• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Day 90.

Glowpun said:
Folks,

We are nearing the 100 day mark just days away.

What has Trump actually accomplised?
Click to expand...

He's lied 417 times, which is more than, well, probably anybody. I mean, more than anybody...ever.

Surely there's a medal for that.
 
Nilly said:
Can't find my image but here's the original

https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/O-TRU-102316-Contractv02.pdf

Donald's 100 day pledge on the second page
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link. None of those Acts on the second page were enacted -- or even submitted. We are indeed fortunate the Trump & Co. are so remarkably incompetent because all of those proposals are hairbrain stupid ideas -- with the exception of "Enacts new ethics reforms to drain the swamp and reduce the corrupting influence of special interests on our politics," which not only wasn't done, but the Administration is working in the other direction -- giving waivers to swamp creatures to enter offices of responsibility.
 
TurtleDude said:
given your hysterical attacks on Trump over the last several months, could we expect you to admit he has done anything positive?
Click to expand...

The nepotism and direct conflicts of interest preclude any so-called accomplishments from gaining traction. My dislike for Trump certainly did not spring up from a vacuum. But, the writing was on the wall of the ether long before he ever won his first Primary.
 
Cardinal said:
He's lied 417 times, which is more than, well, probably anybody. I mean, more than anybody...ever.

Surely there's a medal for that.
Click to expand...

Actually, he isn't anywhere near your total.
 
TurtleDude said:
Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice, United States Supreme Court

instead of Merrick Garland. Now that's a big accomplishment
Click to expand...

Touche! Without a doubt, for those of you Right of Center, you had a prayer answered. Trump and the GOP side of the Senate delivered for you. Congratulations! You know better than to rest on your laurels for very long.
 
Trippy Trekker said:
Touche! Without a doubt, for those of you Right of Center, you had a prayer answered. Trump and the GOP side of the Senate delivered for you. Congratulations! You know better than to rest on your laurels for very long.
Click to expand...


That's the best part. No matter what Trump does or doesn't do, the Supreme Court is going to be conservative for decades to come. His presidency is already a success if he doesn't do anything else.
 
Moderate Right said:
That's the best part. No matter what Trump does or doesn't do, the Supreme Court is going to be conservative for decades to come. His presidency is already a success if he doesn't do anything else.
Click to expand...

May your joy lull you into complacency and not last long, while we who preferred Garland soldier on for the betterment of the most people. Gorsuch, at best, merely restores the balance that existed before Scalia died.
 
Trippy Trekker said:
May your joy lull you into complacency and not last long, while we who preferred Garland soldier on for the betterment of the most people. Gorsuch, at best, merely restores the balance that existed before Scalia died.
Click to expand...

Yeah but we have one or two more to go before Trump leaves office. I'll be "conservative" and say that we're going to make it to 6-3. I do hope the Republicans are smart enough to vote away the nuclear option before it's too late. As Harry Reid found out, what goes around comes around.
 
Moderate Right said:
Yeah but we have one or two more to go before Trump leaves office. I'll be "conservative" and say that we're going to make it to 6-3. I do hope the Republicans are smart enough to vote away the nuclear option before it's too late. As Harry Reid found out, what goes around comes around.
Click to expand...

God loves Ruth Ginsburg. Those of you who wish her ill cannot escape your bad karma!
 
Moderate Right said:
Yeah but we have one or two more to go before Trump leaves office. I'll be "conservative" and say that we're going to make it to 6-3. I do hope the Republicans are smart enough to vote away the nuclear option before it's too late. As Harry Reid found out, what goes around comes around.
Click to expand...

"Vote away the nuclear option before it's too late?" What does that even mean?
 
Cardinal said:
"Vote away the nuclear option before it's too late?" What does that even mean?
Click to expand...

It was voted in. It can be voted out. Unlike your extreme blind partisanship, I am aware that tides turn. Republicans have reached a plateau but that doesn't mean that Democrats are making a comeback. Hopefully this is the chance for third parties to be more relevant.
 
lol@Trump

First 100 Days: How Does Trump Compare to Other Presidents?

President Donald Trump doesn't want to be judged under the same standards applied to all other modern presidents: With his administration marking its 100th day on April 29, Trump posted a message on Twitter Friday lamenting how unfair it is to grade his accomplishments in such a short timeframe.

The 100-day marker has been used by the public for decades to assess what a new White House administration was able to accomplish in its first months...
Click to expand...
 
Moderate Right said:
It was voted in. It can be voted out. Unlike your extreme blind partisanship, I am aware that tides turn. Republicans have reached a plateau but that doesn't mean that Democrats are making a comeback. Hopefully this is the chance for third parties to be more relevant.
Click to expand...

Warning: sharp learning curve ahead. :lol:

You misunderstood everything about the filibuster and the nuclear option, and you're going to learn that the hard way in a few years.
 
Cardinal said:
Warning: sharp learning curve ahead. :lol:

You misunderstood everything about the filibuster and the nuclear option, and you're going to learn that the hard way in a few years.
Click to expand...

You mean like Harry Reid and the Democrats learned the hard way?
 
Moderate Right said:
You mean like Harry Reid and the Democrats learned the hard way?
Click to expand...

That's one aspect of it. The aspect I'm referring to is your notion that the filibuster will be "voted back in." If that's what you think is going to happen then you don't know the most important thing about the filibuster, and is why you're in for an unpleasant learning curve.
 
Cardinal said:
That's one aspect of it. The aspect I'm referring to is your notion that the filibuster will be "voted back in." If that's what you think is going to happen then you don't know the most important thing about the filibuster, and is why you're in for an unpleasant learning curve.
Click to expand...

Unlike you, who lives their life based on pure fantasy and wishful thinking, I realize that the reality is that Republicans will be too stupid to undo the nuclear option before it is too late.
 
Moderate Right said:
Unlike you, who lives their life based on pure fantasy and wishful thinking, I realize that the reality is that Republicans will be too stupid to undo the nuclear option before it is too late.
Click to expand...

You're not paying attention. Regardless of how stupid or smart they are, Republicans aren't voting the filibuster back in. What I'm trying to explain to you is they couldn't even if they wanted to.

And here's the real kicker: while removing the filibuster now will obviously be bad for Democrats in the immediate short term, it will be beneficial for them in the long term. This is because the filibuster has always favored Republicans when Democrats tried to create large social programs and monetary policy. Now, next time they're in power, they can have...whatever they want, however big, however socialist-y. And as the Republicans are learning, it's one thing to pass executive orders curbing this regulation and that, but they're not very good at creating complex policies of their own, and what's more, it's not so easy to disassemble existing large ones such as the ACA.
 
Cardinal said:
You're not paying attention. Regardless of how stupid or smart they are, Republicans aren't voting the filibuster back in. What I'm trying to explain to you is they couldn't even if they wanted to.

And here's the real kicker: while removing the filibuster now will obviously be bad for Democrats in the immediate short term, it will be beneficial for them in the long term. This is because the filibuster has always favored Republicans when Democrats tried to create large social programs and monetary policy. Now, next time they're in power, they can have...whatever they want, however big, however socialist-y. And as the Republicans are learning, it's one thing to pass executive orders curbing this regulation and that, but they're not very good at creating complex policies of their own, and what's more, it's not so easy to disassemble existing large ones such as the ACA.
Click to expand...

Define long term. In case you haven't been paying attention, the Democratic party has been dropping like a rock for the last six years all they way to the point that Republcians have the most control of any party since 1928. . Your only bright spot, if you want to claim it, is that in the presidential election, Hillary go about 3 million more votes than Trump, while still losing the White House. That's your bright spot. Gonna be a long, long term before Democrats can make up that much ground.
 
Moderate Right said:
Define long term. In case you haven't been paying attention, the Democratic party has been dropping like a rock for the last six years all they way to the point that Republcians have the most control of any party since 1928. . Your only bright spot, if you want to claim it, is that in the presidential election, Hillary go about 3 million more votes than Trump, while still losing the White House. That's your bright spot. Gonna be a long, long term before Democrats can make up that much ground.
Click to expand...

Ah yes. "The Republicans/Democrats are out of power. The Democrats/Republicans are officially extinct." Now where have I heard that before? Oh, that's right, every single time the government swung between political parties.

First you banked on the filibuster "being voted back in," now you're banking on the Democrats being extinct.

You didn't do your homework.
 
Cardinal said:
Ah yes. "The Republicans/Democrats are out of power. The Democrats/Republicans are officially extinct." Now where have I heard that before? Oh, that's right, every single time the government swung between political parties.

First you banked on the filibuster "being voted back in," now you're banking on the Democrats being extinct.

You didn't do your homework.
Click to expand...

Where did I say the Democratic party was becoming extinct? In fact I said the exact opposite, saying that Republicans had reached a plateau and that they should devote the fillibuster before it is too late.
 
Moderate Right said:
Where did I say the Democratic party was becoming extinct? In fact I said the exact opposite, saying that Republicans had reached a plateau and that they should devote the fillibuster before it is too late.
Click to expand...

Then your comment about the Democratic party "dropping like a rock for the last six years" seems to have just been a weird attempt at deflection. In any case, Republicans can't "devote the filibuster." It's called the nuclear option for a reason. Once it's done, it's done.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
He has single handedly driven the reputation of the so-called journalists significantly further into the dirt, by scrambling their brains.
Click to expand...

To be fair, a lot of that has been self-inflicted by those very so-called journalists, their editors and their content bias and their editorial bias.

The result is a low point in the electorate's trust in the biased lame stream media as being truthful or unbiased. The electorate, or at least those paying any attention, have indeed seen the biased lame stream media and have recognized it as such.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom