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.
Yup. Just about everything. And the more they obstruct the work of government, >> infrastructure repair, military strengthening, deportations (AKA jobs for AMERICANS), stopping terrorism, etc. the more they make the democracy of the 2016 election impossible.Making Democracy impossible? The GOP controls everything. The federal government, the Supreme Court, most state legislatures, most governorships..... but everything is the Democrat's fault? LOL
What goes around, comes around.Donald Trump was elected by the people of the United States to a four year term. He is the person we chose to execute the laws of our Republic. We chose him according to the method as provided in our Constitution--the supreme law of the land. You Trump-haters have opposed him from his first day in office--not his policies, but him.
So far, the whining over Trump has not even approached the thrashing and screaming and wailing and moaning and flailing and spinning around on the floor from the pseudocons over the past eight years during Obama's regime.
Take your medicine, punk.
The Republicans will do far more to end the drug war than Democrtas. In fact, Obama and his TISA attempt- would have opened the Mexican border permanently, and given the cartels just what they want. We got rid of him just in time.End the drug war with Your majority, right wingers. Or, is fiscal responsibility also more complicated than, nothing but repeal.
Being stepped on by Democrats.Just politics? Mr. Trump alleged to have a, "fine and wonderful" health plan. Where is it.
There is no "again" And it is just this kind of interference and obstruction, that confirms the point of the OP.Trump White House has taken little action to stop next election hack
The Trump administration has taken little meaningful action to prevent Russian hacking, leaking and disruption in the next national election in 2018, despite warnings from intelligence officials that it will happen again, officials and experts told NBC News.
"This attack is really the political equivalent of 9/11 — it is deadly, deadly serious," said Michael Vickers, a career intelligence official who was the Pentagon's top intelligence official in the Obama administration. "The Russians will definitely be back, given the success they had…I don't see much evidence of a response."
According to recent Congressional testimony, Trump has shown no interest in the question of how to prevent future election interference by Russia...
when no one had shown a shred of evidence that there has been any ?
Not even vaguely relevant. You are a bore.Like McConnell did to Obama ??Funny as hell to see republicans not liking the same shit they threw , thrown back in their facesVanquished Rival Bitterly Denounces Victor. Wow, shocking.Hows this Flash?[Q
those first 100 days couldn't have been a carry over from the bush recession? you do remember him losing 800000 jobs in just HIS LAST MONTH??
You are confused Moon Bat.
The Bush economy was doing fine with a Republican Congress for six years, you dumbass. What changed was when that filthy 2006 Democrat Congress took over with Barney Queerboy, Tits Peloski, Dirty Harry and that new commie scumbag Senator from Illinois. Then everything went to hell. Of course those CRA chickens coming home to roost didn't help much,did it? The CRA was a stupid Democrat idea to use the force of the government to give credit to potential Democrat voters who had neither the means not the inclinations to ever pay the money back. You know, for social justice reasons. What could possibly go wrong?
This sorry crap that you Moon Bats do with blaming Obama's failures on Bush got old after the first five or six years. Grow up!
You idiots elected the worst President this country ever had and you were on a path to elect somebody that had the potential to be even worse with Crooked Hillary. You Moon Bats never get it right, do you? Nowadays you idiots are obstructionists to Trump's effort to make this country great again and that is despicable.
July 23 (UPI) -- Jeb Bush criticized Republicans for going easy on Donald Trump on possible collusion between Russia and the campaign of his former rival for the U.S. presidency.
Bush, a former Florida governor, also blasted Trump on Saturday during Ozy Fest, a combination of policy-related symposiums and musical acts hosted by the digital news magazine in New York's Central Park.
"If your opponent does things that you, your head explodes on, if Barack Obama did something as it's related to Russia, you say 'this is outrageous,' all this stuff, then when your guy does the same thing, have the same passion to be critical," Bush said.
When asked whether Republicans were afraid of Trump, he continued: "Does everything have to be a political calculus? 'Oh, my god, if I say something, there will be an opponent, and there will be a third-party interest group come and give money to my opponent. Oh, my god. Oh, my god. Oh, my god.' This is not what public services should be about."
Bush, who did not vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton or Trump in the 2016 election, has criticized Trump repeatedly since the president took office in January.
Bush addressed Trump's way of governing Saturday.
"You get disciplined when your team says, 'No, Mr. President, let's stay focused on these policy objectives,'" Bush said. "Don't disparage people, don't go after Mueller, don't say you're going to pardon yourself or whatever. Don't do all that. Govern."
Independent counsel Robert Mueller is investigating the possible collusion.
"He unleashed five tweets today about stuff that jeopardizes his legal situation, insults somebody, goes back to the 2016 election, none of which is relevant to getting tax relief done, regulatory reform done," Bush said about Trump. "This is going to be a long ride between 2018 in January, much less 2020."
when no one had shown a shred of evidence that there has been any ?
try reading the USA intelligence testimony for comprehension, dumbo.
I could write the same about the Trump-haters on this board. My point in the OP included this, which you did not address: The attacks on Donald Trump were immediate, extreme, unrelenting, and remain that way up to the present moment. That means the attacks were on him, not on his policies. If, along the way to Golgotha, various bystanders toss in some critiques of his policies, it doesn't allow the Pharisees then to claim he was crucified for his views on health care.Where you have been? Trump has been assailed because he is a reprobate and because his policy proposals are ill considered.You Trump-haters have opposed him from his first day in office--not his policies, but him.
When it comes to criticism of his public policy, when an organization does not proffer fawning approbation of them, they are declared an opponent or a liberal, or both, and, at least here on USMB. Such declarations are nearly never accompanied by an on-point rebuttal that directly and with portfolio takes on the specific policy proposal criticized. Instead, what one gets is aspersions such as "you're an idiot," "you're full of sh*t," "fake news," "more liberal XYZ," etc. The problem, mind you, isn't the vulgar aspersion; it's that the aspersion isn't accompanied by sound, rigorous, and well developed and founded content that gives it "adult teeth." (Sure, one can have plenty of adolescent-grade discussions here; indeed, they are on USMB ubiquitous....Were we teens, there'd be nothing bizarre or disconcerting about that....)
- Critique of Trump's Education Policies
- Critique of Trump's policy toward the media -- comments from a former GOP POTUS
- George W. Bush Delivers Critique of Donald Trump’s Policies
- Discussion of Trump's economic policies: protectionism, low taxes and coal mines
- The Macroeconomic Consequences of Mr. Trump’s Economic Policies
- Who Benefits From Donald Trump's Tax Plan?
In short, one way or another, conservatives and Trumpkin members of USMB just don't engage in substantive and sound debate on points of policy. Accordingly, on USMB, it's nigh impossible to have a serious policy or current events discussion/debate. To wit:
Those are some of my posts/threads -- I listed them as examples because I know of their existence -- I'm sure others have made similar entreaties for substantive debate/discussion. The point is that we, as you put it, "Trump haters" (I don't hate Trump; I abhor that he is POTUS.) have presented plenty of opportunities for substantive discussion/debate about his policies. Few, if any, Trump advocates exhibit the will to step up and present hard-hitting arguments, counterarguments and rebuttals that refrain from puerile epithets, or at least that accompany the vulgar aspersions with strong cases that show them to be preponderantly merited.
- CDZ - Donald Trump's [100 Day] Contract with the American Voter
- Obamacare Economy: 7 Years, 16 million Jobs Created, Middle Class Incomes Up $3K
- CDZ - Understanding how the ACA's discounting provisions help people afford health insurance
- CDZ - Understanding how the ACA's discounting provisions help people afford health insurance
- CDZ - American workers competing with "world" workers
- CDZ - Analysis of the ACHA and ACA at the individual level
- CDZ - Trump Transition Team Skipped Ethics Training! Really? No gov't experience and they demurred?
- CDZ - Does Spicer know what he's talking about? Does he know what's going on? I doubt it.
- CDZ - Is it treasonous?
- Why Kushner was right to "beg" Trudeau to "talk some sense" into Trump re: NAFTA
- CDZ - U.S., China and North Korea
- Liberal & Conservative Think Tanks Agree on The Net Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration -- This discussion is particularly illustrative of my remarks above in that not one person who advocated for immigration limits as has Trump offered exculpating rebuttals for the fact that the net economic impact of immigration is positive. People addressed the costs or gains, but not the net impact...That despite the fact that anyone with sense they were born with would recognize that, in isolation, costs or gains, respectively, are of no use in determining public policy. Neither did anyone offer credible refutation of the empirical data and analysis I referenced showing that the net economic impact of immigration is positive.
- Look at what nations Trump's updated ban affects
- Just how much did Trump shave off the cost of the F-35 JSF?
- Debate Now - Universal Exchange Plan
- Trump wants sources but has none to give....The man isn't keen on free speech at all -- This thread is less about public policy and more about Trump's personal polilcies.
- In the space of a month, roughly, what has Trump accomplished and are there any measurable results?
- Trump's Israel remarks today are the first things he said that I can sorta "get with"
- Cutting Immigration Won't Do Low-skilled Workers Any Good -- Not a single direct answer offered in response to a straightforward question about the impact of a proposed policy.
it's nothing personal against the donald per se, it's just all that illicit collusion with Russia...
ALL while undermining highly esteemed USA journalists and intelligence agencies.
need more than 10 to drum it into repubs thick headsWhen it takes 10 paragraphs to Try and make a point then there is no point
Russia has never intentionally attacked one of our ships and strafed the lifeboats as Israel has. Russia didn't provide phony evidence of weapons of mass destruction to dupe us into attacking a sovereign nation without provocation as Israel has. I'd say, much as you may hate to hear it, tribewitch, that Isarel is the enemy.You seek to bring him down. That means you seek to overturn the election. That means you seek to bring down our system of government. That means you and your thug allies think you should replace the democratic will of the people as the supreme power in this land. That means you seek to overturn the Constitution; you seek to subvert the rule of law. That means you are dangerous traitors.
not quite, trumpswab. our constitution has a word for what the trump family has done to our country.
hint: it begins with a T.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
"The Russian active measures campaign may have begun as early as 2015, when Russian intelligence services launched a series of spear fishing attacks designed to penetrate the computers of a broad array of Washington based Democratic and Republican party organizations, think tanks and other entities. This continued at least through the winter of 2016.
While at first the hacking may have been intended solely for the collection of foreign intelligence. In mid-2016 the Russians weapon eyes the stolen data and used platforms established by the Intel services, such as D.C. leaks in existing third-party channels like WikiLeaks to dump the documents. The stolen documents were almost uniformly damaging to the candidate Putin despised, Hillary Clinton. And by forcing her campaign to constantly respond to the daily drip of disclosures, the releases greatly benefited Donald Trump's campaign.
None of these facts is seriously in question. And they're reflected in the consensus conclusion of our intelligence agencies.
We will never know whether the Russian intervention was determinative in such a close election. Indeed, it is unknowable in a campaign to which so many small changes could have dictated a different result. More importantly, and for the purposes of our investigation, it simply does not matter.
What does matter is this, the Russians successfully meddled in our democracy and our intelligence agencies have concluded they will do so again. Ours is not the first democracy to be attacked by the Russians in this way. Russian intelligence has been simile interfering in the internal and political affairs of our European and other allies for decades.
SCHIFF: What is striking here is the degree to which the Russians were willing to undertake such an audacious and risky action against the most powerful nation on Earth. That ought to be a warning to us that if we thought that the Russians would not dare to so blatantly interfere in our affairs, we were wrong.
And if we do not do our very best to understand how the Russians accomplished this unprecedented attack on our democracy and what we need to do to protect ourselves in the future, we will only have ourselves to blame.
We know a lot about the Russian operation, about the way they amplified the damage their hacking and dumping of stolen documents was causing through the use of slick propaganda like R.T., the Kremlin's media arm. But there is a lot we don't know.
Full transcript: FBI Director James Comey testifies on Russian interference in 2016 election
Most important, we do not yet know whether the Russians have the help of U.S. citizens including people associated with the Trump campaign. Many of the Trump's campaign personnel, including the president himself, have ties to Russia and Russian interests. This is of course no crime. On the other hand, if the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it aided or abetted the Russians, it would not only be a serious crime, it would also represent one of the most shocking betrayals of democracy in history."
immediate because perhaps he lied about and bashed all 17 presidential candidates then admitted to being a pussy grabbing pervert ,,,the man is unfit as anyone has ever been and a large % of you repub idiots don't careI could write the same about the Trump-haters on this board. My point in the OP included this, which you did not address: The attacks on Donald Trump were immediate, extreme, unrelenting, and remain that way up to the present moment. That means the attacks were on him, not on his policies. If, along the way to Golgotha, various bystanders toss in some critiques of his policies, it doesn't allow the Pharisees then to claim he was crucified for his views on health care.Where you have been? Trump has been assailed because he is a reprobate and because his policy proposals are ill considered.You Trump-haters have opposed him from his first day in office--not his policies, but him.
When it comes to criticism of his public policy, when an organization does not proffer fawning approbation of them, they are declared an opponent or a liberal, or both, and, at least here on USMB. Such declarations are nearly never accompanied by an on-point rebuttal that directly and with portfolio takes on the specific policy proposal criticized. Instead, what one gets is aspersions such as "you're an idiot," "you're full of sh*t," "fake news," "more liberal XYZ," etc. The problem, mind you, isn't the vulgar aspersion; it's that the aspersion isn't accompanied by sound, rigorous, and well developed and founded content that gives it "adult teeth." (Sure, one can have plenty of adolescent-grade discussions here; indeed, they are on USMB ubiquitous....Were we teens, there'd be nothing bizarre or disconcerting about that....)
- Critique of Trump's Education Policies
- Critique of Trump's policy toward the media -- comments from a former GOP POTUS
- George W. Bush Delivers Critique of Donald Trump’s Policies
- Discussion of Trump's economic policies: protectionism, low taxes and coal mines
- The Macroeconomic Consequences of Mr. Trump’s Economic Policies
- Who Benefits From Donald Trump's Tax Plan?
In short, one way or another, conservatives and Trumpkin members of USMB just don't engage in substantive and sound debate on points of policy. Accordingly, on USMB, it's nigh impossible to have a serious policy or current events discussion/debate. To wit:
Those are some of my posts/threads -- I listed them as examples because I know of their existence -- I'm sure others have made similar entreaties for substantive debate/discussion. The point is that we, as you put it, "Trump haters" (I don't hate Trump; I abhor that he is POTUS.) have presented plenty of opportunities for substantive discussion/debate about his policies. Few, if any, Trump advocates exhibit the will to step up and present hard-hitting arguments, counterarguments and rebuttals that refrain from puerile epithets, or at least that accompany the vulgar aspersions with strong cases that show them to be preponderantly merited.
- CDZ - Donald Trump's [100 Day] Contract with the American Voter
- Obamacare Economy: 7 Years, 16 million Jobs Created, Middle Class Incomes Up $3K
- CDZ - Understanding how the ACA's discounting provisions help people afford health insurance
- CDZ - Understanding how the ACA's discounting provisions help people afford health insurance
- CDZ - American workers competing with "world" workers
- CDZ - Analysis of the ACHA and ACA at the individual level
- CDZ - Trump Transition Team Skipped Ethics Training! Really? No gov't experience and they demurred?
- CDZ - Does Spicer know what he's talking about? Does he know what's going on? I doubt it.
- CDZ - Is it treasonous?
- Why Kushner was right to "beg" Trudeau to "talk some sense" into Trump re: NAFTA
- CDZ - U.S., China and North Korea
- Liberal & Conservative Think Tanks Agree on The Net Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration -- This discussion is particularly illustrative of my remarks above in that not one person who advocated for immigration limits as has Trump offered exculpating rebuttals for the fact that the net economic impact of immigration is positive. People addressed the costs or gains, but not the net impact...That despite the fact that anyone with sense they were born with would recognize that, in isolation, costs or gains, respectively, are of no use in determining public policy. Neither did anyone offer credible refutation of the empirical data and analysis I referenced showing that the net economic impact of immigration is positive.
- Look at what nations Trump's updated ban affects
- Just how much did Trump shave off the cost of the F-35 JSF?
- Debate Now - Universal Exchange Plan
- Trump wants sources but has none to give....The man isn't keen on free speech at all -- This thread is less about public policy and more about Trump's personal polilcies.
- In the space of a month, roughly, what has Trump accomplished and are there any measurable results?
- Trump's Israel remarks today are the first things he said that I can sorta "get with"
- Cutting Immigration Won't Do Low-skilled Workers Any Good -- Not a single direct answer offered in response to a straightforward question about the impact of a proposed policy.
I could write the same about the Trump-haters on this board. My point in the OP included this, which you did not address: The attacks on Donald Trump were immediate, extreme, unrelenting, and remain that way up to the present moment. That means the attacks were on him, not on his policies. If, along the way to Golgotha, various bystanders toss in some critiques of his policies, it doesn't allow the Pharisees then to claim he was crucified for his views on health care.Where you have been? Trump has been assailed because he is a reprobate and because his policy proposals are ill considered.You Trump-haters have opposed him from his first day in office--not his policies, but him.
When it comes to criticism of his public policy, when an organization does not proffer fawning approbation of them, they are declared an opponent or a liberal, or both, and, at least here on USMB. Such declarations are nearly never accompanied by an on-point rebuttal that directly and with portfolio takes on the specific policy proposal criticized. Instead, what one gets is aspersions such as "you're an idiot," "you're full of sh*t," "fake news," "more liberal XYZ," etc. The problem, mind you, isn't the vulgar aspersion; it's that the aspersion isn't accompanied by sound, rigorous, and well developed and founded content that gives it "adult teeth." (Sure, one can have plenty of adolescent-grade discussions here; indeed, they are on USMB ubiquitous....Were we teens, there'd be nothing bizarre or disconcerting about that....)
- Critique of Trump's Education Policies
- Critique of Trump's policy toward the media -- comments from a former GOP POTUS
- George W. Bush Delivers Critique of Donald Trump’s Policies
- Discussion of Trump's economic policies: protectionism, low taxes and coal mines
- The Macroeconomic Consequences of Mr. Trump’s Economic Policies
- Who Benefits From Donald Trump's Tax Plan?
In short, one way or another, conservatives and Trumpkin members of USMB just don't engage in substantive and sound debate on points of policy. Accordingly, on USMB, it's nigh impossible to have a serious policy or current events discussion/debate. To wit:
Those are some of my posts/threads -- I listed them as examples because I know of their existence -- I'm sure others have made similar entreaties for substantive debate/discussion. The point is that we, as you put it, "Trump haters" (I don't hate Trump; I abhor that he is POTUS.) have presented plenty of opportunities for substantive discussion/debate about his policies. Few, if any, Trump advocates exhibit the will to step up and present hard-hitting arguments, counterarguments and rebuttals that refrain from puerile epithets, or at least that accompany the vulgar aspersions with strong cases that show them to be preponderantly merited.
- CDZ - Donald Trump's [100 Day] Contract with the American Voter
- Obamacare Economy: 7 Years, 16 million Jobs Created, Middle Class Incomes Up $3K
- CDZ - Understanding how the ACA's discounting provisions help people afford health insurance
- CDZ - Understanding how the ACA's discounting provisions help people afford health insurance
- CDZ - American workers competing with "world" workers
- CDZ - Analysis of the ACHA and ACA at the individual level
- CDZ - Trump Transition Team Skipped Ethics Training! Really? No gov't experience and they demurred?
- CDZ - Does Spicer know what he's talking about? Does he know what's going on? I doubt it.
- CDZ - Is it treasonous?
- Why Kushner was right to "beg" Trudeau to "talk some sense" into Trump re: NAFTA
- CDZ - U.S., China and North Korea
- Liberal & Conservative Think Tanks Agree on The Net Economic Impact of Illegal Immigration -- This discussion is particularly illustrative of my remarks above in that not one person who advocated for immigration limits as has Trump offered exculpating rebuttals for the fact that the net economic impact of immigration is positive. People addressed the costs or gains, but not the net impact...That despite the fact that anyone with sense they were born with would recognize that, in isolation, costs or gains, respectively, are of no use in determining public policy. Neither did anyone offer credible refutation of the empirical data and analysis I referenced showing that the net economic impact of immigration is positive.
- Look at what nations Trump's updated ban affects
- Just how much did Trump shave off the cost of the F-35 JSF?
- Debate Now - Universal Exchange Plan
- Trump wants sources but has none to give....The man isn't keen on free speech at all -- This thread is less about public policy and more about Trump's personal polilcies.
- In the space of a month, roughly, what has Trump accomplished and are there any measurable results?
- Trump's Israel remarks today are the first things he said that I can sorta "get with"
- Cutting Immigration Won't Do Low-skilled Workers Any Good -- Not a single direct answer offered in response to a straightforward question about the impact of a proposed policy.
My point in the OP included this, which you did not address: The attacks on Donald Trump were immediate, extreme, unrelenting, and remain that way up to the present moment. That means the attacks were on him, not on his policies. If, along the way to Golgotha, various bystanders toss in some critiques of his policies, it doesn't allow the Pharisees then to claim he was crucified for his views on health care.
My point in the OP included this, which you did not address: The attacks on Donald Trump were immediate, extreme, unrelenting, and remain that way up to the present moment. That means the attacks were on him, not on his policies. If, along the way to Golgotha, various bystanders toss in some critiques of his policies, it doesn't allow the Pharisees then to claim he was crucified for his views on health care.
Don't forget, one of the early and long standing criticisms of Trump was that he didn't issue much or any actual policy detail. In some areas, that hasn't changed. For the better part of a year, all we knew with any specificity was that he wanted to build a wall. One cannot offer substantive criticism of policy that wasn't proposed.My point in the OP included this, which you did not address: The attacks on Donald Trump were immediate, extreme, unrelenting, and remain that way up to the present moment. That means the attacks were on him, not on his policies. If, along the way to Golgotha, various bystanders toss in some critiques of his policies, it doesn't allow the Pharisees then to claim he was crucified for his views on health care.
go eat a ham sandwichTrump-haters are marxists and fascists. That's why they hate him.
Oh really?when no one had shown a shred of evidence that there has been any ?
try reading the USA intelligence testimony for comprehension, dumbo.
That's not why you opposed him, and you know it.immediate because perhaps he lied about and bashed all 17 presidential candidates then admitted to being a pussy grabbing pervert ,,,the man is unfit as anyone has ever been and a large % of you repub idiots don't care
