The Trump Presidency – 2016

[PilotMan]

Pompeo was promised that the Saudi's would catch and punish the bad guys.

That's it. We're all good now, right?

There's a shitload of information about who was in the building, and their ties to the Prince, but we're just gonna skip past all that, because they told us it wasn't them.

[Edward64]

Here's a nice chart of Obama vs Trump performance from inauguration to May of following year.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.951a926b38b8

I don't think this is a fair comparison as Obama caught the bottom of the GR (and kudo's to Obama and GWB, their policies, and their teams that pulled us out of it) but nevertheless it shows Obama doing much better than Trump.

Obama had a 148% increase over his 8 years which is pretty impressive. Who knows what Trump will end up with but I wouldn't put that out of reach with 8 years (party affiliations aside, I think we can all root for this goal).

Stock Market Performance by President | MacroTrends

Getting back to RM comment on what the difference is ...

Market soared under Obama. They hated him. Wonder what the difference is.

I'm not sure who the "they hated him" is but assume its the low-middle class based on CU's post but I infer the answer is "because he's black".

Obama got a good share of the low-middle class votes in 2012 vs Romney. For < $50K, Obama got 60%. For $50-$90K, Obama got 46%.

How Groups Voted in 2012 - Roper Center

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

First let me address the statistical fallacy.
On 1/1/09 the Dow was at 9,034 He left at 19,762 (Which was also the highest point at any point in his tenure) a 10,700 point surge in 8 years.

We are 2 weeks removed from a 26,828 peak.

A 7,000 point jump in under 2 years.

That's not a statistical fallacy. Using a date when he wasn't in office to start your statistical analysis is shady. Obama didn't take office on 1/1 when the Dow was at 9,034. He took office on January 20 when the Dow was at 7,949. I wonder why you would credit him for an 1100 point drop when he wasn't in office.

If you want to compare time periods, the Dow was up 50% in the same time period when Obama took over. In the same time period of January 20 to October 17 of the following year, here are the annualized returns.

Obama:

Dow - 21.4%
S&P - 24.8%
NASDAQ - 36.6%

Trump
Dow - 16.4%
S&P - 13.0%
NASDAQ - 20.2%

Now if you want to get real picky since we're talking about 401K plans, the S&P is much more important. Most 401Ks are invested heavily in index funds which typically track the S&P for their purchases.

Regardless, there isn't a metric you can find at this point where Trump's stock market performed better than Obama's. For what it's worth I don't think either President has that kind of power over the markets, but you're the one arguing that's what voters care about.

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Second and I think its the bigger issue with the Democratic party right now. This is the second or third time you have implied if not directly tried to make it an exclusively race issue. You specifically, and many others, marginalize the opinions of any who oppose your view and simply discard them as ignorant racists too dumb to understand these big boy issues. Its the exact mistake Hillary made and what led to the election of a moron like Trump.

I'm not saying it's the only reason. Just that the whole "economic anxiety" argument is garbage. The markets were incredible under Obama. There isn't a person with a 401K as you said that could be upset with those results.

But a large part of his campaign was around race. He is a racist and white nationalist and it's not a coincidence that a lot of those same people were hired for jobs within the White House. It's not a coincidence that he focuses heavily on rhetoric that plays toward that demographic.

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

But go ahead and dismiss everyone who sits on your side of the aisle, just like the Democrat candidates. Dont bother to spend a minute understanding their motivation. Then shake your head next November and make up another boogie man, another strawman for why everyone screwed up again. Find another Russia to blame. Never learn from past mistakes just keep repeating.

I have a pretty clear understanding of their motivation. Not all of it's race. Sometimes people are just angry at the world for their failures. They want to be join a movement with an angry man who will pick a common enemy (minorities, women, liberals) to blame and start yelling (this goes for both sides).

Democrats lost because Clinton wasn't an inspiring candidate. She didn't get enough people to care enough to vote. And she ran for President in a country that uses an outdated system created by people who didn't trust the people to vote and didn't view many of them as equal humans.

Policy and results matter little to the electorate. We've seen this for decades. The more charismatic candidate wins. Look at every election dating back to the 70's and the more charismatic candidate won regardless of party or policy. Trump's a moron con man but he's a charismatic one.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Will they turn out as much I don't know, but they will never turn on him/the GOP while "coastal elites/libruls" say things like this.

Are you saying sensitivity to name calling exceptionally acute now? I think your point is true, being labeled is enraging, just think it is inevitable. Last week I did a lecture in my US History class about how the 1884 presidential election basically came down to the backlash of a preacher calling Democrats the party of "Rum, Romanism and Rebellion"

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

(I also don't think the opioid epidemic is a red state thing - meth was more red state, while opioids were more blue states, and certainly a huge issue in the blue part of the northeast I lived near.)

Well it is an epidemic, but yes it is very much a white rural thing. https://www.businessinsider.com/maps...crisis-2017-10
"Out of the 82 counties with exceptionally high opioid death rates, 77 voted for President Donald Trump in 2016, and most were in rural parts of the country.
Economic regression, unemployment, and the associated social decline are correlated with high rates of drug use in white counties."
(By the way, the lone blue spot in California is Clear Lake, or as everyone calls it, The Red Neck Rivera)

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I don't think Obama policies failed, I think Obama/DNC messaging of those policies did, and a large part of that was due to the media and supporters.

I think they massively failed under educated, rural-ish white folk. The recovery left them behind. This article and map show a near perfect correlation between Trump county victories/flips and places where generational upward mobility is lowest. U.S. Kids Far Less Likely To Out-Earn Their Parents, As Inequality Grows : The Two-Way : NPR

But most importantly, they experienced huge increases in healthcare costs (in some part due to the toothless Obamacare implementation). Here's a great article on a Penn couple that voted for Trump: Two years ago, when they first signed up for insurance on the exchange, they were paying $530 a month for a plan they liked, Abra says. The price rose a little for 2016, but the options for 2017 went up a lot — about 30 percent on average in Pennsylvania.
"We have one for $881, one for $938, one for $984, like the deductibles are — look, these are insane," Abra said, as she checked the exchange website for monthly premiums. "The one that we would be stuck with would be the silver. This is $881.50, and our deductible would be $7,000." Trump Promises On Health Insurance Appealed To Family Struggling With Cost : Shots - Health News : NPR

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

I think they massively failed under educated, rural-ish white folk. The recovery left them behind. This article and map show a near perfect correlation between Trump county victories/flips and places where generational upward mobility is lowest. U.S. Kids Far Less Likely To Out-Earn Their Parents, As Inequality Grows : The Two-Way : NPR

But most importantly, they experienced huge increases in healthcare costs (in some part due to the toothless Obamacare implementation). Here's a great article on a Penn couple that voted for Trump: Two years ago, when they first signed up for insurance on the exchange, they were paying $530 a month for a plan they liked, Abra says. The price rose a little for 2016, but the options for 2017 went up a lot — about 30 percent on average in Pennsylvania.
"We have one for $881, one for $938, one for $984, like the deductibles are — look, these are insane," Abra said, as she checked the exchange website for monthly premiums. "The one that we would be stuck with would be the silver. This is $881.50, and our deductible would be $7,000." Trump Promises On Health Insurance Appealed To Family Struggling With Cost : Shots - Health News : NPR

Counterpoint: People really don't care that much about the health care policy as much as they say they do.

For instance, if price is an issue, why continue to elect Governors who rejected Medicaid expansion in their state? Why elect representatives who stonewall bills that would lower health care costs for those people? It literally cost their constituents billions. It made it harder for that demographic you cited to get health care.

I get electing a person who comes in and says they'll make health care cheaper. But he hasn't. In fact he's done the opposite. There doesn't seem to be much of a plan either. But he isn't losing support from his base over this. So again, do they really care about policy here? Was health care cost really the reason they pulled that lever and will they now change in the next election?

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

First let me address the statistical fallacy.
On 1/1/09 the Dow was at 9,034 He left at 19,762 (Which was also the highest point at any point in his tenure) a 10,700 point surge in 8 years.

Why do you even bother making statistical arguments when you so very clearly use misleading or outright incorrect numbers? This isn't the first time you've done this. Before you tried to pass off the demographics of a single county as being meaningful for an entire congressional district and tried to use employment numbers from 2008 against Obama.

Are you hoping that people won't notice the discrepancy and you'll get away with your argument or are you just lazy? I mean, why even include the 1/1/09 date when everyone in here is aware (or at least I thought they were) that inaugurations don't happen on New Year's Day?

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I get electing a person who comes in and says they'll make health care cheaper. But he hasn't. In fact he's done the opposite. There doesn't seem to be much of a plan either. But he isn't losing support from his base over this. So again, do they really care about policy here? Was health care cost really the reason they pulled that lever and will they now change in the next election?

Agree, and I think the result is this issue cannot be counted on to turn out votes the way it did in 2016. Thus, my main point that the razor thin margins in swing states has all but disappeared.

[RainMaker]

Back to the Saudi thing for a bit. It looks like they started cutting up his body while he was still alive.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/w...dismember.html

[Izulde]

Bernie wing of the party here.

I still love Warren, but between her endorsement of Hillary and this unbelievably short-sighted DNA testing thing, I don't know that I'm comfortable supporting her.

Booker never appealed to me and I was *really* turned off by his and Harris's grandstanding during the Kavanaugh hearings.

I'm still on the Bernie train, but outside of him, I'm just not seeing anyone who I'd enthusiastically support. Everyone has disqualified themselves or was a general meh or nah reaction to begin with.

I do have the hope that this election will usher in some genuine progressives who can be viable candidates for the future, but unless Bernie wins the nomination, 2020 looks like the same unenthusiastic general election feeling I've had in every election of my voting lifetime (bar Nader, who I enthusiastically voted for to try and get the Green Party started on the path to maybe being a viable third party).

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Izulde

Bernie wing of the party here.

I still love Warren, but between her endorsement of Hillary and this unbelievably short-sighted DNA testing thing, I don't know that I'm comfortable supporting her.

Booker never appealed to me and I was *really* turned off by his and Harris's grandstanding during the Kavanaugh hearings.

I'm still on the Bernie train, but outside of him, I'm just not seeing anyone who I'd enthusiastically support. Everyone has disqualified themselves or was a general meh or nah reaction to begin with.

I do have the hope that this election will usher in some genuine progressives who can be viable candidates for the future, but unless Bernie wins the nomination, 2020 looks like the same unenthusiastic general election feeling I've had in every election of my voting lifetime (bar Nader, who I enthusiastically voted for to try and get the Green Party started on the path to maybe being a viable third party).

My issue with Bernie supporters (in general, not you) is they were 100% for Bernie and lost interest in the election when he lost the primary. If progressives want good progressive presidential candidates then they need to show up and get progressives in local and state positions. Then continue to show up as those candidates move into national politics. Otherwise they're just going to sit around bitching that there's no good progressive candidates while watching the baby boomers continue to put people in office at all levels.

I lost most of the respect had for the Bernie movement when his subreddit spent the month leading up to the election trying to convince itself that Trump better aligned with their beliefs than Hillary.

Harris would probably be a great candidate to attack Trump in debates, but I'm not sure she's electable. 2016 made it clear women have more working against them in a general election than Obama did in '08.

Its still early. I'm confident a couple of candidates will stand out by the time we really start looking at 2020. If Dems stop whining about the presidential candidates and show up they may see real change as the senate map is far more favorable in 2020 and a second straight election of getting strong local and state candidates in office would make a big difference for the future.

[ISiddiqui]

The thing about Warren is that she's basically a female Bernie who has actually gotten stuff done.

Now she's a bit too left for me, but I just don't really get why Bernie supporters would be anti-Warren. I can understand if they think she's not inspiring enough (she comes across like the professor she is), but on the policy aspects, not much difference between her and Bernie - aside from the fact that she is willing to work within the party and sometimes he isn't.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Why do you even bother making statistical arguments when you so very clearly use misleading or outright incorrect numbers? This isn't the first time you've done this. Before you tried to pass off the demographics of a single county as being meaningful for an entire congressional district and tried to use employment numbers from 2008 against Obama.

Are you hoping that people won't notice the discrepancy and you'll get away with your argument or are you just lazy? I mean, why even include the 1/1/09 date when everyone in here is aware (or at least I thought they were) that inaugurations don't happen on New Year's Day?

I can promise you it isnt an intent to deceive or hope people dont notice. Maybe its lazy maybe Im just not as smart of a debator as you guys. Outside of this single thread, in the balance of my life I typically avoid political conversations. As a business owner and an employer they do me no good. There will always be someone who disagrees with me and that only serves to hurt my business.


That aside the point I was trying to make, albeit poorly I suppose, is the one of perception.


First let me concede and agree that I personally dont think Obama, Trump W Bush, Clinton or really any President of the last 50 years had much direct personal impact on the stock market. However, that doesnt mean that there isn't a perception, among many voters, that they do. There are voters whose vote will be won based on perception of the market surge.



We can start to break down graphs and argue the "artificial valley" around Obama's inauguration and how much of that was attributable to concerns over him as a candidate and how much were other unrelated market factors.



But none of that was the key point I was trying to argue. The key point I was trying to make was Rainmaker''s ascertion that "poor people" dont care about markets. That their support of Trump was because they were racists. (Which makes one wonder about the motivation of minority poors but I digress) and then the doubling down to say

I have a pretty clear understanding of their motivation. Not all of it's race. Sometimes people are just angry at the world for their failures.

You make an assumption here that only people who are angry and failures vote for Trump. I bristle at this notion because I voted for him, and am neither angry nor a failure nor am I a racist.


I think this same dismissal of the entire base is what lead to Hillary's undoing. I think its foolish to discount the views of so many people. I think instead of thinking that Trump's bluster, arrogance and abrasiveness are the reasons he was elected, I think what should scare the left if that if he had run on the same platform and actually acted "Presidential" it could have been a much, much wider margin. I dont think you give enough credit to how many Rs were turned off by Trump's behavior.


Now you transition over to the populace vs EC argument and you start a whole other conversation. You start to get into a construct argument of state sovereignty and the initial ideal of the Union at the writing of the Constitution as opposed to how it operates today. If you think that all citizens of the US should follow a common set of laws and regulations then certainly popular vote seems much more logical. However if you believe that the federal government should be an umbrella to encompass 50 distinct and different localized governments then you have a different viewpoint.



I wish I were a better written communicator. Its not a strong suit of mine I readily admit. I'm an engineer not a writer...if we were sharing a pint and having this conversation I feel like Id be much better able to express the points Im trying to make. But in written word I fumble in my brain.



The perspective that I have is fairly unique. I came from poverty. Without a lot of government assistance programs Im likely not alive today. Ive also watched the degradation from being saved by the system to becoming dependent upon the system...and I have grown to wonder if that is human nature at its most slovenly or if that is manipulation and control by other humans at their most evil. If the system is designed to create dependency. Today I am an evil rich person. I'm a business owner multiple times over. I employ a considerable number of folks. Despite paying well above industry average, to the point of being ridiculed for paying too much, the vast majority of my work force are low age earners on the global scale. Because we represent a high price product my customers are generally very, very affluent. I am on the board of a local bank. We started a Faith shelter two years ago that I interact with daily. I just try to listen and learn from all these different viewpoints and ...I dont know. Im venting now.


I just believe we are all pretty common. The poor on either side of the race aisle live so similar but they cant see it. The trailer parks around are littered with 4wd trucks heavily modified and in many cases worth a multiple of the home they are parked in front of. Drive over to the projects and its the same thing. The modifications are different, but its the same financially ignorant decisions. Its throwing money into a depreciating asset. Both sides boom their music at max capacity because they have some core message they want to force the world to hear. The messages are different but the human motivation is the same. A desire to force your voice, to be heard, to be unable to be ignored. Then in the suburbs you have the closet racists and white guilts who are the same embodiment of the two previous groups just maybe a tad more matured and reserved in their expression. Yet here we sit arguing about minutia and not fixing a damn thing.


Whatever. Now Im depressed. Have fun. I'll keep my ignorant opinions to the college football threads from now on.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Whatever. Now Im depressed. Have fun. I'll keep my ignorant opinions to the college football threads from now on.

Eh, I vote you stay on, its good to get a variety of opinions. This thread definitely lean liberal so friction is expected. Many people have been wrong on something, most concede it, and move on to the next topic of the day.

As far as being called "names", insulted, ad hominem snipe attacks etc. ... just give it back in kind. They'll expect it.

.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

But none of that was the key point I was trying to argue. The key point I was trying to make was Rainmaker''s ascertion that "poor people" dont care about markets. That their support of Trump was because they were racists. (Which makes one wonder about the motivation of minority poors but I digress) and then the doubling down to say

I'm arguing that if you care about the markets, seeing your 401k nearly triple in 8 years should make you ecstatic.

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

You make an assumption here that only people who are angry and failures vote for Trump. I bristle at this notion because I voted for him, and am neither angry nor a failure nor am I a racist.

This is not my intent and I'm not specifically talking about Trump and Trump voters.

The left does the same thing. They aim to villianize white men in many cases. Or the police. Or any comedian who makes an off-color joke. They also want to point to a group and say "your problems are because of them!".

It's a time honored tradition in politics. I just think it's gotten to an extreme in this country. Too many people are basing their votes on some perceived enemy that has been lined up as an excuse for their lot in life. Policy doesn't matter anymore. Just carving up the electorate into groups and hating those who are not like us.

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Now you transition over to the populace vs EC argument and you start a whole other conversation. You start to get into a construct argument of state sovereignty and the initial ideal of the Union at the writing of the Constitution as opposed to how it operates today. If you think that all citizens of the US should follow a common set of laws and regulations then certainly popular vote seems much more logical. However if you believe that the federal government should be an umbrella to encompass 50 distinct and different localized governments then you have a different viewpoint.

I just think it's a dumb way to elect a leader. States have immense power through the Senate and their own local government. The person who represents all of the people should be chosen by the majority.

It is something Trump and I agree on.

The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 7, 2012

[RainMaker]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/17/polit...ggi/index.html

I'm guessing half the world's intelligence services know what they talked about.

Senior administration officials said Kushner's close relationship with bin Salman was an early cause for concern among career national security staffers, who worried off-the-books conversations with the young prince could lead to misunderstandings or worse. Kushner is known to have messaged with the prince on the communication app WhatsApp.

Using WhatsApp

[Edward64]

Here we go again. Let's hope its not a cluster like last time.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/imm...border-n921286

A caravan of migrants fleeing Honduras has grown to 4,000 and the Mexican government has sent an additional 500 federal police to its border with Guatemala in anticipation of their arrival, according to U.S. government documents obtained by NBC News.

Part of the caravan, which has split into two groups, is now approaching the Mexico-Guatemala border amidst a surge in border crossings on the U.S.-Mexico border.
:
Many of the Hondurans traveling in the caravan are children, some traveling with their parents and some without their parents, according to the documents. Because children are afforded special protections in the U.S., their arrival is creating anxiety within the Trump administration that has pledged to decrease illegal immigration. President Donald Trump said last week that he would consider separating migrant families at the border once again, after reversing his controversial "zero tolerance" policy in June.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Are you hoping that people won't notice the discrepancy and you'll get away with your argument or are you just lazy? I mean, why even include the 1/1/09 date when everyone in here is aware (or at least I thought they were) that inaugurations don't happen on New Year's Day?

I was more concerned that he used raw numbers over percentage gains. But yes, cherry-picking dates isn't very good either.

[PilotMan]

President Trump tells his Cabinet to cut the fat



Monday morning appt scheduled with the Saudi's in Istanbul.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Here we go again. Let's hope its not a cluster like last time.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/imm...border-n921286

So is this one bullshit like the last caravan?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

So is this one bullshit like the last caravan?

Don't know if its bullshit but it could turn out to be real-shit.

[Edward64]

Some Mueller news in MSM.

Hope Manafort has given Mueller some good stuff. Sounds as if its coming to a head soon after mid-terms.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/17/polit...iet/index.html

Ever since reaching a deal with special counsel Robert Mueller, Paul Manafort has kept the Russia prosecutors busy.

The former Trump campaign chairman and his lawyers have visited Mueller's office in Washington at least nine times in the last four weeks, a strong indication that the special counsel is moving at a steady clip.

September and October at first glance appear to be quiet periods for the investigation, under the Justice Department's guidelines to avoid public political acts before the midterm elections. But the quiet period has seen a persistent murmur of activity, based on near-daily sightings of Mueller's prosecutors and sources involved in the investigation.
:
Plus, the discussions between the President's legal team and the special counsel's office have intensified in recent weeks, including after the special counsel sent questions about possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government. The President's attorneys are expected to reply to the questions in writing.

People around Trump and other witnesses believe more criminal indictments will come from Mueller.
:
Attorneys who have dealt with Mueller's investigators and other officials expect that the special counsel's efforts, now 17 months in the works, will include an active post-election period a much-anticipated report where Mueller will outline what his investigators decided to prosecute and what they declined.

[bbgunn]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

I just believe we are all pretty common. The poor on either side of the race aisle live so similar but they cant see it. The trailer parks around are littered with 4wd trucks heavily modified and in many cases worth a multiple of the home they are parked in front of. Drive over to the projects and its the same thing. The modifications are different, but its the same financially ignorant decisions. Its throwing money into a depreciating asset. Both sides boom their music at max capacity because they have some core message they want to force the world to hear. The messages are different but the human motivation is the same. A desire to force your voice, to be heard, to be unable to be ignored. Then in the suburbs you have the closet racists and white guilts who are the same embodiment of the two previous groups just maybe a tad more matured and reserved in their expression. Yet here we sit arguing about minutia and not fixing a damn thing.

This x1000.

I have always said that the politician or political party that finds a way to get poor whites and poor minorities on the same page will be an unstoppable force, and only then will you start to see real change in the U.S. A lot of people forget that when Martin Luther King was assassinated, it was years after the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act. He started to look at the bigger picture: getting poor people of all races together and involved. He was planning a Poor People’s March. As important as the Civil Rights Movement was, a Unified “Poor Rights” Movement would have been an absolute gamechanger. You would have seen things like universal health care, progressive taxes on the rich, etc., come up in the 1970s.

Precisely because it would be a gamechanger, though, it will never happen. Both Democrats and Republicans have too much to gain from keeping the poor and lower-class divided among racial lines.

EDIT: When I said Democrats and Republicans, I meant the politicians themselves.

[JPhillips]

Pat Robertson:

"For those who are screaming blood for the Saudis — look, these people are key allies,” Robertson said. While he called the faith of the Wahabists — the hardline Islamist sect to which the Saudi Royal Family belongs — “obnoxious,” he urged viewers to remember that “we’ve got an arms deal that everybody wanted a piece of…it’ll be a lot of jobs, a lot of money come to our coffers. It’s not something you want to blow up willy-nilly.”

I'm pretty sure Jesus would have some issues with this line of reasoning.

[Edward64]

I wouldn't put it beyond Trump to close the border and/or bully Mexico some other way. Sure it'll disrupt a bunch of stuff but it'll be a great rallying cry for the GOP (in addition to another report on Trump wanting to send troops to the border).

I'm sure there is an explanation but it does seem weird to me that Mexico will allow 3,000 Hondurans en-masse to come into their country without having a visa or the like. Maybe some sort of free work/travel treaty? or they just can't/won't enforce their borders.

Regardless, not good timing for the Dems re: mid-terms. I doubt they are going to win any more/new voters over this issue whereas it likely galvanize the Trump and GOP supporters.

https://www.apnews.com/9919ff5a85e248d5aa96718027821aca

As some 3,000 Hondurans made their way through Guatemala, attention — and pressure — turned to Mexico, after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened Thursday to close the U.S.-Mexico border if authorities there fail to stop them — a nearly unthinkable move that would disrupt hundreds of thousands of legal freight, vehicle and pedestrian crossings each day.
:
The threat followed another one earlier this week to cut off aid to Central American countries if the migrants weren’t stopped. However, earlier this year Trump made a similar vow over another large migrant caravan, but didn’t follow through and it largely petered out in Mexico.

On Thursday, Mexico dispatched additional police to its southern border, after the Casa del Migrante shelter on the Guatemalan side of the border reported that hundreds of Hondurans had already arrived there.

Mexican officials say the Hondurans won’t be allowed to enter as a group, and would either have to show a passport and visa — something few have — or apply individually for refugee status, a process that can mean waiting for up to 90 days for approval.

Mexico’s ambassador to Guatemala, Luis Manuel Lopez Moreno, met with leaders of the caravan Wednesday and warned them that Hondurans caught without papers in Mexico would be deported.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Pat Robertson:

I'm pretty sure Jesus would have some issues with this line of reasoning.

Them being Wahabist should have been enough. Being very likely complicit in the murder of a US citizen would have him screaming if it was a Democratic president. What a hypocrite.

SA is a valuable frenemy (beyond whatever ties it has to Trump & Kushner) for now (until Elon really gets going!) but someone like Robertson should have said "its very troubling if true, let see how it plays out".

[RainMaker]

I just don't understand how anyone could possibly care about the arms deal if you aren't some executive at Raytheon.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Let's hope its not a cluster like last time.

Now that you mention it, clusterbombs would be a viable & reasonable option to invasion.

[stevew]

Hey man I'm all about Trump if he wants to fuck Saudi Arabia up. Like yard sign all in.

[Ksyrup]

My MIL mentioned a name in a conversation about where my wife and I may have been registered for our wedding that I don't think I've heard in about 15 years - Service Merchandise. I mean, you're old when you can say you were registered at SM!

I looked it up, and they went under around the turn of the century (2000, not 1900), although apparently the son of the founding family brought the name back for an online-only presence. I had no clue that website existed until today.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

My MIL mentioned a name in a conversation about where my wife and I may have been registered for our wedding that I don't think I've heard in about 15 years - Service Merchandise. I mean, you're old when you can say you were registered at SM!

I looked it up, and they went under around the turn of the century (2000, not 1900), although apparently the son of the founding family brought the name back for an online-only presence. I had no clue that website existed until today.

That's bringing back some old memories. Wasn't it all mail-order? Or big on layaway? I remember getting my first CD player from there in the early 90's.

[molson]

They used be the big corner tenant at my hometown mall.....wonder how that mall is doing these days.

Circuit City is another one that went online-only, I guess because they feel the brand name has value.

[Ksyrup]

Ah hell, I thought I was in the Random Thoughts thread... sorry.

I used to buy my Trump fuck up Saudi Arabia dolls there, I guess.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I used to buy my Trump fuck up Saudi Arabia dolls there, I guess.

FWIW ... bought my HP 12C calculator there (still have it, works great with new batteries every 5 years or so).

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Now that you mention it, clusterbombs would be a viable & reasonable option to invasion.

I rather just have the wall and immigration reform. No collateral damage or lawsuits that way.

Now that I mentioned it, what's up with the wall? Apparently something is going up?

Video shows border wall construction underway in Texas | TheHill

Video released this week shows construction underway in El Paso, Texas, for a portion of a U.S.-Mexico border wall.

The video published by the El Paso Times shows construction beginning to replace existing fencing with a wall in Chihuahuita, El Paso's oldest neighborhood.

The wall, construction for which began last Saturday, is set to run from Chihuahuita and continue east for four miles.

The 18-foot-tall steel bollard wall will replace the chain link and metal fence as part of President Trump’s executive order last year authorizing construction of his wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, the administration said.

The construction project is expected to be completed in late April 2019 and is estimated to cost $22 million.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Now that I mentioned it, what's up with the wall?

It hasn't gotten funding. He may want a wall, his voters may want a wall, but the big money donors don't. So I doubt it happens.

I really don't have an issue with the wall outside of the cost (and there are better ways to tackle illegal immigration). And I was told Mexico was going to pay for it so I'm not sure why we need to fund it. But it isn't happening under this political system.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Now that you mention it, clusterbombs would be a viable & reasonable option to invasion.

Exactly, win win. You get to watch 100’s of children napalmed and parents won’t have to be worried their children will be separated from them. Imagine the amount of security and patriotism that you would feel...

[JPhillips]

When referring to the USA, I will always capitalize the word Country!

Trump this morning. I have no idea what this is about.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

Exactly, win win. You get to watch 100’s of children napalmed and parents won’t have to be worried their children will be separated from them. Imagine the amount of security and patriotism that you would feel...

I have absolutely zero sympathy for invaders, plain & simple. I've long proposed a bounty system.

It ought to be a capital offense, as should aiding & abetting it.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I have absolutely zero sympathy for invaders, plain & simple. I've long proposed a bounty system.

It ought to be a capital offense, as should aiding & abetting it.

God knows why I'm bothering to reply... but...

if you would like to outlaw Asylum seekers, and all forms of brown people immigrating, I think you're pretty gross (and i know that you don't care and think i should also be killed for my opinions as they are a threat to the state, so again, why am I bothering? I don't know, I'm a moron). But seeking legal immigration and requesting asylum as a refugee are currently legal, and we have government officers at legal points of entry into the United States who deal with this and who make decisions on the validity of such requests for asylum. Until recently this could even be done without separating children from their parents as a form of punishment for daring to want to find safety in the greatest country in the world! So... invaders?

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I have absolutely zero sympathy for invaders, plain & simple. I've long proposed a bounty system.

It ought to be a capital offense, as should aiding & abetting it.

Yes, what part of my reply suggests I do not understand your desire?

You want to see women and children rounded up and publicly killed. That seeing dying children will finally be the reasonable response you wanted for years. I imagine the images of the Syrian children poisoned proved that your idea is not that far fetched.

You've stated that you have a very negative existence, sleeping, waking up getting thought the day, etc. I assume carry out this killing may be the Final Solution to all your personal problems.

As way of extending an olive branch, I'll share some of the bio's of my students that you can hunt down:

Jose, came here at 3. Mom works night as janitor, home alone at night! Even though he can go to a four college he decided to work and continue at Community College and transfer so that he can support is his older sister as she is finishing up at Cal Poly.

Jorge, came here at 6. He and his mom escaped and alcoholic father. He is doing an internship at Standford, very interested in heart medicine.

Jocelyn, came her 3 years ago. She was smuggled across to escape the incest in her family. She lives with her aunt, who is legal, sorry.

Jacklyn. Will be easy to catch. She has sever asthma, her mom was afraid to take her to the doctor when she was young, so has serious issues. She is a great babysitter and is already taking child development classes.

Finally, Jacinta. You might not to do much. Her father was just deported after 11 years here. She and her mom are currently homeless. My guess is any day now she will drop out of school (which she excels in) and work full time.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

She lives with her aunt, who is legal, sorry.

No problem - aiding and abetting!

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

You want to see women and children rounded up and publicly killed. That seeing dying children will finally be the reasonable response you wanted for years. I imagine the images of the Syrian children poisoned proved that your idea is not that far fetched.

You've stated that you have a very negative existence, sleeping, waking up getting thought the day, etc. I assume carry out this killing may be the Final Solution to all your personal problems.

I have absolutely no business judging anybody's happiness, but I too am struck by the fact that Jon's two most public attributes are his distinct lack of enjoyment and his passion for intolerance. I'm sure they're totally unrelated.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Radii

if you would like to outlaw Asylum seekers, and all forms of brown people immigrating

To be fair to Jon, there is a emphasis on "brown" people on this board which lends to calling/implying Jon is a racist.

I'm pretty sure he would feel the same for yellow, black, and white if they were doing the same ... its just seems that brown people are in the news all the time nowadays.

So I don't view him as a racist, he's just an ultra-nationalist.

(Jon, feel free to tell me I'm wrong).

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Edward64

To be fair to Jon, there is a emphasis on "brown" people on this board which lends to calling/implying Jon is a racist.

Jon has a 10+ year history of advocating for the genocide of people from other races and religions that he believes to oppose the most minor of threats to his own preferred group. He is openly and unashamedly a bigot, he consistently expresses disdain towards many other races. I don't think he would even feel insulted by me making the statement.

[Thomkal]

So the first person to be charged with interference in the upcoming mid-term is a Russian woman who likely will never be arrested:


Russian woman charged with political interference in next month's midterm elections - Los Angeles Times

[NobodyHere]

Looks like Khashoggi was killed in a fist fight. Thank you Saudi Arabia for getting to the bottom of this. This shows why you're the chair the of UN Human Rights Council. Pat Robertson will be proud

/sarcasm

Saudi Arabia admits Jamal Khashoggi killed in Istanbul consulate | Jamal Khashoggi News | Al Jazeera

[Neon_Chaos]

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/19/w...ntl/index.html

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I'm totally confused about what is true re: China's hardware hack and it'll gradually play out over the next several week.

I'm still confused.

It looks as if its Bloomberg/Businessweek vs rest of world right now.

Apple's Tim Cook calls for Chinese chip story retraction - BBC News

Bloomberg’s Businessweek published a story which said malicious chips were built into servers that had been manufactured in China.

But in an unprecedented step, Mr Cook told Buzzfeed: "They need to do that right thing and retract it.”

Businessweek has said it stands by its reporting.

"Bloomberg Businessweek's investigation is the result of more than a year of reporting, during which we conducted more than 100 interviews,” the publication said in a statement.

“Seventeen individual sources, including government officials and insiders at the companies, confirmed the manipulation of hardware and other elements of the attacks.

"We also published three companies’ full statements, as well as a statement from China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

"We stand by our story and are confident in our reporting and sources.”
:
"We turned the company upside down,” Mr Cook told Buzzfeed.

“Email searches, data centre records, financial records, shipment records. We really forensically whipped through the company to dig very deep and each time we came back to the same conclusion: This did not happen. There’s no truth to this.”

Apple’s denials are matched by its peers in the industry - such as Amazon - and also by government agencies in the US and globally.

“The Department of Homeland Security is aware of the media reports of a technology supply chain compromise,” a department spokesman shared in a statement.

"Like our partners in the UK, the National Cyber Security Centre, at this time we have no reason to doubt the statements from the companies named in the story."

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Looks like Khashoggi was killed in a fist fight. Thank you Saudi Arabia for getting to the bottom of this. This shows why you're the chair the of UN Human Rights Council. Pat Robertson will be proud

/sarcasm

Saudi Arabia admits Jamal Khashoggi killed in Istanbul consulate | Jamal Khashoggi News | Al Jazeera

You have no idea what happened prior to the fight that may have justified the killing. It was probably a situation where the killer was in fear for his/her life.

[Ksyrup]

All 15 of them, even.