Trumped 202
- Thread starter cloudsurf
- Start date
- Status
Republican elector won't vote for Trump
In an op-ed for The New York Times, Texas presidential elector Christopher Suprun, explains why he will not cast his vote for the President-elect Donald Trump on December 19, the date at which the 538 electors are supposed to formally vote for the president. "I watch Mr. Trump fail to unite America and drive a wedge between us," Suprun writes of his decision. "Mr. Trump goes out of his way to attack the cast of “Saturday Night Live” for bias. He tweets day and night, but waited two days to offer sympathy to the Ohio State community after an attack there. He does not encourage civil discourse, but chooses to stoke fear and create outrage." A number of electors have discussed not voting for Trump, who won the electoral college.
GOP elector won't vote for Trump
Doc says: "He makes a lot of sense. I wouldn't contemplate voting for Trump either even if i were a die-hard Republican. My values and ethics are more important to me."
In an op-ed for The New York Times, Texas presidential elector Christopher Suprun, explains why he will not cast his vote for the President-elect Donald Trump on December 19, the date at which the 538 electors are supposed to formally vote for the president. "I watch Mr. Trump fail to unite America and drive a wedge between us," Suprun writes of his decision. "Mr. Trump goes out of his way to attack the cast of “Saturday Night Live” for bias. He tweets day and night, but waited two days to offer sympathy to the Ohio State community after an attack there. He does not encourage civil discourse, but chooses to stoke fear and create outrage." A number of electors have discussed not voting for Trump, who won the electoral college.
GOP elector won't vote for Trump
Doc says: "He makes a lot of sense. I wouldn't contemplate voting for Trump either even if i were a die-hard Republican. My values and ethics are more important to me."
T-Rump is going to lose the largest number of electors ever originally pledged to a candidate in the history of elections. It won't change the overall out come but it will cost him that magic number threshold of 300, and that's going to be a sore point denying him a mandate, not that he had one anyway. Look for his twitter account to go nuclear repeating the usual screaming about conspiracies and how he could have won every vote ...if he tried. 
ound:
ound:
This would eliminate 3/4 of Trump voters and 1/4 of GOP voters. It would also get the likes of Alex Jones out of business. Okay, you're right it would be a very good thing for the country.
But nutbars such as Donald Trump and Mike Flynn totally believe in fake news, so it would be hard to pass that law right now.
The biggest purveyors of fake news are Huffington Post, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post and now CNN who were caught red handed giving Hillary Clinton debate questions beforehand.
All the news organizations who kept quoting T-Rump as he made himself look like a dope. BTW - according to Megyn Kelly T-Rump also got handed the questions before one of the debates. Let's get the whole truth out.
I thought it was bad enough an unstable ego-maniac got elected by desperate voters. But it seems birds of a feather can't help clinging to each other. One unstable kook with a god-complex picks picks a guy who insists a total fraud is real after it's been exposed, Lt. General Michael Flynn, for National Security Advisor. OMG, the doors of the asylum are wide open. If Flynn really believes Podesta and Clinton were running a child sex ring in a pizza joint, what kind of insanity will he conjure up for his loony boss when the Chinese or whoever make any kind of unexplained move. Between T-Rump and Flynn it's like two live nuclear bombs doing head butts together.
They're going to be seeing dastardly conspiracies in the bottom of their morning Cheerios.
http://us.blastingnews.com/news/201...mation-to-nato-report-explains-001283129.html
Never mind Flynn illegally gave classified information to NATO. He's not Hillary so that's okay.
DAMN!
Never mind Flynn illegally gave classified information to NATO. He's not Hillary so that's okay.
He also had his own personal server when he worked for the Pentagon. Just like Hillary. But since his last name isn't Clinton, it's okay.
If Trump isn't paying taxes, why shouldn't other Americans do the same thing?
65 Million Americans Should Threaten to Not Pay Taxes
Doc says: "Great article & so correct."
65 Million Americans Should Threaten to Not Pay Taxes
Doc says: "Great article & so correct."
Now I understand why my Canadian friends are so upset about the election of Donald Trump.
Canadian jobs are at risk of flocking south under Trump
By Lorne Gunter , Edmonton Sun : Saturday, November 12, 2016
Donald Trump’s election to the presidency is really bad news for the federal Liberals. It is equally bad news for their provincial counterparts in Ontario and for the NDP wrecking-ball of a government in Alberta.
Trump is not bad news because his victory has caused progressives’ hair to spontaneously combust (although that’s been fun to watch) [CaptRenault: I agree ]. And his rattling of politically correct elites in the U.S. threatens to generate a spillover rattle in Canada.
But that’s not why he is trouble for them.
Trump is a danger to our federal and provincial governments because two of his policies with the greatest chance of being implemented quickly are corporate tax reduction and a no carbon tax.
In a world in which capital, plants and jobs move quickly and (comparatively) easily, if Canada and its most industrial provinces have uncompetitive corporate tax rates, plus heavy environmental regulations and carbon taxes/pricing, business and employment will drain quickly to the States.
Starting in less than two months, Alberta’s government will impose a new carbon tax on everything that moves. The $3 billion it is slated to raise annually will be a tremendous added burden on the province’s already depressed economy.
Even when it looked as if the Democrat candidate, Hillary Clinton, would win and continue President Barack Obama’s climate-alarmism policies, Alberta’s oil companies were having trouble attracting investment because of the impending carbon tax.
But that difficulty wooing investors will double or triple now that Trump has won. With an anti-green Republican in the White House and Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, there is almost no chance the U.S. will adopt its own carbon pricing.
Already uncompetitive Alberta will become even more uncompetitive as U.S. taxes go down and Alberta’s go up.
Beginning in 2018, when Ottawa’s carbon tax kicks in (and increases and increases and increases every year until 2022), the job-killing effects will be spread nationwide.
The same is true of Ontario. Nearly a decade of “green” energy obsession has produced few environmental benefits, but it has given Ontario the highest electricity costs on the continent.
Power costs are the third or fourth highest input cost in most manufacturing operations. So the doubling of hydro rates since 2009 has helped drive away hundreds of thousands of jobs. And they have not gone to Mexico, but rather to Ohio, Michigan and Iowa, among other states.
The green policies of Ottawa and the provinces only made sense if Clinton had won and followed our lead. If Clinton had won, the competitiveness gap between Canada and the U.S. wouldn’t have been as large in the Americans’ favour as it is about to become.
But now the gap on carbon taxes and environmental regulations is going to be – as Trump says in his New Yorker accent – “Yoo-ge.”
That carbon-tax gap is bad enough, but Trump has also promised to lower corporate tax rates Stateside.
Believe it or not, Canada actually had an edge over the U.S. on corporate taxes when Stephen Harper was our PM and Obama was the prez. Indeed, the U.S. has one of the highest rates of corporate tax in the industrialized world.
If Trump even just rolls back those rates to Canadian levels, that will make the U.S. more attractive still.
Trump could also reinvigorate the coal industry in the States and stop the forced closure of coal-fired power plants, further lowering U.S. power costs.
Canada’s Liberals and New Democrats live in an isolated fantasyland. In their minds, if they simply will something – such as a prosperous, zero-carbon economy – it will be so.
They’re about to find out the hard way what hogwash that is.
Canadian jobs are at risk of flocking south under Trump
By Lorne Gunter , Edmonton Sun : Saturday, November 12, 2016
Donald Trump’s election to the presidency is really bad news for the federal Liberals. It is equally bad news for their provincial counterparts in Ontario and for the NDP wrecking-ball of a government in Alberta.
Trump is not bad news because his victory has caused progressives’ hair to spontaneously combust (although that’s been fun to watch) [CaptRenault: I agree
]. And his rattling of politically correct elites in the U.S. threatens to generate a spillover rattle in Canada.But that’s not why he is trouble for them.
Trump is a danger to our federal and provincial governments because two of his policies with the greatest chance of being implemented quickly are corporate tax reduction and a no carbon tax.
In a world in which capital, plants and jobs move quickly and (comparatively) easily, if Canada and its most industrial provinces have uncompetitive corporate tax rates, plus heavy environmental regulations and carbon taxes/pricing, business and employment will drain quickly to the States.
Starting in less than two months, Alberta’s government will impose a new carbon tax on everything that moves. The $3 billion it is slated to raise annually will be a tremendous added burden on the province’s already depressed economy.
Even when it looked as if the Democrat candidate, Hillary Clinton, would win and continue President Barack Obama’s climate-alarmism policies, Alberta’s oil companies were having trouble attracting investment because of the impending carbon tax.
But that difficulty wooing investors will double or triple now that Trump has won. With an anti-green Republican in the White House and Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, there is almost no chance the U.S. will adopt its own carbon pricing.
Already uncompetitive Alberta will become even more uncompetitive as U.S. taxes go down and Alberta’s go up.
Beginning in 2018, when Ottawa’s carbon tax kicks in (and increases and increases and increases every year until 2022), the job-killing effects will be spread nationwide.
The same is true of Ontario. Nearly a decade of “green” energy obsession has produced few environmental benefits, but it has given Ontario the highest electricity costs on the continent.
Power costs are the third or fourth highest input cost in most manufacturing operations. So the doubling of hydro rates since 2009 has helped drive away hundreds of thousands of jobs. And they have not gone to Mexico, but rather to Ohio, Michigan and Iowa, among other states.
The green policies of Ottawa and the provinces only made sense if Clinton had won and followed our lead. If Clinton had won, the competitiveness gap between Canada and the U.S. wouldn’t have been as large in the Americans’ favour as it is about to become.
But now the gap on carbon taxes and environmental regulations is going to be – as Trump says in his New Yorker accent – “Yoo-ge.”
That carbon-tax gap is bad enough, but Trump has also promised to lower corporate tax rates Stateside.
Believe it or not, Canada actually had an edge over the U.S. on corporate taxes when Stephen Harper was our PM and Obama was the prez. Indeed, the U.S. has one of the highest rates of corporate tax in the industrialized world.
If Trump even just rolls back those rates to Canadian levels, that will make the U.S. more attractive still.
Trump could also reinvigorate the coal industry in the States and stop the forced closure of coal-fired power plants, further lowering U.S. power costs.
Canada’s Liberals and New Democrats live in an isolated fantasyland. In their minds, if they simply will something – such as a prosperous, zero-carbon economy – it will be so.
They’re about to find out the hard way what hogwash that is.
I for one am not 'upset' that my American brothers and sisters voted for Donald Trump. I'm fully aware that not all of them are racists and bigots, as many people seem to believe. I understand their reasons and also understand that in the States, if you're born in a family of Republicans or Democrats, you usually will wind up voting for your family's party for the rest of your life.
I'm more extremely disappointed that my American brothers and sisters were so naive throughout the election. Many failed to see that they were being sold a fake bill of goods by a snake oil salesman. I was also extremely disappointed that they'd vote for a bigot, racist and mysognist like Donald Trump. Heck, i would have preferred voting for Daffy Duck had i been in their shoes.
Look, i'm really hoping that i'm totally wrong about him. But i feat that he'll be a huge disaster and he'll take the country down the shitter over the next 4-8 years. He's totally unqualified for the job of President and the next years will be years of extreme conflict around Washington and not only will the United States pay the price for the voters' mistake, but the rest of the world (including Canada) will also suffer the consequences.
I really, really hope i'm wrong. I really do.
p.s. Renault, count yourself fucking lucky that you're a white man in Trump's America.
I'm more extremely disappointed that my American brothers and sisters were so naive throughout the election. Many failed to see that they were being sold a fake bill of goods by a snake oil salesman. I was also extremely disappointed that they'd vote for a bigot, racist and mysognist like Donald Trump. Heck, i would have preferred voting for Daffy Duck had i been in their shoes.
Look, i'm really hoping that i'm totally wrong about him. But i feat that he'll be a huge disaster and he'll take the country down the shitter over the next 4-8 years. He's totally unqualified for the job of President and the next years will be years of extreme conflict around Washington and not only will the United States pay the price for the voters' mistake, but the rest of the world (including Canada) will also suffer the consequences.
I really, really hope i'm wrong. I really do.
p.s. Renault, count yourself fucking lucky that you're a white man in Trump's America.
Hillary Clinton now leads Donald Trump by 2.6 million votes.
May i recommend that people who disagree with Donald Trump being appointed as President on a technicality all head towards Washington on Inauguration Day and disrupt the inauguration with any means possible?? Show the world that you haven't lost faith in America and show them that will you not accept this bullshit to continue!! You have had enough!!!!!
Take down the racist president-elect!!! Take down the swamp!!! Take down this corrupted system!! Viva la revolucion!!!!!
“They may take our lives, but they'll never take our freedom!” ----- William Wallace
May i recommend that people who disagree with Donald Trump being appointed as President on a technicality all head towards Washington on Inauguration Day and disrupt the inauguration with any means possible?? Show the world that you haven't lost faith in America and show them that will you not accept this bullshit to continue!! You have had enough!!!!!
Take down the racist president-elect!!! Take down the swamp!!! Take down this corrupted system!! Viva la revolucion!!!!!
“They may take our lives, but they'll never take our freedom!” ----- William Wallace
A guy called Brian Mulroney strongly disagrees
The former conservative prime minister of Canada, a man I like and respect, is saying that Trump will be good for Canada and will be friends with Trudeau . That is as long as Justin perfects his ass kissing skills.
Supporters of T-Rump who are addicted to bashing "Liberals" had better watch out. Today T-Rump had nothing but praise for President Obama after calling him the worst President ever. Contradictions like that are starting to make it clear he didn't beat Democrats, he really beat Republicans. It could be the biggest snooker of all-time. Knowing he'd never get the Democratic nomination he ran as a Republican and played to every bit of hate and fear they had. But on 23 different major issues T-Rump hasn't stuck to any of them, rather he has shown a strange willingness immediately after the election to contradict his hyper-verbosity that drew right wingers to him. Could he have played the hate Hillary card so heavily because he knew how easily and quickly the Right would run to him only to dump or water down every promise he made as a preset plan?
The 141 Stances Donald Trump Took During His White House Bid
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...p-s-rapidly-changing-policy-positions-n547801
President-Elect Donald Trump took 141 distinct stances on 23 major issues during his bid for the White House.
His campaign's constantly-evolving views — often championed as a way for Trump to use unpredictability to cut better deals for the nation — make it difficult glean a political agenda, or even a set of clear, core policy views ahead of his presidency.
It's unclear, for example, if Trump plans to round up and deport the nation's estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants or give them a pathway to citizenship. After announcing he'd ban Muslims from entering the country ten months ago, it's unclear if that policy still stands -- his campaign some times says he's expanded the policy and other times that he's limited it.
After more than a year and a half of stadium rallies, around-the-clock interviews, sweeping primary wins, and one stunning general election victory, the Republican president-elect has the most contradictory and confusing platform in recent history. This is a catalog of his views over a 511-day span, from June 16, 2015 to November 8, 2016.
Don't read more if you are a Libby hater. You may find you elected someone with the same policies you voted against.
Cheers
The 141 Stances Donald Trump Took During His White House Bid
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...p-s-rapidly-changing-policy-positions-n547801
President-Elect Donald Trump took 141 distinct stances on 23 major issues during his bid for the White House.
His campaign's constantly-evolving views — often championed as a way for Trump to use unpredictability to cut better deals for the nation — make it difficult glean a political agenda, or even a set of clear, core policy views ahead of his presidency.
It's unclear, for example, if Trump plans to round up and deport the nation's estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants or give them a pathway to citizenship. After announcing he'd ban Muslims from entering the country ten months ago, it's unclear if that policy still stands -- his campaign some times says he's expanded the policy and other times that he's limited it.
After more than a year and a half of stadium rallies, around-the-clock interviews, sweeping primary wins, and one stunning general election victory, the Republican president-elect has the most contradictory and confusing platform in recent history. This is a catalog of his views over a 511-day span, from June 16, 2015 to November 8, 2016.
Don't read more if you are a Libby hater. You may find you elected someone with the same policies you voted against.
Cheers
That's a perfect description of exactly how many Americans feel about...Obama!
You must live in the deep south, am i correct?
I honestly can't see anyone not liking Prime Minister Trudeau.
As for Brian Mulroney, i never much liked ol' shovel face when he was PM, but i always respected him. Loved his wife's looks and they seemed to have raised good children.
- Status
