Oh, shut up BigTard
I can’t tell if you’re more wrong about what the left believes or about what the right believes.
The better question is whose sock is it?
Or it’s just a new poster who doesn’t know any better and y’all are missing a learning opportunity.
I can’t let this piece of bullshit go un-challenged. The Flint crisis was the fault of a Republican billionaire governor and his right-wing rubber-stampers in Lansing and unaccountable appointed city administrators who were tasked with running cities like a business. The EPA should’ve done more, but for much of the time, had their hands tied.
But tell us more about how your party’s plans to cut the EPA is a good thing, and having an even weaker EPA would’ve prevented Flint’s water crisis! Or better yet, no EPA!
Hey Bob! You guys going to lose jobs if the government regulates you to protect the environment?
Sure am Bill!!! Thousands of jobs!!! Yup. All of them jobs gone iffin’ I get regulated any more.
Ae you suggesting that Democrat policies depress the economy, while GOP policies stimulate it? Study the graph a third of the way down this page — Fight your ignorance.
What is this “ultraliberal leftist” crap? Since when is being a Democrat scary & un-American? I know a couple of members of the CPUSA–nice folks, if a bit unrealistic. *They *are “leftists”–but even they knew enough to vote for Hillary.
A small reason to dislike Trump & his minions: Their pollution of the English language. He’s got a ridiculous brain-damaged vocabulary–when he’s not reading off a teleprompter. And his followers come up with stuff like “alternative facts.”
Oh, history, too. I’ve heard concern about the Trump regime’s close relationship with the Russian oligarchy called “New McCarthyism.” Which proves they know nothing about the career of that Famous Republican. Roy Cohn, McCarthy crony, was one of Trump’s spiritual teachers.
Hey people, look at the join date and this quote and just slowly back away.
I admit being slightly curious what percentage of active members of this board participate in political discussions. I don’t think it would surprise me if 50% or more never do (or do so very rarely), so statements about the political views of the majority of the membership may be unfounded.
I’m not usually a betting man, but I’m comfortable putting up my house, car, and droit du seigneur with Mme Turnip up as collateral for a counter-wager on that one.
First off, lovely grammar. And secondly, no, I am not a troll, and did not utilize any alternative facts, but actual data and things and thing As Mr. Trump has done, such as Indid in my first post. Beefing up our military is a reasonable and necessary strategy for the winning the war against the radical ISIS terrorists, we can’t beat them with a military low on good equipment, etc. The notion that he isn’t “enacting any conservative agenda” is demonstrably false as well; he’s done several conservative things already that he promised during the campaign, including the nomination of an conservative originalist to the Supreme Court, the reinstating of a policy started under Reagan banning funds to international organizations that provide or promote abortions (there goes your “No previous Republican president has done what he did” bullshit bro), as well as the steady and consistent repeal of several burdensome, last-minute regulations Obama passed, with he use of th Congressional Review Act. Those are facts, not “alternative” facts, as you derisively called them. The fact that he has the lowest approval ratings is false, as demonstrated by recent Rasmussen polling putting him at 53-55% job approval. Rasmussen was the most accurate poll during the election, btw, it’s last point predicted HRC would win the popular vote by 2 points, she did indeed. One Politico poll showed him with 49% approval–which is more in Rasmussen’s ballpark. Politico also ran a story showing that yes, Trump is more popular than several of the polls make him appear (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/donald-trump-popularity-polling-234630). Many of those other polling orgs got 2016 wildly wrong; I don’t see why I should trust anything they say.
Correlation does not equal causation, bud. As you know Bill Clinton’s opponents, the GOP, controlled both houses of Congress during the final six years of his presidency, and the economy only boomed after several reforms the conservative members worked to pass with Clinton, such as 1996 welfare reform, the cutting of high capital gains taxes, a balanced budget, as well as holding the line on spending. Indeed, even Clinton saw the sense behind conservative policies when he announced during one of his State of the Union addresses that “the era of Big Government is over.” 
Gaudere’s Law is a bitch, huh?
The present military capability of the United States is enough to kill every member of ISIS and pump extra bullets into the dead bodies just for show. It is willfully ignorant to imply that the defeat of ISIS is dependent upon a huge boost in U.S. military spending. The U.S. Army could roll over ISIS like a steamroller. The reason they’re not is because it’s politically impossible to send a full-blown invasion force to do it. That won’t change with more spending.
The shambolic election season, the shocking result & the worse-than-we-imagined Trump regime have certainly increased political posting here. Still, most of us* also* post on other subjects. TV shows, favorite music, recipes, travel hints, etc.
Why would somebody come out of the blue & decide to begin attacking the “ultraliberal leftists”? (And not make any non-political posts?)
I don’t think Donald J. Trump has ever made a witty remark in his life. The man is completely humor-deprived.
Now, is it possible that he used hyperbolic language to espouse a claim that he personally doesn’t believe, in order to garner support? Or to put it more succinctly: lied through his teeth? Lied like a rug? Yes, I can believe that.
I kind of wonder where you got the idea that our problem with beating ISIS is “not enough military hardware”. In a sheer contest of force, we have an arsenal capable of not just killing everyone in Mosul, but literally turning the entire area of Iraq and Syria into a very dead parking lot. We’ve got remote-controlled drones making regular airstrikes on targets throughout the middle east. The problem is not “we are low on good equipment”. The problem is the same problem we always run into with decentralized terrorist organizations: how do you tell who is a terrorist and who is a civvy? And how do you get at the terrorists when they are using civvies as human shields?
It is perhaps worth noting that on this, Rasmussen is a clear outlier. Essentially every other polling firm has found pretty much the opposite result. Interestingly, a recent Quinnipiac University poll went into considerably more detail and found that not only do most people oppose Trump, most of his policies are radically unpopular. And keep in mind - these guys get an “A-” from 538; Rasmussen gets a “C+”.
The economy really started to improve after Clinton’s 1993 budget bill (if you remember, it was the one the Republicans lied about it being ““largest tax increase in history” and that Gingrich predicted ““The tax increase will kill jobs and lead to a recession, and the recession will force people off of work and onto unemployment and will actually increase the deficit.”) This idea that it was the Republicans were responsible for the economic boon of the 90’s is just silly. It was a multitude of reasons, including deficit reduction, low oil prices, tax increases on the very wealthy, and many more, many un-Republican, actions.
@ckalli1998
I’m interested in your ideas of how the political spectrum is described.
You are describing as “ultraliberal leftists” anyone to the left of your views.
I have to know: if the Democratic party is “ultraliberal” but yet when compared to moderate parties in Europe and elsewhere is very much right/centre, what do you use to describe the social liberalism of, say Norway?
And how do you describe the (self-described) Marxist government of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe?
Who would you say in your opinion represents a moderate? Who represents an ultraconservative?
I’m also slightly interested if the 1998 in your name indicates year of birth… you seem a little naive.