I hope you're right. If Trump is successful, the country SHOULD be successful...........depending what Trump is successful in. It is what it is. Trump is our president. While I thought (God forbid) Hillary would win, Trumps victory is not that surprising. America is great, has been great for a long time, and will be great for the foreseeable future. Trump's campaign was a load of BS as far as that was/is concerned. The only thing that's different is that this election cycle has made America a bit of a joke across the globe. Trumps victory solidified that. (Although a Hillary victory would've done the same.) I believe we'll be fine for the most part. Here's to Trumps success, and America's as well. But, in the mean time, the next 4 years could/should be comedy gold. A few final points...................well, until Trumps first meltdown: -To any left leaning, DNC/Hillary supporters here or reading this; Trump won the electoral college vote. Period. I don't care that Clinton won the popular vote. Deal with it. -@ Aaron365, please show me where Hillary has stated that she "hates the constitution". I'll wait........... -I'd love to see how Trump will get the wall built and, even moreso, I'd love to see how he'll get Mexico to pay for it. -Obama made the economy better. You can't argue numbers. I know many on the right and many republicans don't like to hear that, and can't admit to it. Deal with it. -May Trumps presidency be prosperous. -I hope Chelsea doesn't have any political aspirations. I really don't want to go through this again. ;~:
Of course Clinton hasn't bluntly stated, "Hey, you morons, I hate the Constitution because it places limits on government, and I, as a liberal, worship government and don't want limits on government because I want government involved in EVERY aspect of your lives." Nobody is THAT blunt or direct. If you're expecting me to find an instance where she stated that exact quote, or some variation of it, I straight up admit I won't be able to. However, actions speak louder than words. She loves big government (which is contrary to the spirit of the Constitution) and she's always motivated by the less fortunate among us. In other words, she would have loved to, as President with a Democrat Congress, enact all kinds of programs that required more tax money from us middle class folks to pay for her endeavors. That's socialism. She is very anti-gun. I can guarantee she would have come up with more gun control laws that may have culminated in some sort of underhanded way to stop people from having guns, such as requiring some ridiculous insurance on guns that nobody, or very few, can afford with the alternative being turn in your guns. Bingo. No need to amend the Second Amendment then. But still obtaining the same results as if you had. As far as Trump getting Mexico to build a wall and paying for it, I agree it probably ain't happening. For one, Mexico doesn't have the money to build a wall. Secondly, they are fine with their citizens coming to the United States illegally. In fact, the government of Mexico supplies pamphlets to people coming here illegally, advising them how to improve the chances of surviving the dangerous journey here, what to do once they get here. How to assimilate to the culture. How to apply for welfare and such. Ain't that "kind" of them to do? :
It' easy to pay for the wall. 1. Initial "Guest Worker Program." If you are in the country illegally, you have 90 days to appear and register for the GWP. If you are found in the country illegally after than, automatic deportation. 2. As Guest Worker, you agree to no public benefits, no welfare, no food stamps. You do not have to pay the employer social security tax, but then, you get no SS benefits. 3. Your employer has to pay the SS tax into the "Build the Wall Trust Fund". 4. In addition, you pay 6% of your salary for insurance benefits through old VA system. $2500 deductible, $50 cash copay for every use of service of any kind. We don't need the old VA hospitals because we just give out vets a card that they can go to any hospital or doctor anywhere and the USA pays for it. Period. 5. In addition, you pay federal income tax like everyone else. 6. IN addition, you pay a 10% Guest Worker surcharge tax to the "Build the Wall Trust FUnd." 7. Guest worker program is 5 years at a time, any felonies, and you are gone. Children born in the USA of guest workers are not US Citizens. There, we just took care of the VA. We just took care of illegal immigration. And we just had Mexico pay for the wall. We just took care
The climate of Facebook discussion reminds me of that old 'joke' of two Irishman asking a passerby if he's Catholic or Protestant; 'atheist', he replies, to which they ask, 'Catholic atheist or Protestant atheist'? In this case it's, 'Republican Johnson or Democrat Johnson', or 'Republican Stein or Democrat Stein'?
Are you, like, 5 years-old or something? Why would you think it's reasonable to expect somebody to be THAT blunt with the public about personally disrespecting the Constitution while they're running for President? Are you somehow unable to comprehend that saying something THAT blunt would kind of, well, turn off a lot of people and DECREASE Clinton's odds of winning? As much as I don't like Clinton, I would never think she's that stupid.
What numbers are you referencing? The stock market is at a record high but with QE it seems inevitable that vast sums of money are going to flood into various investments, including the stock market. The Dow being high isn't necessarily a good thing, if the highs were achieved on the back of borrowed money that isn't going to earn its keep. Jobs appear good but there seems to be a question over what kind of jobs are being created, given that not all jobs are equal. If the jobs are decent jobs with good pay and benefits that's one thing, if lots of jobs are being created because everything is part time and qualified engineers are flipping burgers all morning while mopping the floor all afternoon, that's not so good. How many people are receiving welfare/food stamps/etc? If the economy is doing well one would hope it would show up at the bottom and not just at the top. From what I can see health insurance premiums approximately doubled between about 2013-2015. My health insurance policy for 2016 is being discontinued and the closest replacement I can find represents a price increase of over 50%. Good for directors and shareholders of the insurance companies, not so good for people trying to pay it. Tax credits bring the cost down but that's doing little more than shovelling public money into the private insurance companies. If there are figures that show Obama has improved the economy I'd be interested to see them. I'm not a fan of his but don't want to malign the guy if he has handled the economy well, it's just that the figures I'm seeing suggest the exact opposite.
Liquid Tension won't be able to provide you these figures that you request because they don't exist...
To be completely blunt, I really don't give a crap what the rest of the world thinks. They all have their own problems and are in no position to be criticizing us and riding their moral high horses. In short, they can kiss my butt.
Look son, don't get pissy with me because YOU made a claim and YOU can't prove it. Don't get in to a war of words with me. You WILL lose. YOU chose to support someone with the mentality of a 4 year old. Are you 4 years old or something??
Kinda like how you can't prove Hillary hates the constitution?? Let's see: -Unemployment when Obama entered the WH (Jan. 09): 7.6 -Unemployment currently: 4.9 -Dow Jones record highs Tango makes a good, logical argument concerning these numbers. With the DJ being this high, I imagine there would have to be a drop (perhaps even a significant one) at some point in time. That could be painful. Regarding unemployment, I agree that all jobs aren't "equal". But, then again, to a degree, having a job may/could very well be better than not having a job I suppose. Look, I've NEVER been an Obama supporter. Admittedly, the Dow does worry me a bit. But here's two examples of hard numbers.
I recall that basically whoever is president at the time gets to take the credit for any successes, during their term, regardless of how it may have been set up by predecessors. By the same token, he also gets to wear the failures.
Just because Clinton, as a liberal, hasn't bluntly stated she disrespects the Constitution doesn't mean that she doesn't disrespect the Constitution. She's a liberal. Do some research on liberals. Liberals, by definition, love big government. The Constitution, however, limits the powers of government. It's, to be quite blunt, an obstacle to the liberal agenda. Of course Clinton doesn't like it much. Your logic that because she hasn't bluntly stated her dislike for the Constitution it's proof that she doesn't disrespect the Constitution is a faulty argument. Why would she, while running for President, commit political suicide and say she doesn't like all the ways it, if applied well, limits her ability to thrust big government on America? She would have upset a lot of people that respect the Constitution, including some who, for varying reasons, weren't planning on voting. Do you know how many people would have come out to vote against her just on that basis alone? Do you think she's that stupid? Your logic is similar to saying something like if a person is planning to rob a bank and thinks about it in their head, but if they don't bluntly announce it to the world that must mean that they really weren't thinking about robbing a bank. Losing a war of words to you? I doubt it. I'm sure you can hold your own, but I could keep up with you 24/7...
I do think it's way too simplistic to make a binary condition that you either love or hate the constitution.