Trump + Nukes + Twitter = Lulz

[Zyster]

When did anyone say there were no racists in the democratic party ranks? That's right never.

Stop with the denialism. The democratic party abandoned racism with the civil rights era (which doesn't mean there are zero racists in the party), and the republican party collectively embraced it. The end result of that is clear -



And that racism is still practiced and its what keeps those racists in the republican party.

Now you are in deniability. The right does not embrace racism. Neither does the left. You also have implied in many threads now, including this once, hence the responses, the only racists exist in the right.

[alexw]

If that truly is the case then no I wouldn't be behind it but from the voter ID things that I have seen and read, they are trying to keep illegals from voting which they have no right to vote in the first place. The Dems are the ones who pushed to allow citizenship to all illegals in the country in order to allow them to vote knowing they would in fact vote Dem to keep the status quo. Which I do support.

What I don't get is why people are so willing to support illegal immigration to this country and then give free hand outs via government assistance to them when we are stealing that money from American taxpayers and social security. That is the main reason I can not back the Democrats. I value a lot of their ideas but this I can't and won't ever get behind. We treat illegals and criminals better than our vets, disabled, and elderly and it's simply wrong.

No that's false. It is all about making it hard for African Americans and Hispanics to vote.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/us...provision.html

A federal appeals court decisively struck down North Carolina’s voter identification law on Friday, saying its provisions deliberately “target African-Americans with almost surgical precision” in an effort to depress black turnout at the polls.

The sweeping 83-page decision by a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upended voting procedures in a battleground state about three months before Election Day. That ruling and a second wide-ranging decision on Friday, in Wisconsin, continued a string of recent court opinions against restrictive voting laws that critics say were created solely to keep minority and other traditionally Democratic voters away from the polls.

And then we have this gem -

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...b10-story.html

Researchers from the University of California San Diego have created a new statistical model indicating that voter identification laws do what detractors claim — reduce turnout for minorities and those on the political left.

Overall, the researchers found, strict ID laws cause a reduction in Democratic turnout by 8.8 percentage points, compared to a reduction of 3.6 percentage points for Republicans.

The study focused on the 11 states with the strictest voter ID laws, generally requiring photo identification to cast a ballot. Researchers used a large voter survey database to compare turnout in those states to those in states with lesser or no ID requirements.

In the UCSD study, Hispanics show the largest drop in turnout under strict voter ID laws, followed by Asian-American and mixed race individuals. White individuals showed only a small decrease.

[zorkuus]

Lot of people been asking that question for a lonnnnnng time. Seems it might be the only way to put an end to centuries of conflict stemming from that region and the people that come from it.

The cat is out of the bag...

[JohnBrown1917]

Lot of people been asking that question for a lonnnnnng time. Seems it might be the only way to put an end to centuries of conflict stemming from that region and the people that come from it.

Aside from the morals of it(because the US wont care), the International outfall will also not be good for the US economy.

- - - Updated - - -

The cat is out of the bag...

Not even surprising.

[Dug]

I assume our military leaders are starter than to attack Russia head-on because they do have superior Mobile Armor/Artillery. The funny thing is unless the Russians have air superiority that point is moot if the United States can just call in strategically placed air strikes on these high priority targets.

You always need troops on the ground. Air and Sea superiority have never won a war by themselves.

With enough air and sea superiority we could potentially cripple them even further than they already are financially. May just be enough. But let's hope it never actually comes to that. Don't think the USA could even sustain itself in a war like that.

[PACOX]

Nope. USA still uses 30 yr old nuclear subs and 30 yr old planes to drop nukes. We are about 20 yrs behind Russia in Nuclear arms technology. Russia has the S-400 and new S-500 specifically to track and intercept multiple ICBM's or Cruise missiles. Russia's new Sarmat aka Satan 2 can penetrate any missile defense shield on the planet and the US knows this. Russia also has Perimiter aka "The Dead Mans Hand" which guarantees even if the Russian command is taken out all Nukes will be launched regardless. This being said nobodys gonna shoot nukes at eachother.

Russia has the Satan 2,yes. Russia even built the largest nuke ever tested. Russia can't afford the Satan 2 nor does it really matter in a nuclear exchange. Russia cannot nullify an American nuclear attack and its debatable what their launch capability is after a first launch.

You're also over emphasizing US launch vehicles when the actual payloads are more sophisticated than Russia's. Not that really matters because numbers on a piece of paper really don't matter when it comes to nukes. Neither country could 100% prevent a first strike, both countries have sufficient power to take out the other.

[Dug]

Lot of people been asking that question for a lonnnnnng time. Seems it might be the only way to put an end to centuries of conflict stemming from that region and the people that come from it.

Not only is it morally reprehensible but if you open up that can of worms you're giving a free pass for every country that has nukes to use them whenever they wish.

[Miztickow]

Him so smert.

He's "like a smart person".

[Jtbrig7390]

Don't you dare literacy shame me Jt. How dare you!

I did no such thing, I just made a blanket statement that so happen to have a quote from you in it

[Miztickow]

Trump supporters just have to live with the fact that they voted for this sort of nonsense.

They're in denial.

[alexw]

Now you are in deniability. The right does not embrace racism. Neither does the left. You also have implied in many threads now, including this once, hence the responses, the only racists exist in the right.

Of course it does. We have plenty of examples over many decades showing that it does. You might not like that fact but its still a fact nonetheless. That is what keeps those southern racists in the republican party where they form a key voting block. Hell, ~20% of the Trump block think freeing the slaves was a bad idea.

http://time.com/4236640/donald-trump-racist-supporters/

Donald Trump appears to have high levels of support among the nation’s intolerant population, according to a New York Times deep dive into polling data.

The Times found that nearly 20% of Trump supporters did not approve of freeing the slaves, according to a January YouGov/Economist poll that asked respondents if they supported or disapproved of “the executive order that freed all slaves in the states that were in rebellion against the federal government”—Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation.

[zorkuus]

I genuinely wonder who is worse...
Trump himself or people that go with whatever he says and come up with ways to agree with him (such as the outright morons this thread alone has).

It's a personality cult at this point. He can do no wrong it seems.

[JohnBrown1917]

Not only is it morally reprehensible but if you open up that can of worms you're giving a free pass for every country that has nukes to use them whenever they wish.

Trumpers just think they can make the whole world listen to them,

- - - Updated - - -

It's a personality cult at this point. He can do no wrong it seems.

That reminds me of a few people... Duterte, Erdogan.. and.. oh no wait, can't compare him to that one.

[Daymanmb]

God damn it trump.... Please.... Please..... Just stop saying stuff on Twitter that has huge implications like this. You are making it too easy for other side.

He's clearly not smart enough. Im sure a buunch of people have given the same advice that he so arrogantly ignores.

[Enitzu]

No that's false. It is all about making it hard for African Americans and Hispanics to vote.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/us...provision.html

TY for the link.

What I am seeing here is that they wanted to pass a law that requires voters to present a valid state ID to vote. That part of it, I do agree with. You need a valid ID to do nearly everything in this country so why is it so far fetched that you should need to present an ID to vote? So that someone can not walk in and claim to be you and vote in your place. This should be a requirement imo. The rest of it, should have been denied. Not allowing unregistered people to register just because it's the day of makes no sense. I wouldn't go out of my way beforehand to register.

[JohnBrown1917]

And if we call them exactly what they are, we get the infraction. Shocking

Don't you know? mods don't infract Left-wingers and liberals!

[Cthulhu 2020]

Sounds like someone has a grudge to burn. Claiming that Republicans are pure racists when one of the countrys leading Black Men, Ben Carson, ran for the Republican Nomination. Hmm, a very well educated black man decided that rather than be independant as he has been for so long that the Republican party was the right choice. But yea ... he's an idiot because he just couldn't see the racism. And jesus, you had to go all the way back to 81 to find relevant information on your claims to modern day politics? You can do better than that

Yes... Carson...

The man who lived in public housing, who received welfare and food stamps, who got through college with a minority scholarship and got into college through an affirmative action program. A man who, without any of this assistance, wouldn't be a surgeon.

This is the same man who claims that welfare and public housing hurts black people. This is the same man who claims that minority scholarships and affirmative action are also bad for blacks and other minorities.

Carson is an idiot and a hypocrite. The color of his skin doesn't change that in any way.

But despite all of that, I would still rather have him as our president than Twatter grabbing Trump.

[justflayin]

Sad!

/10char

We're gonna win Bigly!

[Paranoid Android]

Yes... Carson...

The man who lived in public housing, who received welfare and food stamps, who got through college with a minority scholarship and got into college through an affirmative action program. A man who, without any of this assistance, wouldn't be a surgeon.

This is the same man who claims that welfare and public housing hurts black people. This is the same man who claims that minority scholarships and affirmative action are also bad for blacks and other minorities.

Carson is an idiot and a hypocrite. The color of his skin doesn't change that in any way.

But despite all of that, I would still rather have him as our president than Twatter grabbing Trump.

Please add that Ben Carson benefited from Affirmative Action. A black man, with no experience at the job getting a position of HUD, because he is black. Make no doubt, the reason Carson go that job was they needed an African American in their cabinet.

Don't conservatives rail against Affirmative Action?

[Vankrys]

i could understand if Trump said he wanted to "greatly strengthen and expand the military strike force", as the US might be called to interviene here and there, especially in the context of the war in terror, but that's not what he said.

He specifically mentioned nuclear capability. Why? No president in their right mind would lightly order a nuclear strike. There is a lot more to be done before arriving to such extreme decision.

Beside, i suppose "strengthen and expand nuclear capability" is not cheap. Who's gonna pay? tax payer?