President Biden

[Dr Gloom 21939]

I assume he's going to need congressional approval to spend $50bn on a wall?

 

in theory there are co-equal branches of government and to build a wall you need appropriations from congress.

 

by signing the executive order to kick things off, he's basically telling the federal government that they have money in the piggy bank that congress has given them and instead of using it for something else he's saying it's going to be re-directed to start building the wall. his problem is there's unlikely to be anywhere near enough there to cover it so eventually he'll have to go back to congress after building 700 metres in say arizona, to ask for the funds to pay for the other 2k meters. ultimately he's going to have to get congress involved. 

[Dr Gloom 21939]

Yeah it's a totally pointless battleground actually. No one is seriously suggesting that he be removed from power off the back of the popular vote, so why even bother with it. I've heard some people suggest that all the crazy shit he does like this is just to distract from the damaging things but I don't think he's smart enough for that.

 

it's pure narcissism. he can't sleep at night knowing hillary won the popular vote 

Edited January 26, 2017 by Dr Gloom

[Happy Face 29]

Trump can't fail.

 

American corporations waiting for him (or Hilary) have been holding $2.4 trillion in profits overseas to avoid paying taxes on them

 

Whether he spends those tens of billions of taxes that start coming in on something pointless like a wall or roads or on something sensible like Schools and Teachers, he'll be putting people to work.

[Rayvin 5223]

Trump can't fail.

 

American corporations waiting for him (or Hilary) have been holding $2.4 trillion in profits overseas to avoid paying taxes on them

 

Whether he spends those tens of billions of taxes that start coming in on something pointless like a wall or roads or on something sensible like Schools and Teachers, he'll be putting people to work.

 

That's another good point.

 

Fuck, who'd have thought it. We're going to lose properly. To think that we could have achieved the same things without racist walls and tax breaks for millionaires if they'd gone for Sanders instead of Clinton.

[NJS 4389]

I pulled that figure out of thin air tbf, but yes, you'd hope so. Would they deny him it though?

John Oliver did an estimate which came out at about 27bn including maintenance.

[Happy Face 29]

it's pure narcissism. he can't sleep at night knowing hillary won the popular vote 

 

It goes back to what I said before.

 

Another Trump bashing stat that has no relevance and only serves to entrench his supporters in their conviction that his opponents are dishonest.

 

Trump pushes this agenda because the angrier the angry middle americans are, the better.  he doesn't care about the overall popular vote.

 

Even I get angry when Hilary supporters bang on about it. He won the popular vote in 30 states.  Hilary only won the popular vote in 20.

 

That's the system.  

 

New York and California don't get to export all the jobs and people to their state and leave middle America decimated by virtue of having a larger volume of inhabitants.

[NJS 4389]

Well if there is evidence of it then it calls into question the legitimacy of his victory. It's basically lose-lose for him on this one. The fuckwit [emoji38]

I read something which said the useless Democrats got 3 or 4 million illegal votes together but couldn't put 77000 of those into the states which would have won it for Clinton.

[ewerk 30629]

in theory there are co-equal branches of government and to build a wall you need appropriations from congress.

 

by signing the executive order to kick things off, he's basically telling the federal government that they have money in the piggy bank that congress has given them and instead of using it for something else he's saying it's going to be re-directed to start building the wall. his problem is there's unlikely to be anywhere near enough there to cover it so eventually he'll have to go back to congress after building 700 metres in say arizona, to ask for the funds to pay for the other 2k meters. ultimately he's going to have to get congress involved. 

 

I don't think you've seen the last series of House of Cards.

[PaddockLad 17283]

Another reason for not taking that job stateside @Dr Gloom you'd probably get arrested for doing your job...

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/24/journalists-charged-felonies-trump-inauguration-unrest?client=safari

[Rayvin 5223]

John Oliver did an estimate which came out at about 27bn including maintenance.

 

But as HF has just demonstrated, he can likely raise that money. And it would actually represent a large number of jobs being created. 40,000 or so I just read. Not sure if that's a lot in the overall scheme of things but it looks significant. And that's not taking into account the money working its way through the system and benefiting local economies and so on.

[The Fish 10858]

I'm not sure it is. One of the key successes of civilised society is the ability to discuss and debate issues using words and not fists. We can reject extremist views based on their own merits or lack thereof.

 

Throwing punches just leads to a like for like escalation. What if that punch motivates some right wing nutjob to attack someone else? Is it still worth it then?

 

Moreover, resorting to physical violence just demonstrates that you lack the mental fortitude to actually tackle the arguments being put forward. The alarming thing about much of this is how so many on the 'left' have absolutely no counter argument to the absolute bullshit being spewed by the Trumpists and the Brexiters. Because the only real counter argument that would work, in my honest opinion, would see they themselves lose out. i.e. they would have to talk about economic progress, not fucking political and social progress.

 

These people aren't looking for a reasoned exchange of ideas man, they want to repeat soundbites, loudly and often, shouting down any attempts to have actual discourse. Trump is their standard bearer, is he really putting arguments forward? No, of course not, he's widening his maw so that more ill-conceived reactionary petulance can spew forth.

 

I'd love to see actual debates, but that frankly just isn't going to happen, because those in power don't want it. They don't want the veil lifted, the puppets that are tossed in front of the camera lens are there to repeat the phrases they've been taught and need not back them up with anything because the public's attention has moved on already. Even if Spencer or Conway lose their job, they can pick one of a thousand others to do the exact same thing, Hell even if Trump is impeached, the right have so comprehensively embarrassed the left that Pence would be sworn in and wreak as much havoc as Trump, probably with more malice.

 

You have to give the right credit, they've successfully neutered the media and the left by deciding not to play by the rules any more.

[Rayvin 5223]

These people aren't looking for a reasoned exchange of ideas man, they want to repeat soundbites, loudly and often, shouting down any attempts to have actual discourse. Trump is their standard bearer, is he really putting arguments forward? No, of course not, he's widening his maw so that more ill-conceived reactionary petulance can spew forth.

 

I'd love to see actual debates, but that frankly just isn't going to happen, because those in power don't want it. They don't want the veil lifted, the puppets that are tossed in front of the camera lens repeat the phrases they've been taught and need not back them up with anything because the public's attention has moved on already.

 

You have to give the right credit, they've successfully neutered the media and the left by deciding not to play by the rules any more.

 

Yeah but this guy himself isn't the issue. It's the people out there who digest what they've just seen in that video who are the issue. They're the ones who vote based on what they consider fair and reasoned. And if the left is throwing punches, they're not likely to give our arguments the time of day, are they?

 

The right has been successful by co-opting identity politics. The left used it to get into power, and now the right have done the same thing. It's ridiculous and divisive, and the left shares in the blame for cultivating it as if it was something that would be 'healthy' for society.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3900]

But as HF has just demonstrated, he can likely raise that money. And it would actually represent a large number of jobs being created. 40,000 or so I just read. Not sure if that's a lot in the overall scheme of things but it looks significant. And that's not taking into account the money working its way through the system and benefiting local economies and so on.

 

But there's the rub, because of the remoteness of the wall, plus the compulsory purchase orders, short term it will be Mexicans who profit the most, I also reckon it will be a huge disaster because of where they are putting it. Lastly when has an estimate on a government funded job been anywhere near correct. If people are estimating 25bn I am willing to bet it will be closer to 75bn or over.

[Rayvin 5223]

All the right has done, both here and in the US, is looked at how miserable people are and given them something to hang onto. The nebulous idea that things can get better if we start looking after our own - and the reason that stuck is because the centre (branded as the left by those on the right) totally and utterly abandoned the people at the bottom. And the actual left was steamrollered by people in the centre who consider it 'unelectable'.

[Meenzer 15550]

Things would be a whole lot easier if people would just stop having identities.

[Rayvin 5223]

But there's the rub, because of the remoteness of the wall, plus the compulsory purchase orders, short term it will be Mexicans who profit the most, I also reckon it will be a huge disaster because of where they are putting it. Lastly when has an estimate on a government funded job been anywhere near correct. If people are estimating 25bn I am willing to bet it will be closer to 75bn or over.

 

I have also read that the wall will be almost impossible to build from an architectural standpoint. Slightly concerned by the 'almost', but even so. Agreed on the estimate, but the more they spend (assuming they have it), the more they'll boost the economy.

 

Still though, I suppose it'll be a hard sell if it looks like Mexico is benefitting, and I guess that works in our favour.

[Rayvin 5223]

Things would be a whole lot easier if people would just stop having identities.

 

It'd certainly make identity politics harder, but would be a bit of a shame for social interactions day to day. There's no issue with having identities as long as we're not voting as blocs of identity groups. We're far too easily manipulated when we do, as has been proven repeatedly now.

 

If we're going to group vote at all it should be along the lines of class.

Edited January 26, 2017 by Rayvin

[The Fish 10858]

Yeah but this guy himself isn't the issue. It's the people out there who digest what they've just seen in that video who are the issue. They're the ones who vote based on what they consider fair and reasoned. And if the left is throwing punches, they're not likely to give our arguments the time of day, are they?

 

The right has been successful by co-opting identity politics. The left used it to get into power, and now the right have done the same thing. It's ridiculous and divisive, and the left shares in the blame for cultivating it as if it was something that would be 'healthy' for society.

 

I'm not sure people have voted in support f a sense of fairness or reason. They may claim that, but it's just not true. They've voted (on the whole) because the angry orange man, or the smug white woman said a thing that elicited a visceral reaction. There isn't reason applied to the vote, as you say it's identity politics. If you were to ask Jimbob Mcgraw of Wichita, Texas to explain the reasoning behind his vote he'd recite some phrase he heard on FOX News, or a soundbite from Trump, then after a little prodding the intolerance would come out. Same as if you asked some office worker from Maryland why they voted for Hillary. CNN/Clinton quote then intolerance of the right.

 

The people who regularly post in this thread are significantly more invested and informed than the overwhelming majority and while that's laudable I don't think it's realistic to suggest people have voted for what is fair or reasonable in their eyes. I honestly don't believe they don't care what is fair and I don't believe they've considered it beyond a gut reaction.

[Meenzer 15550]

"Class" is pretty meaningless these days too tbh.

[The Fish 10858]

"Class" is pretty meaningless these days too tbh.

I dunno, I was told that the pizzas from Franco Manca are "class" and that means a lot to me.

[Meenzer 15550]

Now that I'd vote for.

[Rayvin 5223]

I'm not sure people have voted in support f a sense of fairness or reason. They may claim that, but it's just not true. They've voted (on the whole) because the angry orange man, or the smug white woman said a thing that elicited a visceral reaction. There isn't reason applied to the vote, as you say it's identity politics. If you were to ask Jimbob Mcgraw of Wichita, Texas to explain the reasoning behind his vote he'd recite some phrase he heard on FOX News, or a soundbite from Trump, then after a little prodding the intolerance would come out. Same as if you asked some office worker from Maryland why they voted for Hillary. CNN/Clinton quote then intolerance of the right.

 

The people who regularly post in this thread are significantly more invested and informed than the overwhelming majority and while that's laudable I don't think it's realistic to suggest people have voted for what is fair or reasonable in their eyes. I honestly don't believe they don't care what is fair and I don't believe they've considered it beyond a gut reaction.

 

So you're suggesting that people look at something, consider it to be unfair, but vote for it on the basis that they're mean spirited and innately intolerant? That may well be true but it just doesn't sound right to me. If it was, politicians wouldn't need all these narratives that we see trying to manipulate public opinion. Some people probably do vote like that - entirely emotionally. Hell maybe more than I give credit for do. But the swing voters presumably don't. They're looking for the narratives. And they seem to be the ones who act as kingmakers.

[Rayvin 5223]

"Class" is pretty meaningless these days too tbh.

 

I know what you mean but I can't think of a better word for it. As I say, economic disadvantage is the only thing around which I think leftist populism can build, and if Trump is about to start hoovering that one up, we're stuck with the right wing for the long haul. Presumably until we end up in another global armageddon scenario, or until the next economic collapse.

Edited January 26, 2017 by Rayvin

[The Fish 10858]

So you're suggesting that people look at something, consider it to be unfair, but vote for it on the basis that they're mean spirited and innately intolerant? That may well be true but it just doesn't sound right to me. If it was, politicians wouldn't need all these narratives that we see trying to manipulate public opinion. Some people probably do vote like that - entirely emotionally. Hell maybe more than I give credit for do. But the swing voters presumably don't. They're looking for the narratives. And they seem to be the ones who act as kingmakers.

No, I'm not saying they consider something unfair and support it anyway, I'm saying they don't consider it. They frankly don't give a shit that the overwhelming majority of muslims are not bomb wielding lunatics, they couldn't give a shit that foreign aid can actually provide jobs and customers for domestic companies, they couldn't give a shit about a whole heap of stuff. Certainly not enough to learn more than what the commercial news station that pushes their political party's agenda is telling them.

 

Generally the voting public are wilfully ignorant, reactionary arseholes and shouldn't decide what happens to a country any more than the weaselling dickheads they vote into power to represent them.

[Meenzer 15550]

tl;dr democracy would be great if it wasn't for the people.