Donald Trump wants one-on-one, not multiparty talks with Kim Jong-un ...

[Helix]

In my opinion, Perot had mental health issues that the Clinton camp exploited. He is a very wealthy man and a bit isolated as about the only thing he trusts completely is his wealth.

i don't know what his mental state was. i liked him when i was eighteen. i would have voted for him again in 1996, but like many other kids, i was too distracted / lazy to vote. that's the only year that i missed the presidential election since i've been eligible to vote. i still feel a bit bad about that.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

I see that the concept of "When defeat is inevitable, then taking the enemy down with me is ALWAYS an option." is something that you have never heard of.

That statement is silly beyond imagination. While by way of conventional weapons or nukes, just based on the close proximity of NK to SK, NK can devastate South Korea, however the suggestion of taking the USA down with them is utterly ridiculous. North Korea has no chance of doing that. North Korea would be in a world of hurt in a conventional war with the US, however resorting to nukes would be the equivalent of pushing their own self destruction button. Meanwhile the USA would carry on.This is not the 1950s.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

In what way since that person has no say in what new person says. And in the case of Trump do you think he consulted with Obama on anything?

There have only been 45 American citizens since our founding in 1776 who have advanced to the office of president of the United States. Its every high profile job. Any criticism or compliments aimed at any particular president past or in office now is quite fairly open to comparison to other presidents and is regularly practiced on both sides of the political coin. For instance many of us recently brought up how well the economy is doing under Trump. Libruls on the board immediately responded by attempting to give Obama the credit. You may not like "whataboutism", however it is not out of bounds in political disussion.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

i don't know what his mental state was. i liked him when i was eighteen. i would have voted for him again in 1996, but like many other kids, i was too distracted / lazy to vote. that's the only year that i missed the presidential election since i've been eligible to vote. i still feel a bit bad about that.

I was eligible to vote when I was 18, however I was overseas and was not all that up on the concept of absentee ballots. You can ofcourse vote for anyone you like, however as someone else pointed out, a vote for Perot was a wasted vote. It was more or less a vote for Clinton. George HW Bush went into that election with about 80% approval ratings, and just failed to take his competition seriously until too late. The 5% that Perot drew primarily benefited Clinton and may have made the difference. There were certain things I liked about Perot, however his mental state of mind was not one of them.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Helix]

I was eligible to vote when I was 18, however I was overseas and was not all that up on the concept of absentee ballots. You can ofcourse vote for anyone you like, however as someone else pointed out, a vote for Perot was a wasted vote. It was more or less a vote for Clinton. George HW Bush went into that election with about 80% approval ratings, and just failed to take his competition seriously until too late. The 5% that Perot drew primarily benefited Clinton and may have made the difference. There were certain things I liked about Perot, however his mental state of mind was not one of them.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

It wasn't a wasted vote. I wouldn't have voted for Bush or Clinton whether Perot ran or not.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

It wasn't a wasted vote. I wouldn't have voted for Bush or Clinton whether Perot ran or not.

If you did not consider it a wasted vote then it was not a wasted vote. You voted your heart. It was however beneficial to Clinton.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Helix]

If you did not consider it a wasted vote then it was not a wasted vote. You voted your heart. It was however beneficial to Clinton.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

It is what it is. This is part of why I want to see political parties abolished. Granted, this would be very, very difficult to accomplish.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

It is what it is. This is part of why I want to see political parties abolished. Granted, this would be very, very difficult to accomplish.

Abolishing political parties would violate the 1st Amendment to the constitution. The only real fix that is needed is term limits for Congress critters. That would give a long way towards repairing the poisonous political atmosphere we have now with both major parties constantly at war with each other.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Helix]

Abolishing political parties would violate the 1st Amendment to the constitution. The only real fix that is needed is term limits for Congress critters. That would give a long way towards repairing the poisonous political atmosphere we have now with both major parties constantly at war with each other.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Banning political parties would require an amendment. There's almost no chance of that. We would have been better off if Washington had delivered his farewell speech during the writing of the Constitution. Perhaps he did; I'm not sure.

 

[Dittohead not!]

That is a very juvenile way of looking at it. Sure Trump has said nice things about Kim Jung Un and Putin. However they are under tougher anctions since Trump became president then during any previous president.

According to Trump they are.

According to Trump, he has the most transparent administration ever, millions of illegals voted for Hillary, and windmills cause cancer.

 

[Rogue Valley]

When you add those five together, it is absolutely inconceivable that any rational person wants "one on one talks" and that means that there is no way that Mr. Trump wants "one on one talks"- right?

As with Putin, Trump prefers privacy when he gives Kim a BJ.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

According to Trump they are.

According to Trump, he has the most transparent administration ever, millions of illegals voted for Hillary, and windmills cause cancer.

Can we get serious now?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

That statement is silly beyond imagination. While by way of conventional weapons or nukes, just based on the close proximity of NK to SK, NK can devastate South Korea, however the suggestion of taking the USA down with them is utterly ridiculous. North Korea has no chance of doing that. North Korea would be in a world of hurt in a conventional war with the US, however resorting to nukes would be the equivalent of pushing their own self destruction button. Meanwhile the USA would carry on.This is not the 1950s.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

You are quite correct, and that is exactly the same reasoning that meant that the Japanese never attacked Pearl Harbour on 07 DEC 41.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Abolishing political parties would violate the 1st Amendment to the constitution. The only real fix that is needed is term limits for Congress critters. That would give a long way towards repairing the poisonous political atmosphere we have now with both major parties constantly at war with each other.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Whenever someone mentions term limits, I always wonder what they mean.

The reason why I wonder that is because a 20 year career civil servant generally knows more about that CAN be accomplished and HOW to accomplish it than an elected politician who is on their first or second term (unless those terms are quite lengthy). This leads to the conclusion that what term limits would actually do is to turn the whole process of government over to the career civil servants with the elected people serving as window dressing.

Now, one solution to that is to also establish term limits for civil servants.

That, of course, would mean that NEITHER the elected representatives NOR the civil servants would know what CAN be accomplished or HOW to accomplish it.

So, since you are someone who advocates term limits, I'd like to hear your proposal that would ensure that newly elected politicians would know what CAN be accomplished and HOW it can be accomplished. Do you have one?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

According to Trump they are.

According to Trump, he has the most transparent administration ever, millions of illegals voted for Hillary, and windmills cause cancer.

That is simply NOT TRUE.

Mr. Trump NEVER said that "windmills cause cancer", he said that "the SOUNDS of windmills cause cancer". By that he meant the sounds that the windmills made when turning caused cancer. Mr. Trump would never be so silly as to claim that a windmill, per se, caused cancer and I know this because Mr. Trump has spent his entire life studying what causes cancer.

 

[Born Free]

Thank you for proving that there are some Americans who actually believe that there is no possible option but "The MORE Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" and "The LESS Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" and that anyone who votes the the one of those two that they don't, personally, support is either "wasting their vote" or "supporting people who only want to destroy America".

What nonsense. Ross Perot lost and was kicked to the curb and a bus ran over him along with Helix's vote.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

You are quite correct, and that is exactly the same reasoning that meant that the Japanese never attacked Pearl Harbour on 07 DEC 41.

Last time I checked, nukes had not yet been developed by 07 Dec 41. Want to try again?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Born Free]

As with Putin, Trump prefers privacy when he gives Kim a BJ.

That reminds me Bubba Clinton who got all his blowjobs in the Oval Office from an intern. But back to NK, If was Bubba Clinton, that paid NK billions to stop their nuke program, and NK went off laughing all the way to the bank. What ****ing stupidity.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

That reminds me Bubba Clinton who got all his blowjobs in the Oval Office from an intern. But back to NK, If was Bubba Clinton, that paid NK billions to stop their nuke program, and NK went off laughing all the way to the bank. What ****ing stupidity.

The sad aspect is that the libruls hate Trump so much that they are hoping against hope that he fails in regards to North Korea.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Whenever someone mentions term limits, I always wonder what they mean.

The reason why I wonder that is because a 20 year career civil servant generally knows more about that CAN be accomplished and HOW to accomplish it than an elected politician who is on their first or second term (unless those terms are quite lengthy). This leads to the conclusion that what term limits would actually do is to turn the whole process of government over to the career civil servants with the elected people serving as window dressing.

Now, one solution to that is to also establish term limits for civil servants.

That, of course, would mean that NEITHER the elected representatives NOR the civil servants would know what CAN be accomplished or HOW to accomplish it.

So, since you are someone who advocates term limits, I'd like to hear your proposal that would ensure that newly elected politicians would know what CAN be accomplished and HOW it can be accomplished. Do you have one?

The part about multiple term congress critters having more experience is not always a good thing. With more experiance they also learn how to game the system and become quite wealthy before leaving office. And it's not just about civil service, it's about power. And entrenched power too often involves corruption. No congress critter needs to serve more then 12 years.

 

[Born Free]

The sad aspect is that the libruls hate Trump so much that they are hoping against hope that he fails in regards to North Korea.

The libs have their blinders on, they could care less about anything except destroying Trump. They hate the idea we're having a great economy, they want Trump to fail in NK, and with China, they hate the idea that Trump spoke out to NATO to pay up. They despise the fact that Trump had to enforce Obama's RED LINE, you know the list goes on and on. All of then refuse to talk Policy,

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

What nonsense. Ross Perot lost and was kicked to the curb and a bus ran over him along with Helix's vote.

It appears to me that you think that the ONLY reason for voting is to "vote for the winner REGARDLESS of what the believe" and that any vote that is not cast for the eventual winner of the election is a "wasted vote".

Obviously the concept "People should vote for what they believe in." is too esoteric for you to comprehend.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Last time I checked, nukes had not yet been developed by 07 Dec 41. Want to try again?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Obviously the concept of "parallelism" is something that you have not heard of.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The part about multiple term congress critters having more experience is not always a good thing. With more experiance they also learn how to game the system and become quite wealthy before leaving office. And it's not just about civil service, it's about power. And entrenched power too often involves corruption. No congress critter needs to serve more then 12 years.

And since a "career civil servant" also "entrenches their power", then you would agree that no civil servant should remain a civil servant for more than 12 years as well - right?

I'll put you down in the "I really don't care about individual specifics so I'm in favour of a government where NEITHER the elected representatives NOR the civil servants would know what CAN be accomplished or HOW to accomplish it because I'm too lazy to get off my butt and toss out an elected representative who seems to be more concerned with feathering their own nest than they are with representing ALL the people for the best interests of the WHOLE country." column?

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Obviously the concept of "parallelism" is something that you have not heard of.

Just admit that you lost the argument and move on.