Admiral Rockwell Tory
Diamond Member
Bad news! You are wrong, but you should be getting used to that by now!
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Still Pissed About Jeb
- Thread starter Billy_Kinetta
- Start date
Bad news! You are wrong, but you should be getting used to that by now!
Trump is about...me...me ...meJen or no Jeb
All former Presidents agree Trump is not suited to be President
Of course not. Trump is no globalist. He's not playing their game.
Trump isn't a globalist. He uses foreigners at his resorts. The number of requests for foreign workers at Mar-a-Largo this year is around 70, up from 64 last year.
All of his stuff is made overseas. He is very much a globalist. He is laughing all the way to the bank at the twerp state.
No, he is not a globalist. He is an America first guy, something that Obama absolutely was not. And yes, as a business man he took every advantage the law would allow him. As a business owner, so did I.
However, he is now personally lobbying for better laws, rules, and regs that would make those advantages much less attractive and buying and hiring American and doing business in America much more attractive.
And it is THAT kind of thinking that got him elected President.
America must operate in a global economy. We must cooperate with our allies to lessen our global burden. Our economy depends on other economies
Trumps simplistic global views have destroyed our standing in the world
The United States does not need to get fucked up the ass by global trade deals that don't benefit us in any way.
Trade deals have benefitted the US. TPP would have lifted thousands of tariffs on US products. It did have some jurisdictional issues but it was on the right track.
bripat9643
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,169
- 47,316
- 2,180
Trump is about...me...me ...meOf course not. Trump is no globalist. He's not playing their game.
Trump isn't a globalist. He uses foreigners at his resorts. The number of requests for foreign workers at Mar-a-Largo this year is around 70, up from 64 last year.
All of his stuff is made overseas. He is very much a globalist. He is laughing all the way to the bank at the twerp state.
No, he is not a globalist. He is an America first guy, something that Obama absolutely was not. And yes, as a business man he took every advantage the law would allow him. As a business owner, so did I.
However, he is now personally lobbying for better laws, rules, and regs that would make those advantages much less attractive and buying and hiring American and doing business in America much more attractive.
And it is THAT kind of thinking that got him elected President.
America must operate in a global economy. We must cooperate with our allies to lessen our global burden. Our economy depends on other economies
Trumps simplistic global views have destroyed our standing in the world
The United States does not need to get fucked up the ass by global trade deals that don't benefit us in any way.
Trade deals have benefitted the US. TPP would have lifted thousands of tariffs on US products. It did have some jurisdictional issues but it was on the right track.
It would have fucked American workers:
Pacific trade deal would lower barriers for foreign workers, experts say
The Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement has significant implications for the movement of workers to and from Canada, with experts predicting it will open the Canadian labour market to a new wave of foreign workers.
That influx may or may not be offset by increased opportunities for Canadian workers to move abroad, the experts say.
"I think it's very facilitative [of workers coming here] for better or for worse," said Ryan Rosenberg, a Vancouver immigration lawyer.
"It reduces barriers significantly to a wider scope of nations" than previous trade agreements, he said.
No need to prove a Canadian unavailable for jobs
Rosenberg said he was surprised by the number of skilled occupations included in the agreement that won't require employers to perform labour market assessments to prove no Canadians are eligible for the jobs.
"It's incredible how many skilled trades that are typically unionized positions are opened up to work permits [without labour market assessments]," he said.
The deal divides occupations into regulated and non-regulated professions. The regulated professions it lists include white-collar jobs in health care, engineering and the legal system, but also several skilled trades such as construction workers, plumbers and electricians.
And that's only a small part of what was wrong with the deal.The Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement has significant implications for the movement of workers to and from Canada, with experts predicting it will open the Canadian labour market to a new wave of foreign workers.
That influx may or may not be offset by increased opportunities for Canadian workers to move abroad, the experts say.
- Lawrence MacAulay likely to support Trans-Pacific Partnership deal
- Jim Balsillie fears TPP could cost Canada billions and become worst-ever policy move
- Trans-Pacific Partnership text released
- Highlights: What's in the Trans-Pacific Partnership
"I think it's very facilitative [of workers coming here] for better or for worse," said Ryan Rosenberg, a Vancouver immigration lawyer.
"It reduces barriers significantly to a wider scope of nations" than previous trade agreements, he said.
No need to prove a Canadian unavailable for jobs
Rosenberg said he was surprised by the number of skilled occupations included in the agreement that won't require employers to perform labour market assessments to prove no Canadians are eligible for the jobs.
"It's incredible how many skilled trades that are typically unionized positions are opened up to work permits [without labour market assessments]," he said.
The deal divides occupations into regulated and non-regulated professions. The regulated professions it lists include white-collar jobs in health care, engineering and the legal system, but also several skilled trades such as construction workers, plumbers and electricians.
Billy_Kinetta
Paladin of the Lost Hour
- Mar 4, 2013
- 52,766
- 22,205
- 2,320
- Thread starter
- #124
72+ million didn't vote for him.elected by 60+ million people who didn't want a poll tested, scripted, polished politician as a leader.
Fuck them.
Billy_Kinetta
Paladin of the Lost Hour
- Mar 4, 2013
- 52,766
- 22,205
- 2,320
- Thread starter
- #125
Our classical liberal founders only provided the vote to landowners. Women, blacks, Indians did not have full rights as citizens.Do you believe women should vote?Oh, far more than that. It's a personal vendetta. No authentic Republican would vote for Hillary Clinton. She is the antithesis of classical liberalism.
No such thing as classical liberalism
Only views held by liberals long ago
I am about as pure a classical liberal as it gets There very much is such a thing. Just too few people educated in the wisdom of it.
Sure, if they are citizens, of legal age, of sound mind, and informed. However, that has nothing to do with classical liberalism. The Founders didn't give anybody the ability to vote. They left who voted within the various states strictly up to the various states. That's what most identifies classical liberalism, i.e. the ability to decide what sort of society you want and allow the people to govern themselves.
Are you cherry picking what their views were?
They followed the thinking of the time. Your habit of applying 21st Century mores to the 18th Century is comical at best.
As a liberal, I have to admit that it's frankly a bit scary to imagine if Jeb Bush would have won the nomination, and were president now.
Imagine how much better shape the GOP would be in?
Had Jeb! won the nomination, Hillary would be president and Merrick would be a Supreme Court Justice instead of Gorsuch...so I suspect you are correct...things would be MUCH better for liberals if Jeb! had received the nomination...just like it was better for liberals when McCain and Romney were the nominees.
Jeb Bush would have beaten Clinton. If you take Romney's totals from 2012 and applied them in 2016, that would have been around 262 EV.
How many electoral votes does it take to win? (Hint: it is more than 262!)
Why are libs so intent on flaunting their ignorance?
That would have been the starting point. I have no doubt that Romney would have beaten Clinton in the EV and popular vote. Obama would have beaten Trump as well. That is how reviled both candidates were.
Sorry! You libs are so go at posting stupid shit, I thought you were at it again!
Holding Trump accountable and refusing to bend on genuflected knee is not being a lib. It is being a real conservative not a fake conservative.
Billy_Kinetta
Paladin of the Lost Hour
- Mar 4, 2013
- 52,766
- 22,205
- 2,320
- Thread starter
- #127
Had Jeb! won the nomination, Hillary would be president and Merrick would be a Supreme Court Justice instead of Gorsuch...so I suspect you are correct...things would be MUCH better for liberals if Jeb! had received the nomination...just like it was better for liberals when McCain and Romney were the nominees.
Jeb Bush would have beaten Clinton. If you take Romney's totals from 2012 and applied them in 2016, that would have been around 262 EV.
How many electoral votes does it take to win? (Hint: it is more than 262!)
Why are libs so intent on flaunting their ignorance?
That would have been the starting point. I have no doubt that Romney would have beaten Clinton in the EV and popular vote. Obama would have beaten Trump as well. That is how reviled both candidates were.
Sorry! You libs are so go at posting stupid shit, I thought you were at it again!
Holding Trump accountable and refusing to bend on genuflected knee is not being a lib. It is being a real conservative not a fake conservative.
How so? Define how it is being a real conservative.
I think most 'politicians' are upset trump won.
Breaks up the monopoly they had on the office
Certainly the permanent political class, of which Presidents Bush 41 and 43, both of whom I like personally a great deal, are a part of, are going to try to undermine and/or destroy somebody who dares to shake up a status quo that has so greatly benefited THEM. The permanent political class has long been interested only in promoting their personal power, prestige, influence, wealth. The only difference between the parties is the constituencies they represent and they throw those constituencies just enough bones to keep us voting them into their very lucrative positions.
And add in the fact that Candidate Trump said something uncomplimentary about their family member, and it becomes even more personal.
Tacky of them to attack a sitting President.
But typical in a book written exactly for the purpose of doing that.
If anyone is tacky it is Trump. He is just re-stocking the swamp. When big business tells him to jump he just asks how high. He is putting lobbyists in to oversee the areas they lobby in.
I had a lot of differences when they were President but they have 1 thing Trump will never have. Class. A majority of voters agree with the Bush family.
Nicely recited Democratic talking points but I don't believe a word of it. I will concede that he will never be the poll tested, scripted, polished politician that so many think he has to be in order to be acceptable. (Though the left wing would trash him no matter what his style.)
But it was because he is not that poll tested, scripted, polished politician who plays by the permanent political class rules that got him elected by 60+ million people who didn't want a poll tested, scripted, polished politician as a leader.
Not true. Voters were repulsed by both candidates. Both were seen as dishonest but enough reluctantly voted for Trump. If you look at the polls for both Clinton and Trump you would see something interesting. Anyone who was seen as honest on the Republican side did better against Clinton than they did against Biden or Sanders who were seem as more honest. Democrats who were seen as more honest did better against Trump than Clinton. This was a vote for who was the less awful.
Yet more people voted in this election than last.
Bang!
That was your point blowing up!
No it was not. In many states both Clinton and Trump got fewer votes than Obama did in 2012. Both Trump and Clinton got fewer votes in Virginia than Obama did in 2012 and Trump got fewer votes than Romney did. Exit polls showed that 25% of Trump's support came from people voting against Clinton not for Trump.
Jeb Bush would have beaten Clinton. If you take Romney's totals from 2012 and applied them in 2016, that would have been around 262 EV.
How many electoral votes does it take to win? (Hint: it is more than 262!)
Why are libs so intent on flaunting their ignorance?
That would have been the starting point. I have no doubt that Romney would have beaten Clinton in the EV and popular vote. Obama would have beaten Trump as well. That is how reviled both candidates were.
Sorry! You libs are so go at posting stupid shit, I thought you were at it again!
Holding Trump accountable and refusing to bend on genuflected knee is not being a lib. It is being a real conservative not a fake conservative.
How so? Define how it is being a real conservative.
Go look up Ronald Reagan and you will see a real conservative looks like.
Admiral Rockwell Tory
Diamond Member
Had Jeb! won the nomination, Hillary would be president and Merrick would be a Supreme Court Justice instead of Gorsuch...so I suspect you are correct...things would be MUCH better for liberals if Jeb! had received the nomination...just like it was better for liberals when McCain and Romney were the nominees.
Jeb Bush would have beaten Clinton. If you take Romney's totals from 2012 and applied them in 2016, that would have been around 262 EV.
How many electoral votes does it take to win? (Hint: it is more than 262!)
Why are libs so intent on flaunting their ignorance?
That would have been the starting point. I have no doubt that Romney would have beaten Clinton in the EV and popular vote. Obama would have beaten Trump as well. That is how reviled both candidates were.
Sorry! You libs are so go at posting stupid shit, I thought you were at it again!
Holding Trump accountable and refusing to bend on genuflected knee is not being a lib. It is being a real conservative not a fake conservative.
I hate to break it to you, but the DNA test has confirmed that you are a lib!
Missourian
Diamond Member
I think most 'politicians' are upset trump won.
Breaks up the monopoly they had on the office
Certainly the permanent political class, of which Presidents Bush 41 and 43, both of whom I like personally a great deal, are a part of, are going to try to undermine and/or destroy somebody who dares to shake up a status quo that has so greatly benefited THEM. The permanent political class has long been interested only in promoting their personal power, prestige, influence, wealth. The only difference between the parties is the constituencies they represent and they throw those constituencies just enough bones to keep us voting them into their very lucrative positions.
And add in the fact that Candidate Trump said something uncomplimentary about their family member, and it becomes even more personal.
Tacky of them to attack a sitting President.
But typical in a book written exactly for the purpose of doing that.
If anyone is tacky it is Trump. He is just re-stocking the swamp. When big business tells him to jump he just asks how high. He is putting lobbyists in to oversee the areas they lobby in.
I had a lot of differences when they were President but they have 1 thing Trump will never have. Class. A majority of voters agree with the Bush family.
Nicely recited Democratic talking points but I don't believe a word of it. I will concede that he will never be the poll tested, scripted, polished politician that so many think he has to be in order to be acceptable. (Though the left wing would trash him no matter what his style.)
But it was because he is not that poll tested, scripted, polished politician who plays by the permanent political class rules that got him elected by 60+ million people who didn't want a poll tested, scripted, polished politician as a leader.
Not true. Voters were repulsed by both candidates. Both were seen as dishonest but enough reluctantly voted for Trump. If you look at the polls for both Clinton and Trump you would see something interesting. Anyone who was seen as honest on the Republican side did better against Clinton than they did against Biden or Sanders who were seem as more honest. Democrats who were seen as more honest did better against Trump than Clinton. This was a vote for who was the less awful.
They are all a vote for who is less awful.
It's been a decade since I was happy with my choice at the top of the ballot. Held my nose and voted for McCain and Romney. Finally in 2016 I got to vote for my nominee...and lo and behold...he won the election.
P.S. - the dems would have wiped the floor with Jeb!
Billy_Kinetta
Paladin of the Lost Hour
- Mar 4, 2013
- 52,766
- 22,205
- 2,320
- Thread starter
- #133
How many electoral votes does it take to win? (Hint: it is more than 262!)
Why are libs so intent on flaunting their ignorance?
That would have been the starting point. I have no doubt that Romney would have beaten Clinton in the EV and popular vote. Obama would have beaten Trump as well. That is how reviled both candidates were.
Sorry! You libs are so go at posting stupid shit, I thought you were at it again!
Holding Trump accountable and refusing to bend on genuflected knee is not being a lib. It is being a real conservative not a fake conservative.
How so? Define how it is being a real conservative.
Go look up Ronald Reagan and you will see a real conservative looks like.
That does not answer the question. Also, I am not a conservative, and I voted for Reagan twice.
you're ashamed to admit you're a republican Can't blame youThat would have been the starting point. I have no doubt that Romney would have beaten Clinton in the EV and popular vote. Obama would have beaten Trump as well. That is how reviled both candidates were.
Sorry! You libs are so go at posting stupid shit, I thought you were at it again!
Holding Trump accountable and refusing to bend on genuflected knee is not being a lib. It is being a real conservative not a fake conservative.
How so? Define how it is being a real conservative.
Go look up Ronald Reagan and you will see a real conservative looks like.
That does not answer the question. Also, I am not a conservative, and I voted for Reagan twice.
Rexx Taylor
Platinum Member
- Banned
- #136
give it another 2 years,,by then,,Jeb will be the one falling down in those ads,,,then cant get up
edthecynic
Censored for Cynicism
- Oct 20, 2008
- 43,044
- 6,883
- 1,830
LIAR!we just magically hit over 3% GDP growth by luck; something DumBama couldn't pull off in 8 years.
edthecynic
Censored for Cynicism
- Oct 20, 2008
- 43,044
- 6,883
- 1,830
And as soon as the Trump bubble bursts he will suddenly be a Liberal Democrat.Holding Trump accountable and refusing to bend on genuflected knee is not being a lib. It is being a real conservative not a fake conservative.
bripat9643
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,169
- 47,316
- 2,180
You'll have to excuse us if we don't accept your definition of what constitutes a "real conservative."Had Jeb! won the nomination, Hillary would be president and Merrick would be a Supreme Court Justice instead of Gorsuch...so I suspect you are correct...things would be MUCH better for liberals if Jeb! had received the nomination...just like it was better for liberals when McCain and Romney were the nominees.
Jeb Bush would have beaten Clinton. If you take Romney's totals from 2012 and applied them in 2016, that would have been around 262 EV.
How many electoral votes does it take to win? (Hint: it is more than 262!)
Why are libs so intent on flaunting their ignorance?
That would have been the starting point. I have no doubt that Romney would have beaten Clinton in the EV and popular vote. Obama would have beaten Trump as well. That is how reviled both candidates were.
Sorry! You libs are so go at posting stupid shit, I thought you were at it again!
Holding Trump accountable and refusing to bend on genuflected knee is not being a lib. It is being a real conservative not a fake conservative.
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 285,687
- 159,323
- 2,615
They are abandoning lifelong party loyalties to make it clear
Trump is not suited to be President
Something I don't think either would have done had Jeb not been part of the equation.
Jen or no Jeb
All former Presidents agree Trump is not suited to be President
And yet he's doing a better job than many of them. Unemployment lowest since 2000, consumer confidence the highest since 2000, great work on the borders and attacking immigration, government dependency going down, stock market breaking records. And to think, the guy hasn't been in office a full year yet.
Trump has done nothing to help the economy
Let's hope he doesn't screw it up
Right, we just magically hit over 3% GDP growth by luck; something DumBama couldn't pull off in 8 years.
Trump has been in office for 10 months now, so you can't keep giving DumBama credit for his successes. He gave confidence to businesses and citizens alike. Trump (being a businessman) is pro private sector following the most anti-business President of our lifetime. Of course businesses are excited about the future.
So what is Trump's problem? Some don't like him personally. He's the exact opposite of DumBama. People loved him personally, but his policies sucked. That's why we gave leadership of Congress to the Republicans; to stop DumBama.
The Great Obama gave us over 3% GDP on many quarters. He also gave us consistently positive growth for eight straight years
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 6K
- Views
- 140K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8545
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 485
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-