agree that my opinion is correct and drop the subject”?
> 
> Sorry bud, that’s not how anything in this world works. Until you can prove he’s an idiot, or the other side can disprove it, neither of you are right.


Proof he is an idiot? Just watch TV. He does it everyday. Or just follow his Twitter feed. I would say the guy is fucking retarded, but that makes retarded people look bad.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 26, 2018)




----------



## Infrarednexus (Jun 26, 2018)

Nakita said:


> This boi
> 
> 
> https://imgur.com/4zMBPV6


Be careful! Trump’s hair is poisonous when threatened!


----------



## Mike Nobody (Jun 26, 2018)

Trump - More corrupt than Nixon
Trump - Less "talented" actor than Reagan
Trump - Dumber than Dubya Shrub
Went bankrupt SIX TIMES. Lost money running casinos. Incompetent businessman. Couldn't run a Taco Bell, let alone a country.
History of racist business practices, sexual assault, rape, fraud, and other criminal activities.
He is a spoiled whiny bitch pussy manbaby, who needed an ass-whooping long ago.


----------



## Simo (Jun 26, 2018)

His being elected brings this tune to mind:


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 26, 2018)

Lcs said:


> I'll be fair and point out the deficit reduction is nothing too magical, given that it's in-line with what happened to other similarly developed countries after the worst of the recession passed.
> 
> *It does bother me that you were initially doubting that the deficit fell*, though. Also, that you didn't just say "Oops, I misinterpreted that. My bad." after I pointed out the difference.



Debt... deficit... yes, different, but to be blunt, in the Real World, debt is the problem.  So when it comes to Government, I look at the debt and tend to not consider its difference from the deficit.  Because debt is the killer, if it keeps going up.  It's the whole borrowing thing, and what it does to people.  So, I stand by that last line, which was what I should have emphasized before.  Me bad, there.


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 26, 2018)

Okami_No_Heishi said:


> Well here is one for you. *Obama spent $30 million dollars in his 8 years as President being flown around by Air Force one.* In 8 years. Trump spent that on Air Force One his first 6 months as President!



Might want to check your facts:

www.washingtontimes.com: Inside the Beltway: The final Obama travel tab on Air Force One reaches $100 million


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 26, 2018)

Roose Hurro said:


> Might want to check your facts:
> 
> www.washingtontimes.com: Inside the Beltway: The final Obama travel tab on Air Force One reaches $100 million


Oh. Thats right. It was 100 million. Over 8 years. And Trump passed that in July of his first year, 5 months after taking office.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 26, 2018)

Roose Hurro said:


> Debt... deficit... yes, different, but to be blunt, in the Real World, debt is the problem.  So when it comes to Government, I look at the debt and tend to not consider its difference from the deficit.  Because debt is the killer, if it keeps going up.  It's the whole borrowing thing, and what it does to people.  So, I stand by that last line, which was what I should have emphasized before.  Me bad, there.


I hear you bitching about dept, but its ok if Trump does it. How much is this fiasco at the border costing? You aint never seen debt. Reagan excelled at debt. So did all the Republican presidents. Republican= more national debt.
But what the hell, grab em by the pussy!


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 26, 2018)

I wish I hadn't just fact checked his trips. Good to know I was right, bad to know I was that right. But that's ok. I will keep paying my taxes so he can fly around in that nice plane I payed for, even though I didnt vote for him. History making is supposed to be a good thing, not "Trump will go down in history as the most expensive president of all time, costing more that any other ten presidents combined." And we still have 2 more years of his nonsense!


----------



## ZeroVoidTime (Jun 26, 2018)

Okami_No_Heishi said:


> I wish I hadn't just fact checked his trips. Good to know I was right, bad to know I was that right. But that's ok. I will keep paying my taxes so he can fly around in that nice plane I payed for, even though I didnt vote for him. History making is supposed to be a good thing, not "Trump will go down in history as the most expensive president of all time, costing more that any other ten presidents combined." And we still have 2 more years of his nonsense!


That is if do not impeach him over the Russia probe, and by all means if democrats are elected into congress it will happen. (That is my hope anyways.)

Edit: but then again Mike Pence is far more slippery than Trump, and is far more dangerous.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 26, 2018)

ZeroVoidTime said:


> That is if do not impeach him over the Russia probe, and by all means if democrats are elected into congress it will happen. (That is my hope anyways.)
> 
> Edit: but then again Mike Pence is far more slippery than Trump, and is far more dangerous.


Agreed. Pence is scary religious, Trump is just a racist idiot.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Jun 26, 2018)

So, in Trumps year and a half in office, he has taken 149 trips in Air Force One, just in the US. And 8 international trips. I mean, a math degree is not needed to add those cost up. At $200,000 an hour(times two of course because Air Force One backup goes as well). That doesn't include the motercade in those big C-5s that follow along. So, needless to say, Trump is a big spender. But it's only money, right? Just print more!!(recession/inflation)


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 26, 2018)

Okami_No_Heishi said:


> Oh. That's right. It was 100 million. Over 8 years. *And Trump passed that in July of his first year, 5 months after taking office.*



Hmmm... interesting.  Found this:

www.snopes.com: FACT CHECK: Is Trump Spending More Taxpayer Dollars on Personal Travel than Obama Did?

Might be interesting to come back after Trump has had his eight years, just to see the final tally.  I'll have to keep digging.




Okami_No_Heishi said:


> I hear you bitching about debt, *but its ok if Trump does it*. How much is this fiasco at the border costing? You aint never seen debt. Reagan excelled at debt. So did all the Republican presidents. Republican= more national debt.
> But what the hell, grab em by the pussy!



Did I ever say it was okay?  If we go further into the above, you seem to think only Republicans = more debt, when the debt nearly doubled under Obama.  A Democrat.  This means:  Shame on both parties.  Pot.  Kettle.  Black.




Okami_No_Heishi said:


> I wish I hadn't just fact checked his trips. *Good to know I was right, bad to know I was that right.* But that's ok. I will keep paying my taxes so he can fly around in that nice plane I paid for, even though I didn't vote for him. History making is supposed to be a good thing, not "Trump will go down in history as the most expensive president of all time, costing more that any other ten presidents combined." And we still have 2 more years of his nonsense!



We are talking about Obama here, not Trump.  You gave 30 millon over eight years, which was incorrect.  This puts things in perspective.  And then we have the Snopes article, which shows the disparity was exaggerated.  And do I again have to go back to what our choices were?

But then again, this is a political discussion, and we are free to disagree with each other.  Nobody's perfect.

As for nonsense:


----------



## WolfyAmbassador (Jun 26, 2018)




----------



## Ramjet (Jun 26, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> View attachment 34723




OMFG hahahhaha that's just...Hilarious


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 27, 2018)

It would make more sense if I knew who the guy in tats was...


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 27, 2018)

Roose Hurro said:


> It would make more sense if I knew who the guy in tats was...


MS-13. Look them up and the shit they are doing.

Trump calling them animals is appropriate.


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 27, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> MS-13. Look them up and the shit they are doing.
> 
> Trump calling them animals is appropriate.



Ahhh... MS-13.  Got it.  Heard about them, just never seen any pics.  Thanks.  And yes, very appropriate.


----------



## Infrarednexus (Jun 27, 2018)

WolfyAmbassador said:


> View attachment 34723


In all seriousness, the MS-13 can go to hell and rot. The things they do are barbaric. People like them are the reason I want a secure border.


----------



## Telnac (Jun 27, 2018)

ZeroVoidTime said:


> Edit: but then again Mike Pence is far more slippery than Trump, and is far more dangerous.


That's why I don't think Trump will ever be impeached.  Everything Democrats hate about Trump they hate about Pence 10 fold. 

Personally I think Pence would be a great president. He can make peace with Congress and get things done. Some of Trump's biggest enemies are GOP members of Congress! I think that's Trump's biggest stumbling block.


----------



## AppleButt (Jun 27, 2018)

ZeroVoidTime said:


> That is if do not impeach him over the Russia probe, and by all means if democrats are elected into congress it will happen. (That is my hope anyways.)
> 
> Edit: but then again Mike Pence is far more slippery than Trump, and is far more dangerous.



Yeah impeaching trump would be the worst thing the democrats could do.

I say just let him do his thing until we have a democrat in office again in 6 years.


----------



## Oblique Lynx (Jun 27, 2018)

Telnac said:


> That's why I don't think Trump will ever be impeached.  Everything Democrats hate about Trump they hate about Pence 10 fold.
> 
> Personally I think Pence would be a great president. He can make peace with Congress and get things done. Some of Trump's biggest enemies are GOP members of Congress! I think that's Trump's biggest stumbling block.


Personally even I think Pence is a bit much. Like, I don't care about whether or not rights are given, but shock therapy's a bit far


----------



## Mach (Jun 27, 2018)

Oblique Lynx said:


> Personally even I think Pence is a bit much. Like, I don't care about whether or not rights are given, but shock therapy's a bit far


One could make the argument that when gays have rights enshrined in law, they do not have to be subjected to shock therapy.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 27, 2018)

Telnac said:


> Personally I think Pence would be a great president. He can make peace with Congress and get things done. Some of Trump's biggest enemies are GOP members of Congress! I think that's Trump's biggest stumbling block.



Oh yeah, that's great, let's have a president who actively hates LGBTs, believes the Bible is empirical truth, and funds anti-LGBT organizations. He'd probably having us rounding up the gays and throwing them in prison.


----------



## Saiko (Jun 27, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Oh yeah, that's great, let's have a president who actively hates LGBTs, believes the Bible is empirical truth, and funds anti-LGBT organizations. He'd probably having us rounding up the gays and throwing them in prison.


Nevermind his performance as governor being on par with Phil Bryant from what I’ve heard.


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 27, 2018)

Lcs said:


> To no avail? Uh, I think you'd think otherwise if the deficit remained so high, or even rose further. *And again, the reason the debt rose by so much is because they were deficit spending to combat the recession.*
> 
> I feel as if you're purposefully ignoring the context here.



Sorry, missed this...

Lcs, have you read that bolded line you wrote?  Because it makes my point.  If Obama lowered the deficit, why did our debt increase?  By your very words, you say the debt increased *because* of deficit spending, which would indicate a direct relationship:  More deficit spending = more debt.  Less deficit spending = less debt.  Because that would make logical sense.

Remember what I posted earlier:  *"With those facts in mind, the size of the debt increase is quite staggering."*  So, perhaps you can now understand why I'm so puzzled by the idea that our debt could continue to rise even when the deficit is reduced.  The way I see it, "deficit" involves borrowing money.  "Debt" is what you get when you borrow money.  The more you borrow, the higher your debt.  How is this ignoring context?


----------



## Telnac (Jun 27, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Oh yeah, that's great, let's have a president who actively hates LGBTs, believes the Bible is empirical truth, and funds anti-LGBT organizations. He'd probably having us rounding up the gays and throwing them in prison.


Uh, last I checked, sexual orientation was a protected class in the USA. Even if a future Prez Pence wanted to frog march all LGBTs into prison (which I highly doubt he does) he wouldn't have the legal authority to do so.


----------



## Ramjet (Jun 27, 2018)




----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 27, 2018)

I will leave this video here, as the statement by Bill Maher only shows the kind of crap is one of the reasons why I left the Left.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 27, 2018)

Telnac said:


> Uh, last I checked, sexual orientation was a protected class in the USA. Even if a future Prez Pence wanted to frog march all LGBTs into prison (which I highly doubt he does) he wouldn't have the legal authority to do so.



Right, but if you support him, you can't really say you support LGBT rights and issues. 

I mean, you can. 

But you'll be a hypocrite.


----------



## Sagt (Jun 27, 2018)

Roose Hurro said:


> Sorry, missed this...
> 
> Lcs, have you read that bolded line you wrote?  Because it makes my point.  If Obama lowered the deficit, why did our debt increase?  By your very words, you say the debt increased *because* of deficit spending, which would indicate a direct relationship:  More deficit spending = more debt.  Less deficit spending = less debt.  Because that would make logical sense.
> 
> Remember what I posted earlier:  *"With those facts in mind, the size of the debt increase is quite staggering."*  So, perhaps you can now understand why I'm so puzzled by the idea that our debt could continue to rise even when the deficit is reduced.  The way I see it, "deficit" involves borrowing money.  "Debt" is what you get when you borrow money.  The more you borrow, the higher your debt.  How is this ignoring context?


._.

Do you know what the difference between debt and a budget deficit is? Debt is money owed, while as a deficit is the annual rate at which debt accumulates (as opposed to a budget surplus, where the government gains money or can pay off debt).

Debt rose, yes, like it did in pretty much every country, but over the time of his presidency, the rate at which debt rose fell drastically from the levels it was at when it had peaked. This is a big deal because had the deficit remained as high or rose further, then the debt would be much larger than what it is today.

Anyway, let's just take a step back here. You commented on some guys post, to suggest that the deficit did not fall, because you confused this with debt. I told you that the deficit did indeed fall massively from when spending peaked, like the graphic said. You continued to ignore the fact that the graphic and I refered to the deficit and not the overall debt, and you kept bringing up this point of contention you have with Obama. I pointed out that it's unfair to blame the debt all on Obama, because the biggest reason debt rose by so much was because they were deficit spending (as in, spending to make up the shortfall in demand to help the economy recover) in order to combat the recession that he had inherited when he took office. (And by the way, this is why I said that I believed you were ignoring the context; the context being that he had begun his presidency during the Great Recession. This meaning that there was higher spending, lower tax revenue and a global economic decline.)

I'm pretty sure what was being discussed has already been resolved. At this point, I don't see where the disconnect is. Debt rose over time during his presidency; this is a fact. The deficit fell over his presidency; this is another fact.


----------



## Saiko (Jun 27, 2018)

Telnac said:


> Uh, last I checked, sexual orientation was a protected class in the USA. Even if a future Prez Pence wanted to frog march all LGBTs into prison (which I highly doubt he does) he wouldn't have the legal authority to do so.


No, it’s not yet. At best it’s “quasi-protected,” and a huge part of the country affords no protections for sexuality. For example, I could still be evicted for being gay.

Just because we can get married now doesn’t mean LGBT issues are handled, and anyone who doesn’t get that has missed the entire point of the movement. Economic stupidity aside, Pence could (and would) do a shit ton of damage to that movement.


----------



## Telnac (Jun 27, 2018)

BahgDaddy said:


> Right, but if you support him, you can't really say you support LGBT rights and issues.
> 
> I mean, you can.
> 
> But you'll be a hypocrite.


First, I don't have to agree with a politician 100% to support him. Second, I don't agree with the just about any politician on LGBT rights and issues.  Like my stand on most issues my beliefs are far more nuisanced than agreeing or disagreeing with a single point of view.  That doesn't make me a hypocrite. That makes me a supporter of a politician who I agree with 80% of what they stand for and disagree with 20%.  Until the dsy I run for office (like that'll ever happen...) there never will be any politician I agree with 100%.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Jun 27, 2018)

Telnac said:


> First, I don't have to agree with a politician 100% to support him. Second, I don't agree with the just about any politician on LGBT rights and issues.  Like my stand on most issues my beliefs are far more nuisanced than agreeing or disagreeing with a single point of view.  That doesn't make me a hypocrite. That makes me a supporter of a politician who I agree with 80% of what they stand for and disagree with 20%.  Until the dsy I run for office (like that'll ever happen...) there never will be any politician I agree with 100%.



Of course not, you do the best you can. Hopefully that involves not voting for people who obviously consider LGBTs inferior humans.


----------



## Mach (Jun 27, 2018)

Telnac said:


> Uh, last I checked, sexual orientation was a protected class in the USA. Even if a future Prez Pence wanted to frog march all LGBTs into prison (which I highly doubt he does) he wouldn't have the legal authority to do so.


There is a saying in DC:

Policy is a personnel matter.

This means that as long as you can get the right number of politicians in given branch of government to vote a particular way, legal precedents can overruled or ignored. Looking at the current composition of the three branches of government, it is not unreasonable to assume that if Pence became president or even if Trump decided he needed to energize his base for 2020, they could quickly go on the offensive regarding gay rights. From a political standpoint, banning gay marriage and other freedom is a pragmatic move for the Trump administration because most members of the American QUILTBAG community did not support Trump and certainly did not support Pence. Approximately 14% of that community voted for Trump.

www.sbs.com.au: 14% of LGBT+ Americans voted for Trump: Here’s why

www.people-press.org: Same-Sex Marriage Detailed Tables, 2017

Most registered Republicans oppose same-sex marriage and it is not an exaggeration to say that QUILTBAG rights are not at the top of the Republican agenda compared to issues like the economy and immigration. Additionally, accounting for the fact that 81% of white evangelical Christians voting for Trump  and that 53% of evangelical Christians currently oppose gay marriage, it is not hard to see why Trump would be persuaded to actively oppose QUILTBAG rights in favor of shoring up his base. He has already signed an executive order banning transgender individuals from entering the armed forces, which was drafted by his evangelical supporters. He also applauded to recent decision by the Supreme Court that a business owner who denied service to a gay couple had his constitutional rights violated. The _Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission_ decision has opened a legal Pandora's box of possibilities that could threaten the ability of QUILTBAG citizens to receive equal access to business services.

www.nbcnews.com: Poll: Support for same-sex marriage is now the majority position in 44 states

www.vox.com: Poll: white evangelical support for Trump is at an all-time high

www.theguardian.com: Supreme court sides with baker who refused to make gay wedding cake

As the legislative branch, Congress similarly could attack QUILTBAG rights in order to gain popularity with conservative evangelical groups opposed to the community. Republican congressional members, who are generally not known for their political support of QUILTBAG rights like gay marriage and the right to equal service, could decide that the dismantling of gay right is an expedient and efficient way to garner support, especially with the midterms coming later this year and the 2020 election.

The pinnacle of the judiciary branch, the Supreme Court, is primarily conservative and has already ruled in a detrimental manner to gay rights as I noted above. Also consider that ruling in the decision was made with Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is considered to be a moderate conservative swing vote on the court who had previously sided liberal justices to defend gay rights. Justice Kennedy is retiring and most likely will be replaced with an extremely conservative justice similar in style to Antonin Scalia and Niel Gorsuch due to Trump's commitment to evangelical voters. Protected status can be removed and there are many conservative groups currently funding efforts to move cases through the judiciary system to strike down protected status rulings for sexual orientation. This does not bode well for future gay rights cases brought before the court.

So we have all three branches of the federal government inclined to dismantle or least not protect gay rights due to the conservative elements in them. I understand that sometimes in the context of the furry fandom, it is easy to forget that gay rights *are not* a conservative position in most significant political circles. I also know that many of you identify as QUILTBAG or are QUILTBAG allies, yet support Trump. You are most definitely entitled to your opinion, but bear in mind that the only group Trump has consistently delivered for provably at the expense of others is the evangelical community, not the QUILTBAG community, as the transgender military ban proves.


----------



## Telnac (Jun 27, 2018)

Saiko said:


> No, it’s not yet. At best it’s “quasi-protected,” and a huge part of the country affords no protections for sexuality. For example, I could still be evicted for being gay.
> 
> Just because we can get married now doesn’t mean LGBT issues are handled, and anyone who doesn’t get that has missed the entire point of the movement. Economic stupidity aside, Pence could (and would) do a shit ton of damage to that movement.


Huh. It seems you are correct. I stand corrected; I thought those protections were federal.  Apparently sexual orientation is only a protected class in certain states (including CA.)


----------



## Mach (Jun 27, 2018)

Telnac said:


> Huh. It seems you are correct. I stand corrected; I thought those protections were federal.  Apparently sexual orientation is only a protected class in certain states (including CA.)


And keep in mind those rulings could be struck down on the federal level by the Supreme Court, like I said.


----------



## Saiko (Jun 27, 2018)

Telnac said:


> Huh. It seems you are correct. I stand corrected; I thought those protections were federal.  Apparently sexual orientation is only a protected class in certain states (including CA.)


Sorry for being short-tempered there. You lightly grazed a button of mine, and I’m stressed over that Supreme Court Justice retiring. Thanks to the whole 51-vote bullshit for that, it’s entirely plausible that the next one could be enough to permanently prevent future protections and possibly even reverse what we already have; and there’s nothing we can do about it short of convincing the GOP that would be bad.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 27, 2018)

Saiko said:


> Sorry for being short-tempered there. You lightly grazed a button of mine, and I’m stressed over that Supreme Court Justice retiring. Thanks to the whole 51-vote bullshit for that, it’s entirely plausible that the next one could be enough to permanently prevent future protections and possibly even reverse what we already have; and there’s nothing we can do about it short of convincing the GOP that would be bad.


Hence why it's important to contact any local government officials about the issue.

Write it in a personal manner, if they ever read it.

Trump himself however seem to be rather positive on the issue, though his power is limited at best. Ultimately, Congress is where the power is at.


----------



## Saiko (Jun 27, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> Hence why it's important to contact any local government officials about the issue.
> 
> Write it in a personal manner, if they ever read it.


I’m in Mississippi. The legislators that need convincing literally make “family values” part of their platform.


----------



## Mach (Jun 27, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> Hence why it's important to contact any local government officials about the issue.
> 
> Write it in a personal manner, if they ever read it.
> 
> Trump himself however seem to be rather positive on the issue, though his power is limited at best. Ultimately, Congress is where the power is at.


You may not be familiar with the legislative process in the United States, but Trump as president has most power over this issue of any of the three branches government. If he were so inclined, he could unilaterally issue executive orders protecting gay rights at any time. He could also veto any legislation coming out of Congress that could threaten gay rights. The current composition of Congress makes it somewhat unlikely such legislation would be veto-proof since Democrats control just under half of the Senate.

Instead, Trump used his executive power to prevent transgender individuals from serving in the military.

You are right somewhat about the need to engage local government officials, however. If gay rights is a priority for anyone here, then they need to vote for the Democrats because that is the party that is _unambiguously _for advancing the QUILTBAG enterprise in the United States.


----------



## Yvvki (Jun 27, 2018)

Fallowfox said:


> Batman isn't the hero Gotham wants; he's the hero Gotham _needs_.
> 
> Donald Trump is the hero America wants, but he's the_ opposite_ of what it needs.


This made me almost spit out my drink LOL

Can I have/use this quote?


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 28, 2018)

Mach said:


> Instead, Trump used his executive power to prevent transgender individuals from serving in the military.


Which is a move a lot support, myself included.



Mach said:


> You may not be familiar with the legislative process in the United States, but Trump as president has most power over this issue of any of the three branches government. If he were so inclined, he could unilaterally issue executive orders protecting gay rights at any time. He could also veto any legislation coming out of Congress that could threaten gay rights. The current composition of Congress makes it somewhat unlikely such legislation would be veto-proof since Democrats control just under half of the Senate.


He can't spam executive orders. If the next POTUS so pleases he/she can simply nuke those executive orders from orbit with a cancellation order like what Trump have done with Obama's. It needs to be put into law through Congress. 

Gay rights is human rights. IMO political affiliation/beliefs, gender identity, disability and sexual orientation should also be included in the discrimination laws as is what we already have over here. Companies/interviewers are not legally allowed to ask for any of that nor are they allowed to discriminate based on them.



Mach said:


> You are right somewhat about the need to engage local government officials, however. If gay rights is a priority for anyone here, then they need to vote for the Democrats because that is the party that is _unambiguously _for advancing the QUILTBAG enterprise in the United States.


Not really, no. Want gay rights? Contact your local officials. Even mayor if applicable. 

More and more Republicans are more for Queer rights so it's becoming a non-issue over time.


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jun 28, 2018)

Lcs said:


> ._.
> 
> Do you know what the difference between debt and a budget deficit is? Debt is money owed, while as a deficit is the annual rate at which debt accumulates (as opposed to a budget surplus, where the government gains money or can pay off debt).
> 
> ...



Thank you for your thoroughness.  Found this of interest:

www.politifact.com: Barack Obama claims deficit has decreased by two-thirds since taking office

*Princeton University economics professor Harvey Rosen said the more important question is if Obama has put the government on a path that will keep deficits stable. "And the answer is no," Rosen said, because entitlement programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, have not had substantial reform.

The **long-term forecast** for the deficit illustrates this point.

Absent substantial reform, the Congressional Budget Office expects a few more years of short-term deficit decreases followed by bigger shortfalls in 10 and 20 years. Federal spending is projected to increase through 2039, so much so that by then the federal debt held by the public will reach a point only seen after World War II.*

And this bit, here:

*Obama said since taking office the country has seen "our deficits cut by two-thirds."

His claim is accurate if you use 2009, his first year in office with an historically high deficit, as a starting point.

The claim ignores a stark reality about the deficits, however. The country’s spending is not expected to continue its downward route, according to federal forecasters, for factors that include increased interest payments on the debt and the lack of substantial policy changes for the country’s biggest programs, like Social Security and Medicare.

The deficits have largely come down as a result of the improved economy for which Obama cannot assume full credit.*

It would appear things are not all they seem.  So, just from this alone, I'd say things are not clearly resolved.  More research is needed, both on your part and on mine.


----------



## Troj (Jun 28, 2018)

I honestly can't decide what's worse: an impulsive, self-serving narcissist whose only agenda is to increase their own fame, wealth, and ego, or a zealous fundamentalist who actually has a grand plan, and has the means and the druthers to pursue it. It's the difference between the bull that charges through your china shop in a fit of rage, and the gangster who intentionally burns your china shop to the ground.


----------



## Mach (Jun 28, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> Which is a move a lot support, myself included.


I had suspected it before when you were unfamiliar with the voter registration process in the United States, but you are not a citizen of the United States, with all due respect. You apparently live in Norway. Being blunt, you are entitled have many opinions about the United States on variety of issues, but you do not get a say on how we run our military or who joins our military. Transgendered individuals have been serving with distinction in our armed forces for years, without any logistical difficulties. Trump merely banned from entering the military to amass support from his evangelical congressional allies and voters, nothing more.

I would like to hear why you support the transgender military ban, so please reply to this.


Yakamaru said:


> He can't spam executive orders. If the next POTUS so pleases he/she can simply nuke those executive orders from orbit with a cancellation order like what Trump have done with Obama's. It needs to be put into law through Congress.


The many QUILTBAG citzens of the United States would much prefer protection under executive orders while Congress passes more unassailable legislation rather than no protection at all.


Yakamaru said:


> Gay rights is human rights. IMO political affiliation/beliefs, gender identity, disability and sexual orientation should also be included in the discrimination laws as is what we already have over here. Companies/interviewers are not legally allowed to ask for any of that nor are they allowed to discriminate based on them.


This runs contrary to your support for the transgender military ban.


Yakamaru said:


> Not really, no. Want gay rights? Contact your local officials. Even mayor if applicable.


Yes, really. Contacting local politicians will not cut it. We need _federal _protections for the QUILTBAG community to protect their rights. To get those we need senators, representatives, justices, and a president who unambiguously and unconditionally support gay rights. The Democrats fit the bill as those politicians.


----------



## Troj (Jun 28, 2018)

Once upon a time, people wrung their hands about how the presence of blacks in the military would be bad for morale and cohesion--and then the same argument was made about women, and then about gays.  Soldiers are such delicate snowflakes that they'll  only be able to fire a gun if the person next to them in the foxhole is exactly like them, apparently! That doesn't bode well, does it?

People also like to speculate about the economic cost of having trans people in the military. One, those costs are actually negligible in the grand scheme of things, and two, once upon a time, we as a society agreed that anybody who put life and limb on the line for their country was entitled to healthcare, an education, and other compensation for their sacrifice, so transition costs certainly fall under that umbrella. My feeling is that if you got your legs blown off or your brain permanently damaged for our collective sake, we can't possibly compensate you enough! www.scientificamerican.com: Cost of Medical Care for Transgender Service Members Would Be Minimal, Studies Show

At the end of the day, we have to be vigilant against any and all attempts to "Otherize" already-vulnerable or already-fringe groups of people. It starts with minor, reasonable-sounding concern-trolling, and always inevitably snowballs from there.

www.nytimes.com: Opinion | A Jury May Have Sentenced a Man to Death Because He’s Gay. And the Justices Don’t Care.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 28, 2018)

Mach said:


> I had suspected it before when you were unfamiliar with the voter registration process in the United States, but you are not a citizen of the United States, with all due respect. You apparently live in Norway. Being blunt, you entitled have many opinions about the United States on variety of issues, but you do not get a say on how we run our military or who joins our military. Transgendered individuals have been serving with distinction in our armed forces for years, without any logistical difficulties. Trump merely banned from entering the military to amass support from his evangelical congressional allies and voters, nothing more.
> 
> I would like to hear why you support the transgender military ban, so please reply to this.


Yes, I am from Norway. That does not mean I am not allowed to see, hear and watch what is going on elsewhere in the world or have an opinion of it. In the Information Age you can see what is going on on the other side of the globe with a single mouse click. 

On why I am for the ban:
1. Potential medication problems(some are from what I've read, on hormones, some not) that will fuck up the individual if those hormones either run out or they are no longer supplied them.
2. Suicide/attempted suicide rates.
3. Mental/psychological health problems.
4. Physical problems due to #1. #2 and #3. And #4 is a potential risk factor too.
5. Potential logistics problems if a war breaks out, as in not able to get hormones if it happens.
6. I want only the best, brightest, strongest and most qualified. That goes for any military, regardless of nation. I don't want potential risk factors in a military whose demographic aren't exactly looking too bright on the mental/psychological health front. If or when that changes however I will change my opinion accordingly.

It's for practical reasons, not from a moral/ethical perspective. Because from the latter it's assbackwards and a step in the wrong direction, as I prefer to have those with the willpower, guts, strength and courage to be able to serve regardless of political affiliation, sexuality, gender, gender identity, marital status, +++. What someone may find moral/ethical may not be practical in reality. Life is full of compromises, and this is one such compromise I am rather.. Split on, and will be for years to come.

And no, I don't get to have a *say* on the matter as I am not in any way, shape or form a government official nor do I have any power to change anything. What I *do *get is to have an opinion on it. Though if I am not "allowed" to have an opinion of what is going on outside of my nation's borders that same line of reasoning should apply to you, as well. 





Mach said:


> The many QUILTBAG citzens of the United States would much prefer protection under executive orders while Congress passes more unassailable legislation rather than no protection at all.


Executive orders that are still in place from Obama despite all the fear-mongering about Trump and Congress. The only thing that have been changed on that front is barring transgenders(although I do understand their vigilance, love for their country and a genuine will to serve) from entering the military.



Mach said:


> This runs contrary to your support for the transgender military ban.


Not really, no. Unfortunately trans people are a risk factor. One that I do not want in *any* military. Until things improve, I will be against it.



Mach said:


> Yes, really. Contacting local politician will not cut it. We need _federal _protections for the QUILTBAG community to protect their rights. To get those we need senators, representatives, justices, and a president to unambiguously and unconditionally support gay rights. The Democrats fit the bill as those politicians.


You're free to say people should vote for Z because X reason(s). Though saying people *must* vote for Z because X reason(s) is a tad too much, IMO.



Troj said:


> www.nytimes.com: Opinion | A Jury May Have Sentenced a Man to Death Because He’s Gay. And the Justices Don’t Care.


..Wait, what? What the actual fuck? "May have been sentenced to death because he's gay". So the murder doesn't count, apparently. Yeah, no. That shit is assbackwards!



Troj said:


> Once upon a time, people wrung their hands about how the presence of blacks in the military would be bad for morale and cohesion--and then the same argument was made about women, and then about gays.  Soldiers are such delicate snowflakes that they'll  only be able to fire a gun if the person next to them in the foxhole is exactly like them, apparently! That doesn't bode well, does it?
> 
> People also like to speculate about the economic cost of having trans people in the military. One, those costs are actually negligible in the grand scheme of things, and two, once upon a time, we as a society agreed that anybody who put life and limb on the line for their country was entitled to healthcare, an education, and other compensation for their sacrifice, so transition costs certainly fall under that umbrella. My feeling is that if you got your legs blown off or your brain permanently damaged for our collective sake, we can't possibly compensate you enough! www.scientificamerican.com: Cost of Medical Care for Transgender Service Members Would Be Minimal, Studies Show


Someone who have served/is serving is someone who have served/is serving. I don't care who or what they are or what nation they are from. They deserve the respect that IMO they are kinda entitled to.

Though this isn't about costs, IMO. This is about other risk factors that doesn't affect non-trans people.


----------



## Troj (Jun 28, 2018)

The relevant question is, are they a risk because empirical data and previous experience both suggest the risks outweigh the rewards, or are they a risk because they "feel" risky?


----------



## Mach (Jun 28, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> Yes, I am from Norway. That does not mean I am not allowed to see, hear and watch what is going on elsewhere in the world or have an opinion of it


As I stated in my previous post, you are more than entitled to your opinion. I made that abundantly clear.


Yakamaru said:


> 1. Potential medication problems(some are from what I've read, on hormones, some not) that will fuck up the individual if those hormones either run out or they are no longer supplied them.


The military supplies transgendered individuals the medications they need, as supplies other soldiers with medications for conditions they may have like diabetes or allergies. If you have military personnel stationed anywhere, you need to logistically supply with food and medical supplies. It is a minor matter to supply hormones and other medications through military personnel and logistical services.Military personnel abroad receive wide-vaccinations due local pathogens, sometimes regularly. Respectfully, I do not see you mentioned that ceasing those vaccinations will "fuck up" these individuals and there are far more of these individuals than transgendered individuals.


Yakamaru said:


> 2. Suicide/attempted suicide rates.





Yakamaru said:


> 3. Mental/psychological health problems.



I have noticed that transgender individuals are often erroneously cited to be exceptionally susceptible to problems such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts. This is countered by the prevalence of these same issues in the LGB community and it is notable that many countries do not excluded their service. By creating a more accepting environment, the distress that transgender personnel feel in the military may be mitigated if they may serve openly with full support and by all accounts this happening, despite current circumstances.

http://lgbtpov.frontiersla.com/2012...should-care-about-trans-bias-in-the-military/


Yakamaru said:


> 5. Potential logistics problems if a war breaks out, as in not able to get hormones if it happens.


The United States military has the most resilient and sophisticated logistical network in the world, hands down. It is why we have bases located all over the world, so we can have better force projection and defensive coverage. In Afghanistan and Iraq, there were transgendered military personnel receiving treatment and medications. If we are in a conflict where transgendered individual cannot receive their medications, then it is virtually definite that medical supplies in general are not being shipped and our logistical network has been shattered.


Yakamaru said:


> 6. I want only the best, brightest, strongest and most qualified. That goes for any military, regardless of nation. I don't want potential risk factors in a military whose demographic aren't exactly looking too bright on the mental/psychological health front.


Transgender individuals have go through the same training and re-qualifications as everybody else in the United States military. We keep our standards high, just we do for women serving in the military as well. There are plenty of transgender military personnel, including specialists, who will be hard to replace because they fulfilled niche roles. This is why certain specialists are being given exemptions in case the current stay on the ban is lifted.


Yakamaru said:


> It's for practical reasons, not from a moral/ethical perspective.


All the rebuttals I have issued above are on practical grounds.

However, perhaps you would the advice on individuals who have actually run a military.

On August 1, 2017, the Palm Center released a letter signed by 56 retired generals and admirals, opposing the proposed ban on transgender military service members. The letter stated that if implemented, the ban "would cause significant disruptions, deprive the military of mission-critical talent and compromise the integrity of transgender troops who would be forced to live a lie, as well as non-transgender peers who would be forced to choose between reporting their comrades or disobeying policy".

www.theguardian.com: Top military officials call on Trump to reverse transgender ban

These are top tier commanders my nation's military. I believe they know this matter better than you or me. You should take note.


Yakamaru said:


> Though if I am not "allowed" to have an opinion of what is going on outside of my nation's borders that same line of reasoning should apply to you, as well.


I have said you are more than welcome to have an opinion on matters outside your country. However, you have a responsibility to be well educated on what you are discussing regarding that country. In the political compass thread, you made several glaring errors about voter registration in the United States than anyone who is an American citizen would know are automatically false. I am not attacking you, but when you make erroneous statements that negatively affect groups of people, particularly people who may be users on this forum, it causes unnecessary discord and debate. By researching a topic before we comment on it, we can avoid this.


Yakamaru said:


> Executive orders that are still in place from Obama despite all the fear-mongering about Trump and Congress. The only thing that have been changed on that front is barring transgenders(although I do understand their vigilance, love for their country and a genuine will to serve) from entering the military.


I would note that barring transgender individuals from military service is a major change, especially for transgendered service members. I would also argue that those executive orders from Obama could very well be repealed in short order if Trump finds himself in need of evangelical political support, which was the real reason passed the transgender military ban.


Yakamaru said:


> You're free to say people should vote for Z because X reason(s). Though saying people *must* vote for Z because X reason(s) is a tad too much, IMO.


Read my language. I was not issuing commands, just stating the best course of action.

Thank you for reading this and I hope we can continue this dialogue.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 28, 2018)

Troj said:


> The relevant question is, are they a risk because empirical data and previous experience both suggest the risks outweigh the rewards, or are they a risk because they "feel" risky?


I'd never go out and say "because they *feel* risky". Feelings isn't exactly something I take into consideration when it comes to things that have empirical data and previous experience to suggest that the risks outweigh the rewards.

The problems that trans people have, both internal and external, is something we're going to have to solve over time. Them to take actions that improve their health over time, and for us to show emotional and friendly support. Because ultimately I'd argue we all want the same thing: For people to be healthy, both physically and mentally.

But some people may be right down the line. First it was blacks, then women, then gays, and now trans people. It could be nothing but a scare. But until we have clear-cut evidence and empirical evidence, we will be split on a plethora of different subjects across the board.

I intend to be intellectually honest(or try my best to. I am ultimately human like everyone else), but even I can be a stubborn fuckwit at times. And like everyone else, In most cases I won't magically change my opinion overnight, though it has happened a few times before, so I won't deny the chances of it happening in the future.

@Mach I have to properly apologize for coming off as.. Hostile. I am way too used to shouting matches on these forums as they've practically screwed me over in some ways in how I interact with those I disagree with. It is not appropriate behaviour to show, especially not if my intention is to try and lead by example. You don't deserve any of this as you've done nothing but be friendly on your part. Quite frankly I'm surprised you've not snapped yet at me. I appreciate it, I truly do. It's a breath of fresh air on the forum, and I appreciate your presence here.

I look forward to working with you from this point on, and not against you.


----------



## Troj (Jun 28, 2018)

Mach said:


> I have noticed that transgender individuals are often erroneously cited to be exceptionally susceptible to problems such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts. This is countered by the prevalence of these same issues in the LGB community and it is notable that many countries do not excluded their service. By creating a more accepting environment, the distress that transgender personnel feel in the military may be mitigated if they may serve openly with full support and by all accounts this happening, despite current circumstances.



The research on gay people has previously found that when you control for family rejection, for example, their rates of mental illness, substance abuse, and suicide are comparable to that of the general population.

My overall impression that whether a person feels like they "belong" and have a soft place to fall has a powerful influence on their mental and physical health.

Trans people still face widespread stigma and barriers, so it wouldn't surprise me that they show higher rates of mental illness, suicide, substance abuse, and general distress.

We're doing trans people a gross injustice if we implicitly assume they're just "broken" or "crazy" without carefully testing every nook and cranny of that assumption first. Just rolling with that assumption communicates that we don't care about them having equal rights and respect, because it's easier to just let them tread water.

Ethical issues aside, pragmatically, trans people actually comprise a sizable chunk of the armed forces, especially compared to other minority populations. We're already beggars, so we can't afford to be choosers. www.thetaskforce.org: New study finds transgender people twice as likely to serve in military - National LGBTQ Task Force

Important: by my rough count, 18 countries currently allow trans people to serve in the military. Transgender people and military service - Wikipedia


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 29, 2018)

Though I would like to question the way you phrased yourself:


Mach said:


> I had suspected it before when you were unfamiliar with the voter registration process in the United States, but you are not a citizen of the United States, with all due respect. You apparently live in Norway. *Being blunt, you are entitled have many opinions about the United States on variety of issues, but you do not get a say on how we run our military or who joins our military.* Transgendered individuals have been serving with distinction in our armed forces for years, without any logistical difficulties. Trump merely banned from entering the military to amass support from his evangelical congressional allies and voters, nothing more.


It's been boldened it out. I take it you meant "You are entitled *to* have many opinions about the United States on *a* variety of issues"? I think this was what confused me to begin with, to be honest. Sorry about that.

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf
Being trans often comes with mental health issues, and have shown to have about 8-10 times higher rates of suicide/attempted suicide/suicidal thoughts. I am against it on this basis, for one, stemming from external to internal issues that needs solving. 

Another is a reason posted in the Guardian article you posted here:


Mach said:


> www.theguardian.com: Top military officials call on Trump to reverse transgender ban


"The top military officials said in a letter published Tuesday that transgender military members “must not be dismissed, *deprived of medically necessary health care*, or forced to compromise their integrity or hide their identity”. It comes less than a week after the president announced on Twitter that the government would not “accept or allow … transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the US military”.

"Medically necessary health care"? And these people are in the military? Any competent military officer knows that the reliance on medicine is a possible liability in terms of their military personnel, and could potentially be used against them. A basic tactic in warfare is to hit the enemy's logistics/supply line. Transgenders on this front is more susceptible due to their need for medicine that any non-trans don't need. And during war, supplies can easily run dry, no matter how good a supply line a nation may have. Soldiers are at times expected to be out in the field for months, sometimes even almost a year. Can trans people reliably be out that long, possibly without the medicine they need? Only time will tell.

IMO I want military personnel to have as few as possible potential liabilities as humanly possible. That includes everything from mental to physical aspects such as medicine. And yes, I hold *any* military in extremely high regard, which is why I am against it on those two grounds as the primary ones. However, my own country allow trans people in the military, and I have no option but to respectfully disagree on that front, and show them the respect they deserve regardless, trans or not.

Though on another note: How many trans people do we actually have in our military? Combined? 50? 100? 1000? I've not come across any numbers on that front, unfortunately.



Troj said:


> Ethical issues aside, pragmatically, trans people actually comprise a sizable chunk of the armed forces, especially compared to other minority populations. We're already beggars, so we can't afford to be choosers. www.thetaskforce.org: New study finds transgender people twice as likely to serve in military - National LGBTQ Task Force


If we are to do all Queer people, the amount increases decently due to gay and bi people as opposed to only trans people. Hell, I have two bisexual friends who are in the military. Actually no, scratch that. Make that 3. Forgot for a moment a friend of mine I haven't talked to in years and is currently serving in our own last time we spoke. I wonder how he's doing, actually..



Troj said:


> My overall impression that whether a person feels like they "belong" and have a soft place to fall has a powerful influence on their mental and physical health.
> 
> Trans people still face widespread stigma and barriers, so it wouldn't surprise me that they show higher rates of mental illness, suicide, substance abuse, and general distress.
> 
> We're doing trans people a gross injustice if we implicitly assume they're just "broken" or "crazy" without carefully testing every nook and cranny of that assumption first. Just rolling with that assumption communicates that we don't care about them having equal rights and respect, because it's easier to just let them tread water.


You know.. For some reason I keep finding your posts more and more likeable every time I read them. Stop being so damn likeable, god damn it. 

But yes, widespread barriers and stigma are barriers and stigmas we as a species have to overcome, just like we have overcome other barriers when it comes to blacks, women and gays. There is always something new to overcome, it just so happens that trans issues/problems and the stigmas/barriers surrounding them are those that we have today.


----------



## Misha Bordiga Zahradník (Jun 29, 2018)

Sees 20 day old debate thread is now 13 pages long and still going strong....
On the subject of Trans membership in the Military by numbers www.bbc.com: Reality Check: 15,000 trans people in US military
The data for Transgender Suicide in military service lacks solid data for time during service, and our only data on the topic comes from analysis of Veterans after having served, in which case the rate is 20 times hire than the average veteran. However, that data is unhelpful in that analysis because it includes almost exclusively Veterans who served prior to policies allowing for Trans folk to outwardly express their identity, forcing them to serve as the gender matching their biological sex for their service. 

The conclusions are thus that Trans folk are not only over-represented in the military prior to policies allowing for open identification(despite being minuscule in the population, and therefore minuscule in proportion of the service), but that being closeted during service exacerbates the minority stress related mental health issues to an absurd extreme. What we do not have ample data to confirm is how Transgender Troops perform in the field compared to regular soldiers, but when they permeate to the special forces as rarely as should be expected based on their impressively small portion of that military, I'd say that tips my observations towards a lack of issue.

Open service of Trans individuals is unfortunately a new thing, though evidence suggesting the degree of closeted service members indicates no effect on field performance under the worst possible conditions.

www.rand.org: The Implications of Allowing Transgender Personnel to Serve Openly

You can serve in the armed forces if you require glasses, which are very much so necessary health care to perform your duty as a soldier.

My experience in protesting alongside trans folk is that most try to keep a fair time period of pills on hand during protests in case of arrest. This hasn't served them as well as it should have because the local pigs like to deny people arrested medication, and that goes well and beyond just the trans folk. We've had some people unrelated to activism die recently due to being denied necessary medications, which only _endears_ the local activist scene ever more to our local police. But I'm risking going off on a tangential list of grievances more than a few pages long. Trans folk understand how to prepare for such disadvantageous scenarios, and muscle through when even those backups fail them. That is despite being treated objectively worse in those institutions, but again, I'm avoiding that tangent.


----------



## Mach (Jun 29, 2018)

Yakamaru said:


> I have to properly apologize for coming off as.. Hostile. I am way too used to shouting matches on these forums as they've practically screwed me over in some ways in how I interact with those I disagree with. It is not appropriate behaviour to show, especially not if my intention is to try and lead by example. You don't deserve any of this as you've done nothing but be friendly on your part. Quite frankly I'm surprised you've not snapped yet at me. I appreciate it, I truly do. It's a breath of fresh air on the forum, and I appreciate your presence here.


Apology accepted. I try to be as diplomatic and respectful as possible, particularly your case since you are one of the first people I met here. I mean to ask if you were alright on your profile page last night, but I could see it and I did not want to clutter this thread with personal communications. However, I would stress that properly researching the topics you argue and citing verifiable evidence would go would greatly help matters. When you are confident in your arguments, there is no need for hostility or acrimony.


Yakamaru said:


> Being trans often comes with mental health issues, and have shown to have about 8-10 times higher rates of suicide/attempted suicide/suicidal thoughts. I am against it on this basis, for one, stemming from external to internal issues that needs solving.


As Troj and I stated, creating a more accepting environment for trans service members would bring those numbers down substantially. In fact, the Department of Defense currently has several program meant to change the culture surrounding transgendered individuals in the military, similar to how the Department had programs to help gay service members assimilate into the services after the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy was struck down. Another detail you may have overlooked is that there is psychological screening before you enter any branch of the United States Armed Forces. The tests and background checks they run actively screen against suicidal tendencies.

You also cited a report to prove that transgender are more susceptible to mental illness and suicidal tendencies. I noticed this quote in the executive summary:


> Based on prior research and the findings of this report, *we find that mental health factors and experiences of harassment, discrimination, violence and rejection may interact to produce a marked vulnerability to suicidal behavior in transgender and gender non-conforming individuals*. More research on suicidal behavior among transgender and gender non-conforming people is needed.


So perhaps creating a more accepting environment for transgender service members is path forward here. Additionally, the study you cited made no mention of how prone transgender individuals in the military are to suicide and mental illnesses. This information would be helpful.

Also, I glanced at the Wikipedia link Troj helpfully provided and noted this quote:


> Whilst militaries often cite the high medical cost of transgender people, they fail to reconcile this argument with current standards with other service members. For example, militaries often allow hormone treatments for an array of reasons and conditions, besides gender dysphoria; a common hormone treatment being contraceptive. Furthermore, the often cited risks of cross hormone treatment are rare,[16] and not likely to cause any significant issues to the military. Whilst the cost of gender reassignment surgery is high,[9] it is suggested that fewer than 2% of transgender members per year will choose to undergo gender reassignment surgery.[17]


I believe this addresses many of your concerns with empirical evidence.


----------



## Troj (Jun 29, 2018)

What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.

I can completely accept the argument that field personnel need to be in peak condition, and that reliance on a medication or a medical device makes a soldier vulnerable.

But, not everybody in the military serves on the battlefield. People who rely on medication or medical devices can absolutely serve in some other capacity, and can make a meaningful contribution.

Additionally, we need to be extremely skeptical of any insinuation or argument that trans people represent a _unique_ or _particular_ risk or headache in this regard.  We need to tune out the know-nothings who are going to share their stupid ass-pull opinions about hormones n'shit makin' people cray-cray or whatever.


----------



## Yakamaru (Jun 29, 2018)

Mach said:


> As Troj and I stated, creating a more accepting environment for trans service members would bring those numbers down substantially. In fact, the Department of Defense currently has several program meant to change the culture surrounding transgendered individuals in the military, similar to how the Department had programs to help gay service members assimilate into the services after the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy was struck down. Another detail you may have overlooked is that there is psychological screening before you enter any branch of the United States Armed Forces. The tests and background checks they run actively screen against suicidal tendencies.
> 
> You also cited a report to prove that transgender are more susceptible to mental illness and suicidal tendencies. I noticed this quote in the executive summary:
> 
> ...


I believe I stand corrected on the issue. 

Though keep in mind that acceptance is not something one can force, even in the military. People may seem accepting on the surface, but on the inside they may be resentful, arrogant, ignorant, skeptical and/or intolerant, so we have to tread carefully so as to not make any bad steps. Acceptance takes time, patience and understanding. Ignorance, skepticism and intolerance is not cured overnight. The best cure for a lot of the uncertainty going on is to give it time. Lots of time.



Mach said:


> Apology accepted. I try to be as diplomatic and respectful as possible, particularly your case since you are one of the first people I met here. I mean to ask if you were alright on your profile page last night, but I could see it and I did not want to clutter this thread with personal communications. However, I would stress that properly researching the topics you argue and citing verifiable evidence would go would greatly help matters. When you are confident in your arguments, there is no need for hostility or acrimony.


Indeed. 



Troj said:


> What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.
> 
> I can completely accept the argument that field personnel need to be in peak condition, and that reliance on a medication or a medical device makes a soldier vulnerable.
> 
> ...


Indeed. You don't *have* to be on the front line. 

Though to be fair, they are a largely unknown factor, one that will need lots of research before we can call anything certain. Can't really blame people for wanting to be cautious.


----------



## Troj (Jun 29, 2018)

You can't blame people for wanting to be cautious, but you can certainly call them out when their caution is rooted in bigotry, bias, or a basic misunderstanding of the relevant issues at hand.

"What's the best way to go about X, in light of the facts and the major considerations?" is a fair, smart, good-faith question.

"How can we keep THOSE PEOPLE from causing problems?" or "Are THOSE PEOPLE going to be A PROBLEM?" are questions which inherently reek of bias (if not bigotry).

Too many people just inherently assume that trans people are "a problem," and operate from that assumption. They are inherently hostile to the idea of trans people serving in the military--and often elsewhere and otherwise, too--so they don't even want to ask HOW that might theoretically work, or how you'd troubleshoot problems or risks.

The core problem is that people often play identity or tribal politics without realizing it.  As a result, members of "the majority" often see minorities as not-quite-human, in the sense that their needs, feelings, and desires are treated as secondary, peripheral, trivial, or negotiable. So, it genuinely bothers me how often people have basically treated current, aspiring, and hypothetical LGBTQ military personnel as if they were just silly trolls who were being a nuisance for no "good" reason.

Pragmatically, if we want to have a truly top-notch fighting force, we can't afford to miss diamonds in the rough because of our own biases or false assumptions, or because we didn't channel the right person into the right niche.


----------



## Guifrog (Jul 1, 2018)

__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1037080206465337


----------



## 2oodles (Jul 3, 2018)

Leo Whitepaw said:


> Donald Trump; A tosspot and a madmad



What is madmad?


----------



## Roose Hurro (Jul 3, 2018)

2oodles said:


> What is madmad?


----------



## Ramjet (Jul 3, 2018)

Roose Hurro said:


>



My eyes!!!!!!


----------



## Simo (Jul 3, 2018)

All I can say is no wonder he has to pay hookers and trophy wives to screw him. Geez, that guy is about the ugliest, most hideous creature I have ever had the horror of beholding, both inside and out, a true abomination of body, spirit, and mind. (if any)


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Jul 4, 2018)

Well I can see this is just as much of a shitshow as ever. Since it seems we are at the transgender in military debate, they should be able to join and serve. They don't have a ton of problems and they understand their duties. They are throwing every transgendered person out the window even if they've already transitioned. It is based on bigotry. Why don't we ban women as well because they are more frail than men and bring with them a ton more problems than men? Rape in the military would go down and we wouldn't have to worry about feminine hygiene. All the same excuses say for why transgenders shouldn't serve in the military can be made for other things and it's completely bigoted. Let those who want to serve, serve. As long as they have good mental health and are of reasonable strength, they should be allowed.


----------

