that's all I was saying to Finners. Trump puts Putin in a stronger position.
Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon
- Thread starter kithnou
- Start date
- Status
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
Why is trump saying that people voted illegally, is that one true?
tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
Perhaps, though if Trump takes the heat out of US-Russia relations it will probably result in Putin's real position (which is one of relative weakness, both to the US and when viewed against Russia's position historically) being more obvious. Take the threat of the West away and you end up with him being the ruler of a great nation that is blighted by insane levels of corruption and official ineptitude and whose populace doesn't really have anyone else to blame for it.
yup, good points. I just think the concept of the 'west' might be changing. Worrying to see Trump and Putin cozy up and at the same time Trump doubts the validity of NATO. I just find it hard to see how you could live in Finland or Poland or anywhere around the eastern borders and think that Trump being elected is great news.
TheFinnFan
Finners
the fact is they can, in many states. trump ment illegal immigrants when he was talking about illegal votes...
In an interview highlighted by Fox Business News' Neil Cavuto that's gone viral, President Barack Obama seems to encourage illegal immigrants to vote. In response to an ambiguously phrased question about illegal immigrants and voting, Obama gives an equivocal answer that many have interpreted as an open call for illegals to illegally vote.
RODRIGUEZ: Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens -- and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country -- are fearful of voting. So if I vote, will immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?
OBAMA: Not true. And the reason is, first of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential in terms of who you voted for. If you have a family member who maybe is undocumented, then you have an even greater reason to vote.
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
No evidence then
Trumps claim is backed up by Alex Jones.
Steins claim is backed up by Berkeley and MIT professors.
In these days of frowning on education, Jones takes it.
Stop the world and let me off!
Steins claim is backed up by Berkeley and MIT professors.
In these days of frowning on education, Jones takes it.
Stop the world and let me off!
Trump apparently called him to thank him personally after the election , for his support and more than a few key phrases shared by the pair ,smashing .
The stuff on sandy hook alone is enough to turn most right mind people's stomachs .
yup, Trump spent a half hour on this fellas show, a fella who said Obama was a satanist because he's covered in flies, a fella who has been warned by police for harassing the relatives of the sandy hook victims. This is the fella who's feeding the next president his information. I've seen infowars bumper stickers around Boston, I can't imagine how much people live on this guys every word in deep red states. Scary scary stuff.
There's people over here who repost this nut jobs crap
He was on the BBC a few years ago.
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
Andrew Neill is a t1t but he is quite funny at times, can't decide if Alex Jones is a raving idiot or a genius from making money from spouting nonsense
abelard
Player Valuation: £35m
looks like Mnuchin for Treasury Security then, a former Goldman Sachs banker who started his hedge fund with a loan from George Soros. Trump's chief fundraiser. #swampthedrain!!!
Trump supporters, is this what you voted for? if not, speak up now
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/29/13698804/steve-mnuchin-treasury-trump
"What are Mnuchin’s views on economic policy? Well, that’s essentially a mystery. He has no experience at all in public policy or governance and no apparent public views on issues. I guess we can venture a guess that he probably agrees with many other rich bankers that taxes on rich people should be lower and that at least some regulations on the finance industry should be struck down. But who knows! Maybe his Senate confirmation hearings will shed some light on the matter.
But if you're wondering why Mnuchin backed Trump in the first place? He was kinda admirably straightforward about that to the Businessweek reporters. “Nobody’s going to be like, ‘Well, why did he do this?’ if I end up in the administration,” he said. Indeed."
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/donald-trumps-great-bait-and-switch
"On Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported that “at least a half dozen major Washington lobbyists and three top fundraisers for Mr. Trump’s campaign have been tasked with heading key portions of Mr. Trump’s transition team. . . . In many cases, the lobbyists are selecting administration officials for departments that will affect the interests of firms they represent.”
The Journal report helpfully listed some of the lobbyists, the special interests they represent, and the duties they have been assigned. Martin Whitmer, who shills for the Association of American Railroads and the National Asphalt Pavement Association, is leading the transition’s “transportation and infrastructure” team. In the magazine this week, my colleague Jane Mayer wrote about Michael Catanzaro, a veteran lobbyist for oil and gas firms who is overseeing “energy independence,” and Mike McKenna, the president of the lobbying firm MWR Strategies, who is overseeing appointments to the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Both men count Koch Industries as clients.
Trent Lott, the former Republican Senate Majority Leader, who resigned from the Senate in 2007 and set up shop as a lobbyist representing big corporations, including foreign ones, offered up perhaps the quote of the week in an interview with the Times’ Eric Lipton. “Trump has pledged to change things in Washington—about draining the swamp,” Lott, whose clients have included Airbus, the European aircraft manufacturer, and Gazprombank, a big Russian bank, said. “He is going to need some people to help guide him through the swamp—how do you get in and how you get out? We are prepared to help do that.”
https://www.ft.com/content/31b062e8-a842-11e6-8898-79a99e2a4de6
"Huge, permanent and regressive tax cuts seem the one certainty. It is something on which Mr Trump and congressional Republicans agree. The revised Trump plan would reduce the top individual income tax rate to 33 per cent and the corporate tax rate to 15 per cent. It would also eliminate the estate tax. The highest-income taxpayers — 0.1 per cent of the population, those with incomes over $3.7m in 2016 dollars — would receive an average cut of more than 14 per cent of after-tax income. The poorest fifth’s taxes would fall by an average of 0.8 per cent of taxed income. To those who hath, it shall be given.
The net effect of these plans would be a large rise in fiscal deficits. Calculations by the Tax Policy Center at the Brookings think-tank suggest that by 2020 the deficit would increase by 3 per cent of gross domestic product. With current forecasts as the baseline and ignoring any additional spending, this would mean a deficit of around 5.5 per cent of GDP in 2020. Cumulatively, the increase in federal debt by 2026 might be 25 per cent of GDP.
The president-elect has also promised to eliminate Obamacare and most environmental and financial regulations. It is hard to believe any of this would succour the prospects of the working class. They are more likely to suffer from even worse health cover, a dirtier environment, more predatory behaviour by financial institutions and, at worst, even another financial crisis. Protectionism, too, will fail to help most of his supporters. Many depend on cheap imported goods. Many would be badly hurt by the dire results of a tit-for-tat global trade war. Meanwhile, rapidly rising productivity would still ensure a steady fall in the share of manufacturing in US employment, despite protection.
Mr Trump promises a burst of infrastructure spending, regressive tax cuts, protectionism, cuts in federal spending and radical deregulation. A big rise in infrastructure spending would indeed help construction workers. But little else in these plans would help the working class. Overall, his plans might indeed generate a brief economic surge. But the longer-term consequences are likely to be grim, not least for his angry, but fooled, supporters. Next time, they might be even angrier. Where that might lead is terrifying.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/betsy-devos-trumps-big-donor-education-secretary
"Trump may have run against big money in politics, but his choice for Education Secretary has made no apologies about her family’s political spending. Betsy DeVos has been a major financial backer of legal efforts to overturn campaign-spending limits. In 1997, she brashly explained her opposition to campaign-finance-reform measures that were aimed at cleaning up so-called “soft money,” a predecessor to today’s unlimited “dark money” election spending. “My family is the biggest contributor of soft money to the Republican National Committee,” she wrote in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call. “I have decided to stop taking offense,” she wrote, “at the suggestion that we are buying influence. Now I simply concede the point. They are right. We do expect something in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment.”
“People like us,” she added archly, “must surely be stopped.”
Trump supporters, is this what you voted for? if not, speak up now
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/29/13698804/steve-mnuchin-treasury-trump
"What are Mnuchin’s views on economic policy? Well, that’s essentially a mystery. He has no experience at all in public policy or governance and no apparent public views on issues. I guess we can venture a guess that he probably agrees with many other rich bankers that taxes on rich people should be lower and that at least some regulations on the finance industry should be struck down. But who knows! Maybe his Senate confirmation hearings will shed some light on the matter.
But if you're wondering why Mnuchin backed Trump in the first place? He was kinda admirably straightforward about that to the Businessweek reporters. “Nobody’s going to be like, ‘Well, why did he do this?’ if I end up in the administration,” he said. Indeed."
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/donald-trumps-great-bait-and-switch
"On Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported that “at least a half dozen major Washington lobbyists and three top fundraisers for Mr. Trump’s campaign have been tasked with heading key portions of Mr. Trump’s transition team. . . . In many cases, the lobbyists are selecting administration officials for departments that will affect the interests of firms they represent.”
The Journal report helpfully listed some of the lobbyists, the special interests they represent, and the duties they have been assigned. Martin Whitmer, who shills for the Association of American Railroads and the National Asphalt Pavement Association, is leading the transition’s “transportation and infrastructure” team. In the magazine this week, my colleague Jane Mayer wrote about Michael Catanzaro, a veteran lobbyist for oil and gas firms who is overseeing “energy independence,” and Mike McKenna, the president of the lobbying firm MWR Strategies, who is overseeing appointments to the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Both men count Koch Industries as clients.
Trent Lott, the former Republican Senate Majority Leader, who resigned from the Senate in 2007 and set up shop as a lobbyist representing big corporations, including foreign ones, offered up perhaps the quote of the week in an interview with the Times’ Eric Lipton. “Trump has pledged to change things in Washington—about draining the swamp,” Lott, whose clients have included Airbus, the European aircraft manufacturer, and Gazprombank, a big Russian bank, said. “He is going to need some people to help guide him through the swamp—how do you get in and how you get out? We are prepared to help do that.”
https://www.ft.com/content/31b062e8-a842-11e6-8898-79a99e2a4de6
"Huge, permanent and regressive tax cuts seem the one certainty. It is something on which Mr Trump and congressional Republicans agree. The revised Trump plan would reduce the top individual income tax rate to 33 per cent and the corporate tax rate to 15 per cent. It would also eliminate the estate tax. The highest-income taxpayers — 0.1 per cent of the population, those with incomes over $3.7m in 2016 dollars — would receive an average cut of more than 14 per cent of after-tax income. The poorest fifth’s taxes would fall by an average of 0.8 per cent of taxed income. To those who hath, it shall be given.
The net effect of these plans would be a large rise in fiscal deficits. Calculations by the Tax Policy Center at the Brookings think-tank suggest that by 2020 the deficit would increase by 3 per cent of gross domestic product. With current forecasts as the baseline and ignoring any additional spending, this would mean a deficit of around 5.5 per cent of GDP in 2020. Cumulatively, the increase in federal debt by 2026 might be 25 per cent of GDP.
The president-elect has also promised to eliminate Obamacare and most environmental and financial regulations. It is hard to believe any of this would succour the prospects of the working class. They are more likely to suffer from even worse health cover, a dirtier environment, more predatory behaviour by financial institutions and, at worst, even another financial crisis. Protectionism, too, will fail to help most of his supporters. Many depend on cheap imported goods. Many would be badly hurt by the dire results of a tit-for-tat global trade war. Meanwhile, rapidly rising productivity would still ensure a steady fall in the share of manufacturing in US employment, despite protection.
Mr Trump promises a burst of infrastructure spending, regressive tax cuts, protectionism, cuts in federal spending and radical deregulation. A big rise in infrastructure spending would indeed help construction workers. But little else in these plans would help the working class. Overall, his plans might indeed generate a brief economic surge. But the longer-term consequences are likely to be grim, not least for his angry, but fooled, supporters. Next time, they might be even angrier. Where that might lead is terrifying.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/betsy-devos-trumps-big-donor-education-secretary
"Trump may have run against big money in politics, but his choice for Education Secretary has made no apologies about her family’s political spending. Betsy DeVos has been a major financial backer of legal efforts to overturn campaign-spending limits. In 1997, she brashly explained her opposition to campaign-finance-reform measures that were aimed at cleaning up so-called “soft money,” a predecessor to today’s unlimited “dark money” election spending. “My family is the biggest contributor of soft money to the Republican National Committee,” she wrote in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call. “I have decided to stop taking offense,” she wrote, “at the suggestion that we are buying influence. Now I simply concede the point. They are right. We do expect something in return. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment.”
“People like us,” she added archly, “must surely be stopped.”
- Status