What will Trump say in his SOTU?

[SoCal]

So you again establish that you have no clue as to what you speak.
Figures.
What exactly did you not understand about that suggestion of how they could possibly pay for the wall?

Do you really not understand the differences between a suggestion and that of a definitive? What you cite isn't a definitive, it was a suggestion.

No they didn't.
They laid it out as a possibility. Not something that was going to occur.

When he declared over and over again that Mexico will pay for his wall, he never said or implied that his claims were suggestions or possibilities.

He never said, "I suggest Mexico make a one time payment of 5 to 10 billion"

He never said, "Mexico's one time payment of 5 to 10 billion is a possibility"

Basing the decision of who to vote for on the candidates claims and promises might be considered "foolish" by The Cult, but it still matters to me and the 70% of Americans who know the difference between a plainly stated claim and a suggestion or a possibility...

 

[Excon]

When he declared over and over again that Mexico will pay for his wall, he never said or implied that his claims were suggestions or possibilities.

Are you really this confused?
Again, no one said he did not say Mexico will pay for the wall. What is in dispute is the how they will pay.

He never said, "I suggest Mexico make a one time payment of 5 to 10 billion"

He never said, "Mexico's one time payment of 5 to 10 billion is a possibility"

Apparently you do not understand English as well as you think.

This is what was said.

It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year. There are several ways to compel Mexico to pay for the wall including the following: (link)​

It goes on to suggest indirect methods that could be employed to compel such a payment, just like those he spoke of in the video.

You not understanding that that is a suggestion of a way they could possibly get Mexico to agree to make a one time payment is the only issue here.
It does not in any way say Mexico "will" make a one time payment.

Basing the decision of who to vote for on the candidates claims and promises might be considered "foolish" by The Cult, but it still matters to me and the 70% of Americans who know the difference between a plainly stated claim and a suggestion or a possibility...

There was no plainly stated claim that they "will" make such a payment.

You are engaged in irrational thought if you believe such a claim was made.

 

[Moderate Right]

you can thank Gingrich and the GOP in the 1990's that led us down to this path in the first place.

Assuming you are correct, when does it stop? Or is it all just a pissing contest for both parties, like it is right now? Who is the bigger party? The left hypocritically claim they are and then they turn right around and act just as bad or worse. Michelle Obama said, "When they go low, we go high" and yet she really meant that, "when they go low we'll show 'em that we can go even lower", while simultaneously trying to claim that they are the party of higher morals.

 

[Puigb]

Assuming you are correct, when does it stop? Or is it all just a pissing contest for both parties, like it is right now? Who is the bigger party? The left hypocritically claim they are and then they turn right around and act just as bad or worse. Michelle Obama said, "When they go low, we go high" and yet she really meant that, "when they go low we'll show 'em that we can go even lower", while simultaneously trying to claim that they are the party of higher morals.

Uh, that's your side champ. Your party has been claiming to be the party of "family values", and "law enforcement" for years, and yet we've seen what a complete crock that is, especially in the past two years of the Trump presidency.

As for "playing nice", that doesn't work with the power hungry GOP or Trump. Trump and his minions in the GOP have proven themselves to be power hungry corrupt pieces of **** that will literally do anything to further their political agenda. Playing nice doesn't work, as the Democrats have learned the hard way.

 

[ultmd]

The alternative paths are stated quite clearly. Some choose to believe the president of Mexico is going to trek over in a limo and whip out his checkbook. Those would be foolish people indeed.

:lamo
Of course, the above is either just another simple-minded right-wing lie...or just a well-intended, though weak-minded Strawman argument.

Which is it?

No one (liberal, conservative or in-between) has EVER stated any such thing (although the one who came closest to it was actually Trump himself)...so why imply it when you had to know that someone was going to slap you down for it? What is clear to me is that your remarks (i.e. about writing a check,etc.) mirror those of your Dear Leader over the last couple of weeks. So I think we know why you said it, don't we? Geez....and you guys get upset when people mock you for being brainwashed.:roll:

That said, what is UNQUESTIONABLY true is that your Dear Leader (Trump) was EXTREMELY clear that Mexico was going to pay for the wall.....and that Mexico would pay DIRECTLY (not indirectly) for it.

Anyone who denies those FACTS...or who dissembles about them...is either being ignorant or dishonest.

Over 200 times, Trump announced that Mexico would pay for the wall. Heck, he posted his "3 Day" plan directly on his campaign website (and sent a memo diretly to several news outlets) describing his exact plan. Trump said he would threatened Mexico on Day one, and by Day 3 the Mexican government would issue a payment of "$5-10 Billion" to pay for the wall. Look it up.

Now, I would imagine it's true that very few (if any) intelligent Americans actually believed that nonsense. But only an idiot would still SERIOUSLY believe what Trump is saying (i.e. lying about) today, with regard to the wall. He just knows that he can say, LITERALLY, anything to some of you...and you'll believe it, and then come to message boards like this one and actually try to defend it.

That's pretty funny, when you think about it. The power of mind-control, among the weak-minded, is truly an awsome thing to observe.

 

[Moderate Right]

Uh, that's your side champ. Your party has been claiming to be the party of "family values", and "law enforcement" for years, and yet we've seen what a complete crock that is, especially in the past two years of the Trump presidency.

As for "playing nice", that doesn't work with the power hungry GOP or Trump. Trump and his minions in the GOP have proven themselves to be power hungry corrupt pieces of **** that will literally do anything to further their political agenda. Playing nice doesn't work, as the Democrats have learned the hard way.

That's my point. The right tried claiming that they were the party of higher moral values and now that the presidency has changed the left claim they are the party of higher moral values. Meanwhile, gridlock and partisanship go on with endless investigations of the other side and total obstructionism. Both sides are nothing but pieces of ****.

 

[calamity]

That's my point. The right tried claiming that they were the party of higher moral values and now that the presidency has changed the left claim they are the party of higher moral values. Meanwhile, gridlock and partisanship go on with endless investigations of the other side and total obstructionism. Both sides are nothing but pieces of ****.

That's not hard. Compared to Trump, Pence and the colluding congress of Republicans, even Stormy Daniels has higher morals.

 

[bongsaway]

SOTU addresses are about the POTUS taking credit for all that is good, blaming others for all that is bad and promising to make most things better. The party of the POTUS rises up and claps like trained seals while the other party pouts as if they have been terribly wronged. Meanwhile, the actual SOTU remains unchanged and "our" congress critters go back to doing as little as possible to change anything - after all, doing very little is what keeps the campaign cash flowing and gets them re-elected at a rate of over 90%.

People never stop complaining about congress and then elect the same people over and over and then claim there is nothing we can do about congress. Go figure?

 

[ttwtt78640]

People never stop complaining about congress and then elect the same people over and over and then claim there is nothing we can do about congress. Go figure?

One huge problem with congress is that any given voter may vote for or against only 3 of the 535 congress critters. Most are unlikely able to name their current two Senators and single House member much less tell you how they voted on a given bill. Many incumbents face little or no competition in the primary and thus to get rid of them means voting for the "wrong" party's candidate in the general election. Add gerrymandering into the mix (for House seats) and it gets even worse.

 

[Puigb]

That's my point. The right tried claiming that they were the party of higher moral values and now that the presidency has changed the left claim they are the party of higher moral values. Meanwhile, gridlock and partisanship go on with endless investigations of the other side and total obstructionism. Both sides are nothing but pieces of ****.

I won't argue that (though we obviously disagree which side is worse). Trump being where he's at today in some ways is in large part due to both parties being failures.

 

[ElChupacabra]

No they didn't.
They laid it out as a possibility. Not something that was going to occur.

That's quite the spin. I'd imagine they had some kind of faith in it working if they took the time to publish it and continually campaign on the idea of Mexico paying for it somehow. Unless of course it was more about the sales pitch than it was about reality.

 

[DiAnna]

With Stephen Miller writing it, there will be lots about how terrible undocumented immigrants are. I am sure the tone with be one of dark and fear, much like his inaugural address.

Stephen Miller is basically a horrible human being. It is chilling that he, above everyone else, has this utterly incompetent president's ear.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Maybe you haven't heard many SOTU addresses, Presidents talk about much more than our economy. If you read further down the Wiki page you quoted, you'll find these examples;

"...The address fulfills rules in Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, requiring the President to periodically "give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient...

...The address has also been used as an opportunity to honor the achievements of some ordinary Americans, who are typically invited by the President to sit with the First Lady...

...James Monroe first stated the Monroe Doctrine...
...It became a defining moment in the foreign policy of the United States and one of its longest-standing tenets...

Franklin D. Roosevelt on January 6, 1941. In an address known as the Four Freedoms speech, he proposed four fundamental freedoms that people "everywhere in the world" ought to enjoy: freedom of speech and expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear.

During his State of the Union Address on January 11, 1944, FDR proposed the Second Bill of Rights. Roosevelt's argument was that the "political rights" guaranteed by the constitution and the Bill of Rights had "proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness"...

Reporting on polling data isn't biased or BS, unless you don't believe it. Ignoring this polling is fine with me. I have NP with Numnuts making an ass out of himself while his approval rating continues to drop. He obviously won't or can't change his approach to governing and the longer he doesn't, the better the Dems look...

You definitely earned that Educator badge just now. :applaud

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

you can thank Gingrich and the GOP in the 1990's that led us down to this path in the first place.

I know that's goddamn right, and ever since the people spoke and booted him out, he's been doing the equivalent of a toddler with one of those toy steering wheels, pretending that he's still an elected official.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I wager this will be his last State of the Union speech, so I expect it will be a humdinger, and he will most likely commit to at least two statements which will open him up to further charges, and he will lay down at least one veiled threat to an individual or group that amounts to obstruction of justice.

Oh yeah, almost forgot, at least two knob polishings for Vladimir Putin.

 

[Excon]

That's quite the spin.

Wrong. There is no spin to what I pointed out.
The spin is from your side claiming it was a definitive when it clearly is not.

I'd imagine they had some kind of faith in it working if they took the time to publish it and continually campaign on the idea of Mexico paying for it somehow. Unless of course it was more about the sales pitch than it was about reality.

Did you, or did you not see the video? It, like that which is in writing, spoke of possibilities and of indirect method. Claiming he said they will pay by direct method is false.

Your position has been shown to be wrong. So push on with the bs.

---

You definitely earned that Educator badge just now.

Wrong as usual you are.

 

[Puigb]

I know that's goddamn right, and ever since the people spoke and booted him out, he's been doing the equivalent of a toddler with one of those toy steering wheels, pretending that he's still an elected official.

Gingrich is up there with Turtle McConnell as one of the most ruthless and despicable politicians of all time. Utter trash in every regard.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

The state of the union is effed up. Will Trump be honest about that? I know, I know. He's hardly honest about anything, but every now and then he gets one right.

How creative will he be in trying to describe some silver lining to this hot mess?

Trump like usual will say something stupid.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Wrong. There is no spin to what I pointed out.
The spin is from your side claiming it was a definitive when it clearly is not.


Did you, or did you not see the video? It, like that which is in writing, spoke of possibilities and of indirect method. Claiming he said they will pay by direct method is false.

Your position has been shown to be wrong. So push on with the bs.

---

Wrong as usual you are.

:lamo

Ok, go with that you should.

 

[Excon]

Ok, go with that you should.

Of course I should.
Your failure to understand why puts you at a severe disadvantage.

 

[akyron]

Mexico would pay DIRECTLY (not indirectly) for it..

Lets see the direct quote please? Thanks...

 

[jnug]

What will Trump say?

"Joining you today from my grand golden throne in my Mar-a-Lago suite bathroom. It is however appropriate since Nancy won't let me appear on the House floor and frankly, everything I have to say tonight is horse dung anyway."

 

[ultmd]

Lets see the direct quote please? Thanks...

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/01/trump-revises-history-on-mexicos-wall-payment/

“It’s an easy decision for Mexico. Make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year.”

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/jan/10/donald-trump/trump-claims-he-never-meant-mexico-would-write-che/

Spoiler: Trump has it wrong.

We found several instances over the last few years, and in campaign materials contradicting the president’s statement.

In an April 2016 memo, Trump’s campaign outlined the steps he could take to get Mexico to pay for the wall.

"It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year," the memo said.

Trump proposed measures to compel Mexico to pay for the wall, such as cutting off remittances sent from undocumented Mexicans in the U.S. via wire transfers.

Then, the memo says, if and when the Mexican government protested, they would be told to pay a lump sum "to the United States to pay for the wall, the Trump Administration will not promulgate the final rule, and the regulation will not go into effect."

You are welcome.

 

[akyron]

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/01/trump-revises-history-on-mexicos-wall-payment/


https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/jan/10/donald-trump/trump-claims-he-never-meant-mexico-would-write-che/


You are welcome.

That is one of the alternatives previously presented on video. Not sure what you think you are saying there.

 

[ultmd]

That is one of the alternatives previously presented on video. Not sure what you think you are saying there.

Oh, you know exactly what I'm saying.

You asked for a direct quote from Donald Drumpf declaring that Mexico would issue a direct payment for "the wall".

I did that.

Now, I get that you may not like it, but that's not my problem.

The FACT remains that Drumpf did state that Mexico would pay DIRECTLY for his wall. So anyone...ANYONE...who argues otherwise, is either ignorant of that fact, or just a lying ideologue.

End of dicussion.