Total posts: 2,049
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
@Greyparrot
Should we get Pie's claim?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BearMan
Re: why Speed would say he investigated you town - because if he says he investigated scum and they flipped inno, he would be extremely sus. And if/when he flips scum, it would make people second guess your affiliation.
The question is why would he investigate you in the first place when you're one of the only people to have claimed (and a role we could somewhat verify no less?) It seems very unlikely he would believe that investigating you would be statistically useful.
And the fact that neither one of you were role blocked or killed is also very sus. If Speed were town I think he would be here playing better + making a better case for himself insofar as why he targeted you with his night action and why he's focusing on a Luna lynch this DP.
I also think killing warren seems like Speed would be behind it. Assuming they have to logically deduce who their scum partner is, and they know it's not Luna, and assume it's not me or you, that leaves just a few potential targets. I could see Speed, Pie or whiteflame being the ones threatened by warren.
The only thing making me second guess Speed as scum is that it would be weird for scum to "give up" at this point since they definitely still have a shot at winning. Speed's behavior seems like he doesn't really care. Pie on the other hand seems to be trying to delay things to give mafia the edge in numbers and is open to lynching Luna/you. So Speed/Pie are my biggest suspects right now along with one of the lesser active people. Skittlez and Croc need to post. I'd like to hear more from MisterChris as well. It's good he posted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Our_Boat_is_Right
People always brush it off when Trump says it as "absurd" among other things, but can you name a president who has done more? Most people only say LBJ because he passed the civil rights act; however, he was a proud racist who frequently used the N-word and voted against any civil rights legislation in the senate before he was president. The only reason he signed it into law was because he was pressured by everyone to do so, and it would have been very bad politically if he hadn't.
Someone could just as easily bring up Trump's racist remarks and incidents (like the Central Park 5) pre presidency, or suggest he "only" did certain things to garner political favor from the black community, so I don't think focusing on a president's personal morality is useful for this convo. You asked which president did the most for blacks aside from Abraham Lincoln. In that case I might suggest President JFK since the Civil Rights Act went forward because of him. He gave the Report to the American People about civil rights in a TV speech and got the CRA up and running. And LJB even said the country should pass the Civil Rights Act to honor the memory and legacy of JFK.
Created:
Posted in:
"If he survives one more day phase, we'll have him confirm that person." - Me
Well maybe not. We'll see.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I'd like to lynch Speed today and wanted to wait for other people's input before explicitly saying so. He was my biggest scum read on DP1 but I held back because of the Cop claim. Today I still feel the same.
After this DP I'm leaning more on Pie being scum primarily because I disagree with lynching Luna (unless I am misunderstanding his role). If we lynch Luna and the DP progresses, then sure let's confirm Luna's role if we have time. But if we lynch him and he survives + the DP ends, that would be a huge waste. I kind of wish Luna had insisted we lynch him DP1.
Right now nobody suspects Luna is mafia because a lynchproof mafioso makes no sense, and I believe he is lynchproof because he was okay with testing his role. There would be no way to kill a lynchproof mafioso unless there was a vig who shot successfully. So if Luna was scum and made it down to the end of the game, the town wouldn't be able to lynch him to win. Therefore I think Luna must be town or TP. I'm going to assume he's town - otherwise he probs wouldn't say he could confirm another player town. If he survives one more day phase, we'll have him confirm that person.
Speed: His behavior was sus on day phase 1 and now day phase 2 he's conveniently MIA; Investigating BearMan was not a good choice; neither Speed nor BearMan were role blocked or killed which is extremely odd; and I think warren dying in the night also points to Speed being scum. As far as the possibility of a Bear and Speed scum team, I think it would have made no sense to Janitor warren when both Speed and BearMan claimed power roles already on day phase 1. There would be no point since neither one of them are going to fake warren's claim (I guess they could use the info in other ways but meh).
So now despite his game play I'm learning more towards Bear being town, and Pie's glossing over Speed's game play makes me sus him a bit more. I think it's weird he tried to FOS Luna by saying Luna isn't playing to his town meta, but at the same time seems to believe Luna's claim. Sounds a bit like defensive panic.
Of course a few players have been inactive, specifically MisterChris, and if we assume there's 3 scum then at least 1 of them is probably among the more quiet folk. Skittlez and Croc need to be looked into since their game play is probably very sub par so it'll be hard to read them (which would have made them better investigation targets than BearMan who at least claimed a role we could try and verify).
Anyway I'm rambling and I gotta work a little. I wish I got paid to play Mafia but sadly I do not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Cause of your side and the fact that it takes time lol
My side? I only voted for a Democrat once in my life and it was in 2018. If you look back on DDO you'll find me shitting on Democrats and the left more than Republicans and the right. It's just that Trump supporters are mind bogglingly stupid.
Yaaaaa no. McCain and Romney are losers
I agree but John McCain is not a RINO. So.
Trump has brought a lot of the white working class voters that formed the base of the Democratic Party.
He's lost some of them too. But let's acknowledge the reason so many working class voters supported the Democratic Party was because of the GOP promoting free trade. Are all of the Republicans who suddenly did a 180 in support of Trump RINOs now too?
I gotta go for now
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
not sure why it’s an either/or situation.
I'll explain later why I think that
I already stated why I think it’s Speed and not BM, sticking with that for the moment. Don’t buy that he investigated BM, though that’s largely because I already suspected BM was town going in.
Will you cast a vote on Speed then?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@MisterChris
@skittlez09
@Crocodile
Please cast a vote.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
He needs to get a majority in the House and a filibuster proof Senate.The last time that happened, Obamacare was rammed down our throats where they had to make it a law before we were allowed to see what it was.Let's hope Trump isn't like Obama in that regard should 2020 flip the Congress.
Um, yeah we both know Trump has no integrity and has bragged about the authoritarian capabilities of his office (sometimes misunderstanding those too) so we have no reason to believe Trump or a Republican-controlled Congress wouldn't "ram things down our throat" if they had the political power to do so, just like they are doing with Judge Barrett.
You said "There was a time when he thought he could work with Pelosi. Pelosi smashed his aspirations like melted ice cream from her fridge." What are you referring to specifically? It doesn't seem like Trump became a cynic AFTER getting to Washington when literally his entire campaign was predicated on shitting all over establishment politicians and whining about how ineffective Congress was. Then he suddenly gets elected and "discovers" politicians are difficult? That's nonsensical.
As far as corruption goes, I guess you don't find blatant conflicts of interest inherently corrupt. I'm on the fence about that but in Trump's case I think the corruption is pretty clear. Business dealings with him and his kids aside, and government staff + foreign dignitaries staying at Trump resorts and so on and so forth, he has not made closing any loopholes a priority. He hasn't brought it up at all. He used that "anti elite" rhetoric as a talking point to get poor white Southerners on board with him, cuz they're too stupid to realize he IS one of those elites and doesn't give a flying fuck about them.
Trump rightly identified that he could shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue and no supporter would care. That's why he gets away with all of these campaign promise failures whereas with any other politician he would say it's proof of their incompetence. Obama didn't have EITHER branch of government on his side for the majority of his presidency, but that didn't stop Trump from tweeting nonsense about him like an ignorant douchebag.
Created:
Posted in:
And lol at calling John McCain a "RINO" because he disagreed with Trump. Trump is a fucking RINO.
He's an anti capitalist who rails against the economic system Republicans have been championing since Reagan.
He's an anti capitalist who rails against the economic system Republicans have been championing since Reagan.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
You go against Trump, he’ll make your life hell.
So if Trump has all of this control over Congress, then why did he completely and utterly fail to repeal any of the "Wall Street elite" tax breaks? Explain.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Oil is the cheapest way to provide heat but it's not the only way. Furthermore transportation is arguably a necessity, so if necessities justify oil subsidies you could make a case for why people need to move around.Do you believe it's more efficient to give subsidies to international mega-corporations (MOBSTER CON-ARTISTS), or would it perhaps be a more efficient use of resources to instead give that exact same subsidy to, let's say, the bottom 50% of income earners?
And this was another straw man. My point was that there are cost-benefits to everything and people often have to weigh difficult choices. For instance, oil is not the most ideal way to provide heat in terms of environmental concerns, but it is currently the cheapest and easiest way. I asked if the government was evil for going the cheapest and easiest route to provide heat to poor people.
3RU7AL replied by asking if I was conflating luxuries with necessities. I said no, but if he's suggesting that it's okay for people to go the cheap and easy route for the necessity of heating, then why not the necessity of transportation? I did not get an answer. Instead I got an irrelevant question about what I think is the best way to distribute money. I'm not talking about distributing money bro. I specifically asked about whether or not he's saying it's okay to do things that may cause harm if it is deemed a "necessity." Like I said there are cost-benefits to everything and he seems to be agreeing with my point.
Please wish me patience in this conversation instead of "luck" lol I don't need luck. I'm not impressed.
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
I said: People get heart disease from sugar - are bakers evil for selling you delicious cakes?
He replied with: It might be "evil" for our tax dollars to be leveraged in order to subsidize the sugar industry.
I wasn't talking about subsidies. I was talking about whether or not sellers were responsible for providing things that people could abuse or be harmed from. If he wanted to make the point that bakers weren't evil for supplying sugar, but government was evil for incentivizing the mass consumption of it, then he could have made that point and I would have discussed it. But he didn't.
My point was that if you start applying this standard for one provider (cigarette sellers) you might have to start applying it to others. Are bartenders evil? After all a lot of alcoholics beat their wives, drive drunk and harm their kids and workplace. Are distillery owners evil? Liquor store owners? I was going down THAT road and he brought up a whole different point about the role of government which is arguably a red herring.
And furthermore when government subsidizes the market it is less of a "capitalist" market and more of a regulated one. Protectionism through tariffs, incentives through tax breaks and other government influences are certainly worthy of consideration, but they do not answer my question about whether bakers are evil for selling delicious cakes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Tell me where Trumpy is going to get support in Congress for abolishing loopholes?
He campaigned on taking down Establishment politicians. Are you saying he can't or that he won't? Is he a liar or ignorant to how government works?
You do make a good point about Congress not helping seeing as how Trump also failed to deliver on his border wall promises and of course repealing the ACA. The only thing they really helped him on was tax cuts which Republicans have supported all along. So it looks like Trump has been useless as a maverick "anti politician" and didn't accomplish anything that any other Republican president and Congress could do. Shocking.
I just want to know if your position is that Trump is corrupt or inept though. I think it's both. You?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I've always held the position that corporate media rarely knows shit.
Yeah, but most criticisms of "the media" are vapid and hollow to me for aforementioned reasons. There is reason to be suspect of all types of media. Most often the people who scream about fake news are the ones sharing conspiracy theories from YouTube.
It's possible I misunderstood the initial comment of yours I replied to though. When you said "there is no possible way a TV reporter will reliably tell you what Trump's assets are" I thought you meant they were intentionally lying.
I agree there's no way to know all of Trump's assets, but I don't think that undermines the NYT's story at all. They've been trying to prove for years that he paid little to no income taxes because it champions the leftist point about the rich not paying their fair share. He is the personification of that inequity and laws that give benefits to the rich for their failures, but hurts the working class. And it undermines his "America first" rhetoric as well. He can't claim to be all about the military and cops and public workers and simultaneously brag about paying no taxes. How do you think they get paid? He wants the middle class to fund them but no one else? Not a good look. So I think if you said to the NYT their story shouldn't be regarded because Trump probably has even MORE money the government has no way of knowing about, they'd agree with you and say that's exactly the point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Read post above yours.
So now you're changing your position from the NYT knowingly misrepresenting Trump's assets just for the sake of lying, to a completely different argument of them simply not knowing the breadth of his assets.
It seems like you will do anything to get out of answering this very simple question I asked you even though it is an opinion based question. Weird. You seem to be suggesting that Trump has even more wealth than Americans know and is therefore paying even less of his "fair share." Even if that's true that doesn't mean anything the NYT reported was wrong.
I don't think anyone denies all of the legal loopholes that exist. We all know about the Panama Papers. Highlighting that Trump has exploited all of these things only begs the question even further of why hasn't he ended them despite his incessant promises to do so? Do you think he is a selfish liar? That can't possibly be it, right? There's no way he lied to his incredibly poor white lower middle class workers about standing with them against the Wall Street elite, right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Biden did have much to do with making them being the Senate for nearly 40 years
This is the dumbest argument ever ("Joe Biden has been in Congress for a long time; therefore, is responsible for everything that is wrong with government") so of course Trump fans repeat it like brain dead parrots.
I don't mean that as a direct personal attack btw. I know it's inevitable that I am criticizing you but I just think it's such a monumentally stupid argument that I'm going to have to ask you to explain it to me, because clearly I'm missing something. Please explain how one member of Congress is responsible for laws that require the majority support from multiple branches of government.
In reality Joe can only be held accountable (and he should) for what he's advocated and voted on. He is often grilled most harshly by progressives for being "too moderate" and for negotiating with Republicans so often in his career where he had a reputation for being bipartisan.
If the logic is that Joe can be blamed for every single bad thing the government has done or not done in the last 40 years, then by the same logic he is responsible for all the victories including tax cuts, capturing Bin Ladin, fighting illegal immigration, giving more power back to states, improving mass transportation, reducing toxic waste, increasing market competition, increasing job training -- these are all things the US government did in the last 40 years. Are we giving Joe Biden credit for all that just because he was in Congress? Lol obviously that is a dumb take.
Not to mention that we will find that Biden uses them, too. Oops
This classic whataboutism failed as #1 he does not use it to anywhere near the same extent as Trump and lol Trump campaigned on ending those loopholes but completely and utterly failed. Is ya Islamophobic boy Trump a brazen liar who had no interest in keeping his word, or just such a weak ass loser of a president that he couldn't accomplish what he promised? Tell us :)
Created:
-->
@secularmerlin
Well 3RU7AL decided to get pedantic about it. Good luck he is a much more skilled interlocutor and logician than I am.
He's just replied to me with a bunch of fallacies for reasons that remain unclear. I don't need luck but thanks :)
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I said: People get heart disease from sugar - are bakers evil for selling you delicious cakes?
You replied with: It might be "evil" for our tax dollars to be leveraged in order to subsidize the sugar industry.
I wasn't talking about subsidies nor what they incentivize. I was asking (in response to cigarette sellers selling something potentially harmful) if bakers selling something potentially harmful also made them evil. You replied with a red herring about government. I didn't give an opinion on what I thought the role of government should be and I never said that a luxurious poison should be subsidized. I was asking about the role of personal responsibility in the market and remarking that almost everything has cost-benefits.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
How does NYT know Trump's assets?
Apparently they have a source who gave them his tax returns, so they only know what he reported on his taxes.
Maybe they know more. You're the one saying they are misrepresenting but refuse to say how or why lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Lol are you trolling? Let's try this one more time. You think the NYT is misrepresenting Trump's assets. That could only mean one of the following: that the NYT knows Trump is even richer with more assets, yet downplayed his wealth (even though the entire point of their expose was to highlight how egregious $750 in income taxes is for an alleged billionaire) - OR - you think the NYT knows Trump has less assets and they want to protect his reputation instead of expose him? It could only be one of these two things. If you're making the claim that the NYT is misrepresenting Trump's assets then give me your opinion on whether you think the NYT is hiding the fact that Trump is richer or Trump is poorer.
I have no idea what Trump's wealth is because I only know what was presented by the NYT. I'm not his accountant.
I'm asking you whether you think the NYT is hiding the fact that Trump is actually richer or actually poorer. You're the one who made the claim that the NYT's reporting can't be trusted. So which do you think it is? This is not a trick question. There's no right answer and if there is we can't prove it. I'm asking your opinion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
How would you go about determining Trump's assets and liabilities?Because you need to know both to know a person's wealth.
I don't have access to that so I can only venture a guess. My boss used to work for Trump so I've heard some things, but not about his personal finances obviously. I'm asking what you believe though. If the representations in the NYT are not accurate then it must be one of the following: Do you think he is even MORE rich and the NYT downplayed how rich he really is - because they don't want everyone to know only $750 in income taxes should be even more outrageous; or do you believe he isn't very rich at all and even the NYT wants to protect Trump's reputation?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Of course, it can be both. Visual Media has been pushing conflicting narratives since it started being profitable.
I'll rephrase again. You think the NYT is misrepresenting Trump's assets. Do you think he is actually richer or poorer than the NYT reported? He cannot be both richer and poorer at the same time. That violates the law of non contradiction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
His lawyers will explain why his accountants are responsible for a lot of that. I think for election purposes he should have to answer for himself: what is HE doing to promote change to the loopholes, and if nothing, why not? Why did he fail so spectacularly on that campaign promise? Is he incompetent? Indifferent? Pray tell.
Created:
Posted in:
Pie thinks that because someone's net worth decreased, they couldn't possibly engage in corruption. Lol. How fucking stupid.
I'm tempted to make so many corrections to really bad posts I've seen in this thread, but I think this is one subject I'll keep quiet on. All the people from DDO already doxxed me so they could tell you this is actually my area of expertise. I work in Donald Trump's industry (NYC commercial real estate) and figuring out how to leverage assets, utilize tax structures and maximize returns is like... what I do. I'ma just keep quiet.
What I will say is while we shouldn't blame Trump at all for utilizing every possible loophole he can (he's not even the one doing his taxes bruh) the question is: Does Trump agree with these loopholes, and if not, what is he doing to change them? He bragged about his expertise in avoiding taxes and how he knew everything about "how to cheat the system" as a businessman, so he promised to change it. Well nothing changed. That should be the topic for Trump to discuss - why hasn't he gotten Congress to do dick about this?
He campaigned on hedge funds paying their share of taxes. He campaigned on ending the carried interest tax perk. He campaigned on ending so many loopholes that are absolutely still there. So we should be asking Trump: are you a liar or just completely incompetent at getting things done for the good of the American people, and not just the Wall Street elites? Let him answer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
it depends on what narrative the media wants to push to manufacture the outrage that drives TV media ratings.
They already released the findings and you said they can't be trusted. Do you think Trump is richer than the NYT says he is and actually avoiding more taxes than previously reported, or do you believe he is in more financial dire straits than he would like everyone to believe with a lot of his wealth being a façade? It can't be both.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
All of this may be true, but there is no possible way a TV reporter will reliably tell you what Trump's assets are.
Do you think the media would want him to look more rich or less rich and why?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Are you conflating luxury with necessity?
Oil is the cheapest way to provide heat but it's not the only way. Furthermore transportation is arguably a necessity, so if necessities justify oil subsidies you could make a case for why people need to move around.
I asked if bakers were evil for supplying delicious cake. Are you saying it's only evil if government helps the bakers?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
It might be "evil" for our tax dollars to be leveraged in order to subsidize the sugar industry.
Eh, that's a stretch and a stretch from the original question as well. I wonder: is the government evil for subsidizing Big Oil so poor people can have heat?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Wrong. What Trump asked for was a travel ban against six countries, none of which are 100% Muslims. He targeted those countries because they would not participate in vetting their own citizens who demonstrated excessive disregard for US policy. It was a nation ban, not a religious discrimination. Get your facts straight.
Wrong. He called for a "TOTAL AND COMPLETE SHUT DOWN OF MUSLIMS ENTERING THE UNITED STATES" in December of 2015, and he said similar things many times. His campaign doubled down on it calling it "common sense" which Trump repeated on Fox News and elsewhere. You can Google it for yourself. The only reason I'm presenting this YouTube clip to you is because I want to embarrass you after you had the audacity to speak to me in a condescending tone like that about how "wrong" I was when you are so blatantly and brazenly wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@whiteflame
@MisterChris
@skittlez09
@Crocodile
I said I’d trust him more than you. Its perfectly logical you’re both Town or both Scum
They're not both scum but I won't get into why. I want input from the others before saying anything else.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BearMan
I picked it out of random.
How/why is that useful for town?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BearMan
Why did you track whiteflame over the people with the same activity level as his?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
Why did you investigate BearMan?
Created:
Posted in:
I think we should look into danielle also, but she's been pretty townie, but I won't discount her.
Tbh I would sus me based on warren's death, but I can't get past the fact that both Speed and BearMan lived - especially since neither one of them was role blocked. There was nothing about what you said yesterday that suggested you had a role with a night action for the mafia to fear your role over a cop role. Even if they have a GF and were less worrisome about the Cop, they didn't worry about the tracker either? Nah. I'm finding it more and more hard to believe both Speed and Bear are town. I feel like Speed had better targets than Bear as well. At least one of them is scum imo, but I don't wanna harp on that cuz it'll appear tunneling and because it may limit or direct where this day phase goes which isn't my intent. I'd like to hear from other people. Some are being too quiet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
So Mafia now has a safe claim even if they didn’t have one before. We should consider any claim henceforth as suspicious regardless of how logical it sounds
Agree but I was wary of DP 1 claims as well. It would be very unfair for mafia to have no idea of what's going on DP1. They could easily get caught not knowing theme or w/e when pressed for a claim, so I'm confident Supa gave at least 1 fake claim unless he is a bastard mod.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
I'd like to hear more from MisterChris.
Created:
Posted in:
There were two POWER ROLE claims last day phase, and neither one of them was from warren. I was also the most talkative, and Luna's role would make the mafia most wary if they knew he was telling the truth (I believe he is not mafia because a lynchproof role would be insanely OP, so he's either town or TP and I'm not worrying about a TP). It is weird though that Luna initially refused to full claim last day phase in post #83, but then later said he would. It's possible Luna isn't being entirely truthful about his role, but I don't wanna focus on it too much tbh.
I wanna focus on the fact that warren was deliberately killed so mafia could Janitor him. But going after warren makes no sense. They should have gone after Speed or BearMan. I suspect Speed will claim to be role blocked and of course we don't know if that's true. But if they RB Speed and assumed Doc would be on Speed -- or me, since Luna explicitly asked Doc to be on me before Speed role claimed -- then mafia should have killed BearMan last night.
It also makes no sense that BearMan would track whiteflame. Sure whiteflame was relatively quiet last DP (BearMan's excuse was that "If he was mafia, and he wasn't under suspicion, it would perfectly easy for him to do an NK") but so was Chris, Crocodile, skittlez, Pie and Parrot to the same extent. Granted Parrot claimed Vanilla but I find it odd that BearMan would choose whiteflame.
I feel like I don't believe both Speed and BearMan are town but let's see where the day phase goes. Btw one reason scum might have targeted warren for death is because he was the most vocally knowledgeable about the theme iirc. I do remember warren voting BearMan at some point and he was questioning BearMan's character + role claim. Not sure if that means anything. It could be an attempt to frame BearMan.
I think scum was a lil threatened by warren's knowledge though and prob assumed the mod would give him a decent role. That seems like something a more considerate mafia player would do as opposed to a novice player. Nonetheless I know warren's kill was very deliberate and scum had a plan there, whether it was framing someone or trying to make it look sus that I was still alive or something. But yeah Speed, BearMan and Luna all being alive makes no sense. I think one of them is scum but I don't see how Luna could be a lynchproof mafioso, so.
Created:
Posted in:
Does Indonesia fund Hamas more than Iran?
Dunno. I stopped following Middle Eastern politics in like 2015. It became too much for me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
yay dani made it to dp2!
I'm thrilled! But is that all you have to say about it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
So realistically, Under what scenario can you imagine Trump declaring Indonesia a security threat to the USA?
I can't see him doing so and never said he would. Maybe if he wanted to retaliate against them for something having to do with his real estate business or China? Most realistically my guess would be something having to do with our partnership with Israel, since Indonesia is one of Palestine's biggest supporters and we know how Trump feels about Palestine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
So we should legally let in people that can't support themselves into the welfare nation known as the USA. Good to know.
Lol another straw man. I didn't say that either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
My comment wasn't directed at Trump.My comment was directed at your assertion that Trump could ban All Muslims across the planet including Indonesian Muslims, which he clearly is not allowed to do.Indonesia isn't comprised of nations that pose any threat to the USA. Do you know something about Indonesia that I do not?
True. You wisely chose to ignore every one of my other points - since they are all accurate - to focus on the one you found to be factually incorrect. That's fair since I am a stickler for accuracy as you know :) But now you are straw manning me to say I asserted Trump could ban ALL Muslims across the planet, and I can't have that. What I actually said was "Trump can unilaterally do things like ban immigrants from Muslim countries though" which is absolutely true as evidenced by the Supreme Court upholding his travel ban. So note your "gotcha" attempt is predicated on a misrepresentation of what I said, and it was still wrong.
What the Supreme Court said is that the President has the power to ban people for security purposes because that is within his power as POTUS, and because this ban was not explicitly based on religion (despite Trump saying publicly we should ban Muslims dozens and dozens of times along with other anti Muslim rhetoric). The President can ban people for security purposes from whichever country he pleases so long as it is not based on something like religion. But my statement that he can unilaterally ban immigrants from Muslim countries, which were my exact words, is absolutely true and that is exactly what he did. I don't have to prove Trump can ban all Muslims across the planet because I never said that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Trump shouldn't make it easy for people who can't support themselves to immigrate legally. It's a burden on the taxpayer. If a group of Democrats want to donate their own time and money privately sponsoring people from shithole countries, Trump can't do a damn thing about that. If we didn't live in a welfare state, I would be all for open borders. We can eliminate welfare tomorrow and I will be the first one in line to tear down TrumpyWall.
# 1 Illegal immigrants don't qualify for welfare. #2 Trump nor his constituents advocate letting immigrants in with the expectation that they get no welfare whatsoever, so that is a ridiculous albeit clever cop out as evidenced by #3 which that Trump has explicitly stated he does not want an immigrant workforce. Period. He, like protectionist and anti capitalist Bernie Sanders, believe immigrants drive down wages of the American workers (which is true) and therefore they do not want immigrants. It has nothing whatsoever to do with welfare. It has to do with their desire to protect American jobs and wages. There's also #4 which is Trump's racism evidenced by rhetoric and tweets; there's no denying the racism of his base at the very least.
Created: