trump2028. wrote:
And ironically Somaliland is doing a lot better. It's not "thriving", sure, as it's still poor, but it's stable and much safer.
Did their president triple their net worth in the first year of presidency? Winning!
-
70
-
trump2028. wrote:
Svetlana seems to be saying that elections have consequences, but it’s hard to understand her Russian accent.
80 -
112
-
Newname wrote:
hussars 1776 wrote:
parties can do what they want to decide their nominees.
Not in a democracy. Not what people want
a political party can choose its nominees any way it wants to. This is not an issue of democracy. Parties are not choosing who will run the government - they are choosing who they think SHOULD run the government.
the whole primary system is fairly recent. Parties used to decide nominees in back rooms. Didn't make the country undemocratic.
70 -
hussars 1776 wrote:
Newname wrote:
Not in a democracy. Not what people want
a political party can choose its nominees any way it wants to. This is not an issue of democracy. Parties are not choosing who will run the government - they are choosing who they think SHOULD run the government.
the whole primary system is fairly recent. Parties used to decide nominees in back rooms. Didn't make the country undemocratic.
So two parties select someone to be president and we the people get to choose from those two.
And you think this is good?
37 -
5th straight losing week for the stock markets. Trump’s RINO policies are ruinous for the economy.
120 -
Women for Trump wrote:
5th straight losing week for the stock markets. Trump’s RINO policies are ruinous for the economy.
now is when Piggie gets a bunch of very rich people telling him he has to stop with his moranitude because they are losing money.
in the past, piggie could follow instructions and correct his course.
now, piggie can't. because he doesn't' control the situation in the Strait.
we're cooked.
110 -
Newname wrote:
hussars 1776 wrote:
a political party can choose its nominees any way it wants to. This is not an issue of democracy. Parties are not choosing who will run the government - they are choosing who they think SHOULD run the government.
the whole primary system is fairly recent. Parties used to decide nominees in back rooms. Didn't make the country undemocratic.
So two parties select someone to be president and we the people get to choose from those two.
And you think this is good?
it's a mixed picture.
When parties chose the presidential nominees, we got people who were vetted and qualified. A guy like Trump would never have been a nominee in those times. He was obviously unqualified, had criminal tendencies, and is mentally ill. That a charismatic billionaire could hijack a party and make it his own via the primary system is not good for the country.
also, the primary system rewards the more extreme candidates. Which is not good either.
But I'm not sure the old system would have chosen Obama, who proved to be one of our finest recent presidents.
And the idea of members of a party choosing their nominee does a have appeal.
complicated question if the country would be better off without the primary system.
40 -
This administration has done irreparable harm to our standing in the world. Because of Trump, the US is no longer trusted by our allies. This is what happens when unqualified maga culture warriors are put is positions of power. Hegseth should never have been confirmed to run the most powerful military on the planet. We are now in a self inflected mess that is destroying both our economy and our international relations.
130 -
The conflict in Ukraine (and Iran) will end soon. For those counting, that will be 10 wars DJT has ended.
08 -
mruns wrote:
This administration has done irreparable harm to our standing in the world. Because of Trump, the US is no longer trusted by our allies. This is what happens when unqualified maga culture warriors are put is positions of power. Hegseth should never have been confirmed to run the most powerful military on the planet. We are now in a self inflected mess that is destroying both our economy and our international relations.
If only we had Sam Brinton instead!
07 -
trump2028. wrote:
The conflict in Ukraine (and Iran) will end soon. For those counting, that will be 10 wars DJT has ended.
You're still posting like someone who hates Trump and wants to make his worshippers look stupid.
61 -
trump2028. wrote:
mruns wrote:
This administration has done irreparable harm to our standing in the world. Because of Trump, the US is no longer trusted by our allies. This is what happens when unqualified maga culture warriors are put is positions of power. Hegseth should never have been confirmed to run the most powerful military on the planet. We are now in a self inflected mess that is destroying both our economy and our international relations.
If only we had Sam Brinton instead!
For all the odd stuff that Sam Brinton was into, doesn't it worry you that even he didn't humiliate your country on the world stage as much as the people you worship are now doing?
31 -
NYT--
1. Mortgage rates jump yet again to 6.38 percent as war goes on
2. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development warned on Thursday that the war would push up inflation in the United States to 4.2 percent this year, more than a percentage point higher than its previous forecast.
20 -
trump2028. wrote:
The conflict in Ukraine (and Iran) will end soon. For those counting, that will be 10 wars DJT has ended.
That's a very very big "if."
No progress toward that at all.
40 -
hussars 1776 wrote:
Newname wrote:
So two parties select someone to be president and we the people get to choose from those two.
And you think this is good?
it's a mixed picture.
When parties chose the presidential nominees, we got people who were vetted and qualified. A guy like Trump would never have been a nominee in those times. He was obviously unqualified, had criminal tendencies, and is mentally ill. That a charismatic billionaire could hijack a party and make it his own via the primary system is not good for the country.
also, the primary system rewards the more extreme candidates. Which is not good either.
But I'm not sure the old system would have chosen Obama, who proved to be one of our finest recent presidents.
And the idea of members of a party choosing their nominee does a have appeal.
complicated question if the country would be better off without the primary system.
Nope. It's a corrupt joke. Our leaders are chosen by psychpath billionaires who detest us.
Obama is a pupet who attacked several ME nations for his bosses and evenmet once a week to go over a kill list.
That has appeal??
211 -
nooob wrote:
NYT--
1. Mortgage rates jump yet again to 6.38 percent as war goes on
2. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development warned on Thursday that the war would push up inflation in the United States to 4.2 percent this year, more than a percentage point higher than its previous forecast.
Been betting for oil prices to go up and the market to tank -- going good.
Buy most investments in "safe" govt bonds and these are getting killed due to inflation.
Tough to compete with the criminal insiders
24 -
hussars 1776 wrote:
Newname wrote:
Not in a democracy. Not what people want
a political party can choose its nominees any way it wants to. This is not an issue of democracy. Parties are not choosing who will run the government - they are choosing who they think SHOULD run the government.
the whole primary system is fairly recent. Parties used to decide nominees in back rooms. Didn't make the country undemocratic.
Live by the sword die by the sword. Harris was a drunk. and now MAGA rules.
07
2 posts were removed from this page.
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.