Stephan Colbert is lobbying hard to win multiple awards. He has placed ads in the new york times and has put up a billboard pleading his case. He says nothing will confirm one's credibility as much as being called a list by Donald Trump.I
Colbert has exposed this stunt for the buffoonery that it is.
Certainly more than not presidential but indicative of Trump's continued emotional decline.
Night observer wrote:
Stephan Colbert is lobbying hard to win multiple awards. He has placed ads in the new york times and has put up a billboard pleading his case. He says nothing will confirm one's credibility as much as being called a list by Donald Trump.I
Colbert has exposed this stunt for the buffoonery that it is.
Certainly more than not presidential but indicative of Trump's continued emotional decline.
Colbert will be denied the attention he is so desperate for. For all his talents, he has never "exposed" anything.
Flagpole wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
Did you make a New Year's Resolution to be more humble and less partisan this year Flagbro? If so good work, brother! Very admirable.
Nope. I don't make New Year's Resolutions. I wake up every day determined to be the best person anyone meets that day, and I have accomplished that every day since October 6, 1991; on that day someone tried to force me to take a bite of eggplant after I had explained that I do not like it. They were insistent, so I had to end it with a comment about that person's mother.
I post how things are or should be here, and if someone posts something that I agree with, I will agree with them, regardless of past history. I hoped that you were correct about this administration's movement on marijuana because you have the right stance on that issue.
A very poignant story. Who amongst doesn't have at some point in our lives a life altering pivotal eggplant experience?
Mine was eggplant parmesan. After eating that dish on June 12th 1981, I had an epiphany. I need to spend the rest of my life making the world a better place by making anonymous posts in the middle of the night.
I have never regretted the path I have chosen in life.
Night Observer
Can't Stump the Trump wrote:
Night observer wrote:
Stephan Colbert is lobbying hard to win multiple awards. He has placed ads in the new york times and has put up a billboard pleading his case. He says nothing will confirm one's credibility as much as being called a list by Donald Trump.I
Colbert has exposed this stunt for the buffoonery that it is.
Certainly more than not presidential but indicative of Trump's continued emotional decline.
Colbert will be denied the attention he is so desperate for. For all his talents, he has never "exposed" anything.
He is a genius and I bet you used to like his previous show.
Night observer wrote:
Can't Stump the Trump wrote:
Colbert will be denied the attention he is so desperate for. For all his talents, he has never "exposed" anything.
He is a genius and I bet you used to like his previous show.
Boy the term genius gets tossed around casually these days. If he's a genius why does he need a team of 34 writers to produce a show? LOL
I never mentioned the Russia thing. For what it's worth I don't think they will prove collusion with Russia. From this article it doesn't seem like there's much of a case for anything except stupidity and being a suck-up. Stupidity and ignorance isn't always an excuse though when it comes to obstruction of justice and money laundering. Kushner's meeting was dumb. Flynn taking $45000 from the Russians for a speech only makes sense if they all thought they were going to lose and treated the campaign like a big joke. Flynn "Well, it would only be a problem if we won”. And finally one of my favoirite quotes: “What has he gotten himself into with the Russians?” pressed Ailes. “Mostly,” said Bannon, “he went to Russia and he thought he was going to meet Putin. But Putin couldn’t give a sh*t about him. So he’s kept trying.” The president's epic ignorance of the law and how anything works will become increasingly apparent and might work in his favour. Lets all quote from above from now on. I like it :-)
its_baddude wrote:
If Trump did not want to win the election why do you think he colluded with the Russians. Does that make sense to you? Please explain.
sounds about right wrote:
Worth posting again. You guys should all read this if you haven't already. It should challenge assumptions on both sides.
It portrays the campaign as a massive PR stunt that was never meant to succeed and President Trump as a man hopelessly out of his depth, along with the rest of his team.
If you're thinking fake news then skip to the end:
"HOW HE GOT THE STORY
This story is adapted from Michael Wolff’s book Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House, to be published by Henry Holt & Co. on January 9. Wolff, who chronicles the administration from Election Day to this past October, conducted conversations and interviews over a period of 18 months with the president, most members of his senior staff, and many people to whom they in turn spoke. Shortly after Trump’s inauguration, Wolff says, he was able to take up “something like a semi-permanent seat on a couch in the West Wing” — an idea encouraged by the president himself. Because no one was in a position to either officially approve or formally deny such access, Wolff became “more a constant interloper than an invited guest.” There were no ground rules placed on his access, and he was required to make no promises about how he would report on what he witnessed.
Since then, he conducted more than 200 interviews. In true Trumpian fashion, the administration’s lack of experience and disdain for political norms made for a hodgepodge of journalistic challenges. Information would be provided off-the-record or on deep background, then casually put on the record. Sources would fail to set any parameters on the use of a conversation, or would provide accounts in confidence, only to subsequently share their views widely. And the president’s own views, private as well as public, were constantly shared by others. The adaptation presented here offers a front-row view of Trump’s presidency, from his improvised transition to his first months in the Oval Office."
its_baddude wrote:
Lets bring up some facts to the conversation since you liberals love facts so much.
When Obama signed the stimulus bill in 2009, he promised it would provide “help for those hardest hit by our economic crisis.” Clearly, it did not. The states hurt the most, the ones with more foreclosures, unemployment and bankruptcy, got less money than richer states closer to power. Washington, D.C. got the most stimulus money: $7,602 per capita.
Rich Democrat donors also got payback. The farcical “green” energy company Solyndra defaulted on more than half a billion dollars of our money, while Obama mega-donor George Kaiser finagled his interest ahead of ours. Other beneficiaries of Obama’s largesse for dubious deals include Larry Page and Sergey Brin (if you Google them you will find they founded Google) for Tesla Motors, NRG Solar owners Warren Buffet and Steve Cohen, and Siga Tech owner Ronald Pearlman. All told, more than 75 percent of stimulus grants and money for such “businesses” found their way to big Obama supporters.
Some examples
--------------------
$11 Million To Provide Rebates For Ohioans To Buy Energy-Efficient Appliances Sent To A Texas Company That Outsourced Work To A Call Center In El Salvador.
$835,000 To Study The Ecology Of Plankton
$772,709 To Study Bacteria On Squid
$700,000 To Collect Lost Crab Pots
...
and my favorite
$600,000 On Signs Touting The Stimulus
https://gop.com/the-real-obama-stimulus/https://www.ocregister.com/2013/03/26/ron-hart-where-did-the-stimulus-money-go/Can't Stump the Trump wrote:
Very little of the money went to infrastructure improvements, and said projects were probably never completed anyway.
All talk no action.
Did you have any investment or significant money in banks in 2008? It was a scary time. Financial institutions, the auto industry and basically our whole economic system was crashing.
Obama pulled us out of that mess. Donald inherited a very different situation.
Conservatives ruled for 8 years during the Bush years and they left us with never ending wars and in financial crisis. Obama and Bill both did better.
Can't Stump the Trump wrote:
Night observer wrote:
He is a genius and I bet you used to like his previous show.
Boy the term genius gets tossed around casually these days. If he's a genius why does he need a team of 34 writers to produce a show? LOL
(1) Did you know that there is zero correlation between one's level of intelligence and the number of writers one employs for their show.
(2) where did you get the number 31? Link your source.
(3) Colbert is a genius. He has an amazing find of general information and very high verbal reasoning skills.
(4) Trump is a dumb person. Vocabulary and reasoning skills are not at a level commensurate with the requirements for his position. He used to have a good but biting sense of humor. Now with his increased level of anger his attempts at humor fall flat.
Colbert has a large staff of writers to make him "look like" a genius. He is also very angry. Jon Stewart went after conservative public figures but did so in a humorous way. Colbert's anger can not be disguised. All liberals hate Trump so much that they look so foolish.
Why does Trump have so many people who don't do anything working in his administration and for his previous campaign? Anytime someone does something to make Trump look bad he claims they were of no importance or had a job doing nothing? Seems odd to have so many people working for you that have no responsibility?
Corsicana Pete wrote:
Colbert has a large staff of writers to make him "look like" a genius. He is also very angry. Jon Stewart went after conservative public figures but did so in a humorous way. Colbert's anger can not be disguised. All liberals hate Trump so much that they look so foolish.
It's more than his great monologue. In situations where he has to recall facts or lyrics or written passages he shows brilliance.
You might not like his politics, but he isbrilliant.
He put Trump in a conundrum with the awards. If he picks Colbert, Colbert will celebrate. Colbert turns what Trump intended to be humiliating for the receivers into a badge of honor.
My prediction, trump people will say trump was only being satirical, and never really intended to give out awards.
Colbert will make Trump back down on the awards.
You got some solid data in your reply this time. Good job.
I am making a blog on a website I have and I am thinking of having a left side (left leaning blogs) and a right (leaning) side blog.
I may recruit people here for the right/conservative side.
Conundrum wrote:
He put Trump in a conundrum with the awards. If he picks Colbert, Colbert will celebrate. Colbert turns what Trump intended to be humiliating for the receivers into a badge of honor.
My prediction, trump people will say trump was only being satirical, and never really intended to give out awards.
Colbert will make Trump back down on the awards.
Trump won the popular vote, just not the popular vote in your liberal loving state of California.
Trump IS the President and is going nowhere, he'll finish his first term and Idiotpole will be wrong on another prediction.
Who care what your opinion is on Colbert? When someone else brings up someone on the right, you look the other way.
Being a big baby for 4 years is no way to live your life old man.
My prediction, Hillary and Obama people will never change and always be sour puss whiners.
Trump is doing a great job!
L L wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:
GDP was already growing at more than 3% before the corporate tax rate was cut. GDP could be growing at 5+% by the 2018 midterms.
Trump is winning.
But where will that growth be allocated, evenly among Americans or concentrated at the top?
I would hope that the growth is distributed to those helping generate it, and to those people actually working for a living (NOT those leaching off the tax paying public). It also seems to me that by improving GDP, the probability job growth is very real.
Governor Moonbeam Brown wrote:
Stats Major wrote:
Okay bonehead. Here ya go and I'm sorry, but I have to say, do you research ANYTHING in life or just haphazardly hit random keys on the keyboard and hope to sound smart? Why do I ask? Well, the American People did speak as a whole, except for Liberal Loonies in California. You're welcome.
Clinton won California with illegal votes, lots of them.
She won California by 4.3 million votes more than Trump.
Take that one silly liberal state away and Trump wins the popular vote by 1.4 million.
You were totally fine with the system, till your corrupt girl lost, THEN you started talking about the process.
Here's your proof peabrain: Take out California, one state out of 50 and look what happens. She lost, deal with it.
If you take California out of the popular vote equation, then Trump wins the rest of the country by 1.4 million votes. And if California voted like every other Democratic state — where Clinton averaged 53.5% wins — Clinton and Trump end up in a virtual popular vote tie. (This was not the case in 2012. Obama beat Romney by 2 million votes that year, not counting California.)
Meanwhile, if you look at every other measure, Trump was the clear and decisive winner in this election.
**********
Number of states won:
Trump: 30
Clinton: 20
_________________
Trump: +10
Number of electoral votes won:
Trump: 306
Clinton: 232
_________________
Trump: + 68
Ave. margin of victory in winning states:
Trump: 56%
Clinton: 53.5%
_________________
Trump: + 2.5 points
Popular vote total:
Trump: 62,958,211
Clinton: 65,818,318
_________________
Clinton: + 2.8 million
Popular vote total outside California:
Trump: 58,474,401
Clinton: 57,064,530
_________________
Trump: + 1.4 million
For those of you living in the occupied sanctuary state of Mexifornia, excuse me, California, at the very least, 1M illegal Mexicans voted for Hillary.
Zero proof of illegal voting in California or anywhere else as the end of Trumps election commission shows. Therefore the rest of your post is invalid. I didn't read anything after that.
Corsicana Pete wrote:
Colbert has a large staff of writers to make him "look like" a genius. He is also very angry. Jon Stewart went after conservative public figures but did so in a humorous way. Colbert's anger can not be disguised. All liberals hate Trump so much that they look so foolish.
Colbert's retorts to interviewee responses over the years have shown he is quick on his feet without writers, too. You'd have to be daft to claim he isn't talented.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
HelloHillaryLovers wrote:
How’s that Russian collusion working out for you?
Multiple felony pleas in less than 12 months. Pretty good.
This is the saddest part of the Trumpets. They are so clueless, have such minimal analytical skills, that even after two (and counting) guilty pleas they still think this is all made up.
Conundrum wrote:
...
(4) Trump is a dumb person.
...
Yet he defeated:
1. A field of 15 Republican candidates
2. The smartest woman in the world - Mrs. Clinton
3. The entire Establishment Republican party
4. The Democrat party
5. The Deep State bureaucracy - FBI, NSA, CIA, etc
6. The Main Stream Media
7. The social media giants - Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc
8. Harveywood
9. All of Academia
If Trump is dumb then what does that say about all these people and institutions that he outsmarted?
Conundrum wrote:
its_baddude wrote:
Lets bring up some facts to the conversation since you liberals love facts so much.
When Obama signed the stimulus bill in 2009, he promised it would provide “help for those hardest hit by our economic crisis.” Clearly, it did not. The states hurt the most, the ones with more foreclosures, unemployment and bankruptcy, got less money than richer states closer to power. Washington, D.C. got the most stimulus money: $7,602 per capita.
Rich Democrat donors also got payback. The farcical “green” energy company Solyndra defaulted on more than half a billion dollars of our money, while Obama mega-donor George Kaiser finagled his interest ahead of ours. Other beneficiaries of Obama’s largesse for dubious deals include Larry Page and Sergey Brin (if you Google them you will find they founded Google) for Tesla Motors, NRG Solar owners Warren Buffet and Steve Cohen, and Siga Tech owner Ronald Pearlman. All told, more than 75 percent of stimulus grants and money for such “businesses” found their way to big Obama supporters.
Some examples
--------------------
$11 Million To Provide Rebates For Ohioans To Buy Energy-Efficient Appliances Sent To A Texas Company That Outsourced Work To A Call Center In El Salvador.
$835,000 To Study The Ecology Of Plankton
$772,709 To Study Bacteria On Squid
$700,000 To Collect Lost Crab Pots
...
and my favorite
$600,000 On Signs Touting The Stimulus
https://gop.com/the-real-obama-stimulus/https://www.ocregister.com/2013/03/26/ron-hart-where-did-the-stimulus-money-go/Did you have any investment or significant money in banks in 2008? It was a scary time. Financial institutions, the auto industry and basically our whole economic system was crashing.
Obama pulled us out of that mess. Donald inherited a very different situation.
Conservatives ruled for 8 years during the Bush years and they left us with never ending wars and in financial crisis. Obama and Bill both did better.
This is all true. The last year of Bush's presidency into Obama's first year was crazy bad. We were bleeding jobs at 800,000 per month, and the financial system was in tatters. Steps that Obama took did help turn it around.
Lots of things went into that financial meltdown, and both Republicans and Democrats and their policies were to blame.
Two big ones:
Democrat side - Bill Clinton's push to get banks to loan more money to people who shouldn't have been loaned money to.
Republican side - Too much deregulation on the financial side of things.
And then we also had:
Banks who were engaging in very suspect lending practices, even beyond laws enacted under Clinton.
Greedy individuals who took out ARMs and pay only interest loans on properties they could really not afford in hopes that those homes would continue to go up up up in price.
Summary: Both major Parties had a hand in the financial crisis. Republicans fared worse overall (by a little, not a lot), and Obama DID help pull us out of that mess (with some bipartisan support actually).