Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

01-14-2018 , 12:27 AM
Er, seems like per capita is the appropriate measure?

That table is just state and local taxes though.
01-14-2018 , 12:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praetor1an
They should pay their fair share.
Think we all agree here.

Can't believe dems haven't proposed this on their own. "fair deal, red states don't have to pay for blue ones anymore" then watch the fireworks of R congress people try to argue against fairness.
01-14-2018 , 12:38 AM
The expert coalition building of the Democrats itt. Herp derp blue states should stop paying for red states. Who receive the bulk of that money? Red state POORS who don't vote, maybe in part because they feel, correctly, that both parties treat them with contempt.
01-14-2018 , 12:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praetor1an
Per that chart Californians pay $1100 to other states, Nebraskans pay $1267. They should pay their fair share.
Since you are talking about fair share, what are your thoughts on electoral votes?

During the 2016 election, Nebraska had 1,211,000 registered voters along with 5 electoral votes. So that's 242,000 votes per electoral vote.

During the 2016 election, California had 18,200,000 registered voters with 55 electoral votes. So that's 331,000 votes per electoral vote.

Since you demand "fair share", tell me...should Nebraska have 3 electoral votes, or should California have 75 electoral votes?
01-14-2018 , 12:47 AM
They could excise Nebraska from the US tomorrow and the only people who might notice are college football fans
01-14-2018 , 12:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese
The expert coalition building of the Democrats itt. Herp derp blue states should stop paying for red states. Who receive the bulk of that money? Red state POORS who don't vote, maybe in part because they feel, correctly, that both parties treat them with contempt.

Not sure anyone was saying that, just responding to the idiotic comment that “California should pay it’s fair share for being in the line of fire for ballistic missiles.” In retrospect the comment was not worth responding to but I’m getting real tired of deplorables and their garbage opinions that aren’t even tied to reality.
01-14-2018 , 12:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiggymike
They could excise Nebraska from the US tomorrow and the only people who might notice are college football fans
Hasn’t Nebraska football been dog**** since like the 90s?
01-14-2018 , 12:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matty Lice
Since you are talking about fair share, what are your thoughts on electoral votes?

During the 2016 election, Nebraska had 1,211,000 registered voters along with 5 electoral votes. So that's 242,000 votes per electoral vote.

During the 2016 election, California had 18,200,000 registered voters with 55 electoral votes. So that's 331,000 votes per electoral vote.

Since you demand "fair share", tell me...should Nebraska have 3 electoral votes, or should California have 75 electoral votes?
Most of the California voters probably aren’t even American citizens, so it kind of evens out.
01-14-2018 , 12:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiggymike
They could excise Nebraska from the US tomorrow and the only people who might notice are college football fans
Hey now...
01-14-2018 , 12:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praetor1an
Most of the California voters probably aren’t even American citizens, so it kind of evens out.
Easiest cite or ban. GTFO here w/ your racist crap.
01-14-2018 , 12:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by champstark
Hasn’t Nebraska football been dog**** since like the 90s?
Alright, that's enough.

We got a new coach and he's really good and he's gonna get us back...
01-14-2018 , 12:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praetor1an
Most of the California voters probably aren’t even American citizens, so it kind of evens out.
Yes, cite or ban.
01-14-2018 , 01:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praetor1an
Most of the California voters probably aren’t even American citizens, so it kind of evens out.
One good thing about the way things are right now, it doesn't take long for deplorable asshats like you to out themselves. We will forever know you are a racist coward.
01-14-2018 , 01:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimHammer
Alright, that's enough.

We got a new coach and he's really good and he's gonna get us back...
As a lifelong diehard Sooner fan, I sure hope so. I miss the rivalry back in the day...
01-14-2018 , 01:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimHammer
Alright, that's enough.



We got a new coach and he's really good and he's gonna get us back...

Yeah I was pretty sure they hadn’t been good in a while but I always kinda liked them and their uniforms and they just seem like they should be a good program.
01-14-2018 , 01:34 AM
https://twitter.com/funder/status/952346553255186433

01-14-2018 , 01:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorKeeed
It's a war crime and only Congress has the authority to declare war.
Congress laser declared war on someone in 1942. Seems like we have killed lots of people in non-war. Plus war crimes are only punishable for the losers.
01-14-2018 , 01:49 AM


https://mobile.twitter.com/WSJ/statu...04617261961216

Apparently some claim he is saying “I’d probably have” instead of “I Probably have”. Not one hundred percent sure on that but is what I came across do. Pretty clear to me he tells us he is bragging about having a good relationship with Kim.


Good luck to any person dumb enough to try to defend Trump and give them one million bonus points for defending anything he is trying to communicate verbally.


Every single time Trump does something stupid or questionable he needs to be shut down. He should be forced to prove and defend every single thing he says, does and tweets. The one thing he has rightfully earned his first year in Office is to never be given ANY sort of benefit of the doubt for any reason. If he says anything even slightly askew then you have to assume it lies with him and he is wrong or lying. If you are not sure what he means because he does not speak English very well, you should always assume to worst. No quarter.
01-14-2018 , 02:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorKeeed
Right and if Trump decides there is an imminent threat because his phone tells him so while the NORAD radars are clear, we aren't going to nuke anything. It's laughable. Like the general in charge of Strategic Forces said in the article I linked to, they aren't morons.
They can try to shut him down once or twice, perhaps, but it's really up to their willingness to push back on the Commander in Chief. He's legally the one who determines whether we are under imminent threat and whether it is necessary/right to launch a nuke.

Would Pence 25th Amendment him in this scenario? Probably. Would he be able to convene the Cabinet and 25th Amendment him before Trump could finish the launch? Doubtful.

Even if the military leaders do shut him down, he can go Saturday Night Massacre on the chain of command until he gets someone who is willing to launch.

But more to the ridiculousness of your point, since Trump has the legal authority to launch a nuke, you're basically saying, "It's fine, if he tries to launch, we'll have a military coup d'etat in the United States. What are you guys so worried about? LOL!"

Lastly, let me put it this way. You can laugh about whether Trump would launch based on a phone alert... But what if he was golfing today in Maui instead of in Florida? Do you really think Donald J. Trump is going to stay put for 38 minutes and believe it's a false alarm when his phone is telling him he's about to be wiped out?

If Donald Trump was golfing in Maui today there is a VERY real chance we would have started a nuclear WW3 with a first strike on North Korea. Our only hope would be if the Secret Service was rushing him to the air strip to get him airborne as a security measure and there was too much chaos to give the order... which of course is a MAJOR security vulnerability in and of itself if that's the case.
01-14-2018 , 02:20 AM
The great thing is that we’ll probably get to find out what they’ll do if he orders an unprovoked first strike so get your bets in now!
01-14-2018 , 02:25 AM
Supposedly Nixon's Secretary of Defense told the Joint Chiefs to ignore any military orders that he hadn't signed off on. But that was essentially a treasonous order, and who knows what would have happened?

Basically, we're hoping for the same here... But who knows what would happen if push came to shove. Hopefully we never find out.
01-14-2018 , 02:27 AM
Watched the David letterman interview with Obama on Netflix. Just unreal how far we have fallen. Smart, funny, compelling, humble, introspective, thoughtful, decent, articulate...not a single thing on that list even seems possible again.

Last edited by Johnny Truant; 01-14-2018 at 02:34 AM.
01-14-2018 , 02:58 AM
By the way, speaking of the Hawaii false alarm, is anyone actually buying the story? It doesn't pass the smell test to me. I can't buy that this is a system where one person hits one button and the alert goes out.

I think it's far more likely that we were hacked and don't want to disclose it.

Based on what we know I'm basically 100% confident our military IMMEDIATELY knew it was a false alarm (no other countries responded as far as we know - Japan would have been on alert, their citizens would likely have gotten push notifications... also we didn't scramble fighters/bombers)... But I just can't buy that one person hits one button and that's what happens, and for 38 minutes.

Thoughts?
01-14-2018 , 03:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuserounder
Supposedly Nixon's Secretary of Defense told the Joint Chiefs to ignore any military orders that he hadn't signed off on. But that was essentially a treasonous order, and who knows what would have happened?

Basically, we're hoping for the same here... But who knows what would happen if push came to shove. Hopefully we never find out.
Maybe some Secret Service agent or Marine or something makes a great sacrifice if Trump is about to launch.
01-14-2018 , 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman


https://mobile.twitter.com/WSJ/statu...04617261961216

Apparently some claim he is saying “I’d probably have” instead of “I Probably have”. Not one hundred percent sure on that but is what I came across do. Pretty clear to me he tells us he is bragging about having a good relationship with Kim.


Good luck to any person dumb enough to try to defend Trump and give them one million bonus points for defending anything he is trying to communicate verbally.


Every single time Trump does something stupid or questionable he needs to be shut down. He should be forced to prove and defend every single thing he says, does and tweets. The one thing he has rightfully earned his first year in Office is to never be given ANY sort of benefit of the doubt for any reason. If he says anything even slightly askew then you have to assume it lies with him and he is wrong or lying. If you are not sure what he means because he does not speak English very well, you should always assume to worst. No quarter.
I read the transcript and laughed out loud at that quote.

But, now that I've heard the audio I actually agree with him. I hear "I'd probably have" every time. I think it's pretty obvious and I despise Trump and wish he'd said "I probably have..."

      
m