I keep hearing republican politicians say

[Adam Jensen]

What, exactly, would have happened in these past nine weeks if Hillary had been president instead of Trump?

Would she be passive-aggressively whining at people on twitter?

Would she have had tried to pass unilateral Muslim bans only to have them turned down?

Would she have had the judicial branch give her the middle finger?

Would she have brought millions of Americans to the verge of losing healthcare only to have her own party split and fragment underneath?

Would she be embroiled in more and more of her underlings being found to have had ties to Russia?

Because I don't think any of those things would have happened.



Like, tell me, exactly, what Hillary would have been screwing up? What part of her policy would have caused the utter grease fire that is the current Trump administration?

She would have sent her desire for pizza at the Comet Ping Pong on an email server!!!!

- - - Updated - - -

I will try to keep this short. She would carry on a lot of Obama's agenda and if you disapprove of Obama's agenda, then that is a good enough reason.

You mean, his agenda of helping everyone get healthcare, of improving American relations around the world, of job creation?

- - - Updated - - -

That isn't a Republican specific thing though, Liberals also have a huge problem with believing stupid shit over reality. Both sides are as bad as each other when it comes to separating fact from fiction

And republicans don't?

"Trickle down will work!" - Every republican since Reagan.

[Mehrunes]

And republicans don't?

"Trickle down will work!" - Every republican since Reagan.

Hey, no one said this is going to be a quick process. Just imagine this pitch is economics and you've got a visual representation.

[therealbowser]

Good, coal is a filthy disgusting source of energy that should be replaced ASAP. Putting coal miners lives in danger so we can have cheap energy that destroys the environment isn't a good thing, regardless of how much Trump thinks it is. Especially when you're actively trying to kick those people off their health insurance...

I don't really get this at all. So you are saying it's better for people to have no job at all than to have a potentially dangerous one? I doubt the coal miners would agree with you on this.

[Kolbjorn]

I don't really get this at all. So you are saying it's better for people to have no job at all than to have a potentially dangerous one? I doubt the coal miners would agree with you on this.

Trump/GOP can't bring back coal anyways. Obama didn't kill coal. Incredibly low natural gas prices due to fracking killed coal.

I mean, I guess they could bring back coal by banning fracking, but I don't think that's the plan. It's not like the coal miners are larger campaign contributors than the energy companies...

[Xeones]

I don't really get this at all. So you are saying it's better for people to have no job at all than to have a potentially dangerous one? I doubt the coal miners would agree with you on this.

It's irrelevant, as someone who lives in a state that has nothing but coal I can tell you coal jobs aren't coming back. There are thousands of ex miners out of work and they are going to disagree just because they think there is a way their jobs will come back despite the automation in the industry.

[Ghostpanther]

- - - Updated - - -



You mean, his agenda of helping everyone get healthcare, of improving American relations around the world, of job creation?

- - - Updated - - -

I am sorry, but that is a bit like white washing the outside of a outhouse. I know you think it is true and you are entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. Obama was one of the most deceptive Presidents ever in my opinion. :P He had a much more sinister agenda which was not in the best interest of the US.

[Kaleredar]

Hillary shill detected.

...So you don't actually have a response, then.

[therealbowser]

It's irrelevant, as someone who lives in a state that has nothing but coal I can tell you coal jobs aren't coming back. There are thousands of ex miners out of work and they are going to disagree just because they think there is a way their jobs will come back despite the automation in the industry.

That may be true, but none the less it's the principle of the matter. The person I was quoting was basically saying it's a good thing for someone to have no job at all, than to have a job that might be considered dangerous. I am sure these coal miners would love to have a job, and I am sure they can decide on their own what they want to do.

Whether or not coal should be mined and used, is another argument entirely, which was basically my point.

[Logwyn]

Oh don't try to oversimplify it so much that we might not understand it was Democratic party's ultimate failure to nominate Clinton and their hypocrisy. Basically if it was singing cowboy vs Hillary, yea, singing cowboy would win, but don't delude yourself much about why that happened, you have yourself and MSM to blame. That is in case, you supported Hillary, which I am sure you did.

Well you'd be wrong dead wrong on my supporting of Hillary. I kinda find that a bit laughable as well. But regardless my point still stands. Obama was being replaced whether it was Hillary, Sanders, Trump, Singing Cowboy, Bush, or the other list of want to be candidates.

[announced]

Trump has accomplished a lot since taking office.

Really?

I don't know how many of those executive orders passed, and we know what happened with healthcare and the immigration ban, so really, what has he actually accomplished to the point that it's a done deal?

Plus, even if he builds the wall, the next democrat will knock it down, so that's just stupid to waste money.

Oh, wait, he has accomplished a 37% approval rating..... Yeah, I guess he did accomplish something. He's even pissing off the people who voted for him..... who didn't think this would happen?

EDIT: BTW, there is a casino in England taking bets on whether Trump completes one term..... 10 out of every 11 bets are going for him not being able to complete one term.

Trump started with an approval rating of like... 40%? so going down to 36% doesn't seem like much. Obama started at around 84% and went to 37% as his lowest? big difference.

Trumps executive orders are very entertaining for the rest of the world. Plus Trump might pull out of Nato because Germany wont pay up, and Trump played with a Semi.

Seriously though the healthcare bill and the Russia allegations are the only things that are causing Trump problems, and sadly Trump can't force GOP members to vote a certain way or he would have passed it easily. And how is it Trumps fault that some random ex staffer had tiers to Russia? Flynn resigned as soon as they figured out he had ties and lied about it, and Paul Manafort was a long time ago.

[jdbond592]

Trump started with an approval rating of like... 40%? so going down to 36% doesn't seem like much. Obama started at around 84% and went to 37% as his lowest? big difference.

Trumps executive orders are very entertaining for the rest of the world. Plus Trump might pull out of Nato because Germany wont pay up, and Trump played with a Semi.

Seriously though the healthcare bill and the Russia allegations are the only things that are causing Trump problems, and sadly Trump can't force GOP members to vote a certain way or he would have passed it easily. And how is it Trumps fault that some random ex staffer had tiers to Russia? Flynn resigned as soon as they figured out he had ties and lied about it, and Paul Manafort was a long time ago.

But Sir, I eagerly await the day when America has been restored to it's former glory. Are we great again by mere election of Trump or this fortuitous day is coming soon? I can tell you on thing, world has never respected us more.

[Felya]

I am sorry, but that is a bit like white washing the outside of a outhouse. I know you think it is true and you are entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. Obama was one of the most deceptive Presidents ever in my opinion. :P He had a much more sinister agenda which was not in the best interest of the US.

That he didn't implement in his 8 years?

[crewskater]

Plus, even if he builds the wall, the next democrat will knock it down, so that's just stupid to waste money.

Why would anyone take down the wall when he's going to show China how to build one and not take thousands of years to build it? It's gonna be HUUUUUGE!

[Kokolums]

Accomplishments that republicans are thrilled about:

1. Drain the Swamp Act that prohibits politicians from becoming lobbyists for 5 years after leaving office.
2. Produced a new budget that makes deep cuts to big government social programs.
3. Withdrew from the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP).
4. Promoted alt-right news sources like Breitbart and demoted mainstream press entities like CNN.
5. "Two out, one in" rule for business regulations. Any government department that requests a new regulation must also list 2 regulations that would like to see cut.
6. Executive order to build the wall, the first step in the process.
7. Hiring freeze for new federal government workers.
8. Executive order to build the oil pipelines (Keystone XL and Dakota Access), reversing Obama's order to halt construction.

[Dovashy]

Why would anyone take down the wall when he's going to show China how to build one and not take thousands of years to build it? It's gonna be HUUUUUGE!

No no no, c'mon now, don't be silly. You guys are thinking about this the wrong way, really. See, we don't need a wall. What we need is a moat. A large, glorious moat. The best moat there ever was, spanning our glorious borders from coast to coast. A wall is easy, anyone can build one. Heck, it's what they /expect/ us to do. Nah, anyone can build one. Give a five year old some Legos? Lil' scamp is gonna build something remotely wall-like, just you watch.

As a bonus, having a moat would also give Obama a brand new position, we could dress him up in heavy chainmail and put him on horseback. No moat is complete without a knight to guard it, afterall!

As an added bonus, we can fill the moat with some sort of traps or something, maybe just fill it with a bunch of barbed wire? You can tear down a wall or scale it with some rope, but good luck with a moat!

[Wells]

Trump started with an approval rating of like... 40%? so going down to 36% doesn't seem like much. Obama started at around 84% and went to 37% as his lowest? big difference.

Trumps executive orders are very entertaining for the rest of the world. Plus Trump might pull out of Nato because Germany wont pay up, and Trump played with a Semi.

Seriously though the healthcare bill and the Russia allegations are the only things that are causing Trump problems, and sadly Trump can't force GOP members to vote a certain way or he would have passed it easily. And how is it Trumps fault that some random ex staffer had tiers to Russia? Flynn resigned as soon as they figured out he had ties and lied about it, and Paul Manafort was a long time ago.

lol master deal maker can't even get his party to support him.

[Rasulis]

Trump/GOP can't bring back coal anyways. Obama didn't kill coal. Incredibly low natural gas prices due to fracking killed coal.

I mean, I guess they could bring back coal by banning fracking, but I don't think that's the plan. It's not like the coal miners are larger campaign contributors than the energy companies...

Even China is closing their coal mines. By the end of 2017, 600,000 coal miners would have lost their job.

[therealbowser]

There are other jobs they could be working. I never said or implied anything like what you indicate. Please don't put words in my mouth.

First of all, if there were other jobs they could take, they would have them and not need to be coal miners. This is non-issue, wrong, and otherwise irrelevant.

Second of all, that's just wrong. You absolutely worded it this way, even if you didn't directly say that. The way you put your comment together justifies having coal miners lose their jobs because 'the work is dangerous' and 'it's bad for the environment'. Those are separate issues.

I don't really get this at all. So you are saying it's better for people to have no job at all than to have a potentially dangerous one? I doubt the coal miners would agree with you on this.

Good, coal is a filthy disgusting source of energy that should be replaced ASAP. Putting coal miners lives in danger so we can have cheap energy that destroys the environment isn't a good thing, regardless of how much Trump thinks it is. Especially when you're actively trying to kick those people off their health insurance...

You are directly saying that putting their lives in danger is a bad thing, and that coal should be eliminated as an energy source. That means that, no matter how you wish to put it, that it would be better they have no job than a dangerous one. Or maybe you're just trying to combine two separate issues to help justify your environmental concerns.

While I agree that coal is bad for the environment and I would like for it to be removed as a source of energy for the most part, it has nothing to do with these people needing jobs. And having a dangerous job is preferable to having no job at all for a lot of these people. There isn't an easy solution and I'd lean towards removing coal as a source of energy, but justifying them losing their jobs as "it's too dangerous anyways" is ludicrous on a number of levels. They can make that decision on their own. If you are saying they should be paid more for their work or something else, that makes more sense to argue than they should just lose their jobs because it's dangerous. But this won't be the case as, presumably, your concern is with its effect on the environment.

In short, saying coal mines shouldn't be worked because they are dangerous is not for you to decide. (Alternatively, saying that there should be certain amenities for doing so makes more sense.) Saying that coal mines shouldn't be worked because it's bad for the environment is a separate issue, and one I'd likely agree with. Don't combine them.

[therealbowser]

I love when children tell me about how black and white the world is. No shades of grey to be found.

Wow, it sure didn't take long for you to run out of logical arguments and stoop to petty insults. It's almost impressive.

[therealbowser]

When someone puts words in my mouth using a child's logic they are responded to as such. Hint something isn't bad just because it's not good...

I don't enjoy politics that much anyways, but if there's nothing to discuss then there's nothing to discuss. You could have simply refuted what I said was true (and actually explained why), but you can't even be bothered to do that. I went into detail to explain your error and you ignored it presumably because you have no logical response to it.

You clearly do not care very much about the topic, and to be fair I don't blame you. But this discussion between us was over the moment you decided that it was more fun to use personal attacks than rational logic. That's a lot easier than critical thought though, isn't it? Have fun with that.