Actually he has bragged about never drinking, despite lending his name to a brand of vodka.
Thatâs what happens when he stops doing math and starts having opinions.
One state examination in the late 1980s of the New York City construction industry concluded that âofficial corruption is part of an environment in which developers and contractors cultivate and seek favors from public officials at all levels.â
Trump gave so generously to political campaigns that he sometimes lost track of the amounts, documents show. In 1985 alone, he contributed about $150,000 to local candidates, the equivalent of $330,000 today.
Officials with the New York State Organized Crime Task Force later said that Trump, while not breaking any laws, âcircumventedâ state limits on individual and corporate contributions âby spreading his payments among eighteen subsidiary companies.â
John Oliver plays Drumpfâs statements to the Fox folks that the families of suspected terrorists must be killed.
Killing family members of enemy combatants goes way beyond an international intervention. As Oliver noted â without laughing â thatâs the probable GOP nominee for President of the United States stating his intention to commit a war crime.
Not a secret bombing like Nixon or covert arms for hostages like Reagan. Thatâs the GOP advocating openly to commit war crimes.
Well then fuck it, needs kicking if itâs down.
I wonder howâd it look outlook wise if a campaign started specifically to dismantle the 2-party system, and had as itâs utility enough popular support to convince Sanders AND Bloomberg to run if the busted-ass system produces Clinton-Trump in itâs dying spasms?
Trump Vs Clinton Vs Sanders Vs Bloomberg
TV worth watching!
Isnât 1968 a better year for you and @daneel to use for comparison to this election?
Clinton would be in Nixonâs role, freighted with controversy and past scandal but facing a fractured New Deal coalition, unable to unify any more â even behind a sitting president.
Heh-heh. He was looking pretty good to me though in 1999.
Hell, Iâll vote for McCarthy too. Kennedy, at a push (much as I personally dislike the Kennedys).
LBJ can do one. Donât want him.
Can we persevere with the DSA caucusing with dems on local issues and school board and mayoral races? Work cooperatively and locally for the long haul.
Up here itâs taken about a million years to develop a third party that has been able to gain enough support to hold the balance of power occasionally in minority governments, and in the parliament preceding this one weâre in now finally achieved official opposition status.
But itâs hella worthwhile having a third party at all if it can gain seats here and there. Forces the two status quo parties to consider stuff they wouldnât otherwise, like UHC and maybe not going to war at absolutely every opportunity, or at least debating it first. Gainign seats is easiest in interesting times, and if things go as they seem to be, interesting times are nigh in the US (like, more interesting than usual, in the negative sense)
School Boards are fertile ground, at least they have been for the anti-progressive sorts.
Well, I wasnât making the comparison in the first place. I was actually thinking the 1972 election wasnât really Nixonâs to lose because his shenanigans hadnât been brought to light yet and most Americans went with the status quo. I know that my Republican parents did not vote for him because my reporter-father and nurse-mother thought Nixon was truly unhinged, but they were in the minority. However, I have a clear memory of many Democrats in town who said, âIf itâs not brokenâŚâ and had Nixon signs prominently displayed.
Itâs fun to remember there was a time when Democrats were living more or less happily in Tulare County!
Itâs still a lot of catching up work in the western U.S. â and when would it ever stop feeling that way? Who knows. Itâs good to hear when progress is made in other places.
Well, there werenât a ton of them and Iâm hesitant to call them good Democratsâmaybe good olâboys southern type? I mean, my dad was RINO and my mom was, too (she liked the Ohio Republicans that she grew up with, but LOVED Muskie). But I know three other radical leftie Democrat families who probably didnât vote Nixon.
Nope.
We will dump Drumpf.
Joseph, Eugene, or Jenny?
Or Charlie? (The only candidate more wooden than John Kerry!)
Because he was a real hero, who understood how gauche it was to talk of his heroics. My Nazi killing-machine uncle was the same. We didnât learn of his heroics until nearly 70 years after the fact.
Obviously there are systemic reasons behind the momentum of the Trump train. Can anyone explain them to me in a calm and rational manner.
[quote=âhello_friends, post:44, topic:74394, full:trueâ]Killing family members of enemy combatants goes way beyond an international intervention. As Oliver noted â without laughing â thatâs the probable GOP nominee for President of the United States stating his intention to commit a war crime.
Not a secret bombing like Nixon or covert arms for hostages like Reagan. Thatâs the GOP advocating openly to commit war crimes.
[/quote]
The GOP has been advocating for (and committing) war crimes constantly since 9/11. Torture, remember? And yet, still nobody held responsible.
Yeah for me Trump is a deal maker, not an operator. He doesnât follow through and I doubt he will stand for 18 hour working days split by his staff into 15 minute slots. He will want to be out buying stuff, not dealing with all that shit.
A repeat of a Bill Clinton presidency or TrumpâŚthat is an easy choice for Clinton.
Trump has put forth very few policies. The ones heâs been clear on is attacking immigrants, tax cuts for the rich, and bringing back torture. Itâs insane to look at that and project on to it progressive fantasies about reform of campaign finance. What Congress, in an electorate that votes for Trump, is going to pass a big campaign finance bill?
A third of people are arseholes is a good place to start when figuring out where that thumb came from.