The right is eating itself. Paul Ryan Roast Trump.

Ruprecht said:
I'm not American, so I'm more interested in trade and foreign policy really. Thankfully it doesn't look like Trump's going through with any of the nonsense he said/tweeted about trade wars, nukes or NATO, but I'm far from convinced he's any better than Hillary.
Just from a standpoint of sheer political incompetence.
Click to expand...




Do you really think the situation in Syria, or Isis being on the brink of defeat, would be the same under Hillary???


I don't.
 
IngaVovchanchyn said:
This. Trump is a life long Manhattan liberal who takes the sensible position that we ought to control our borders. Dems missed a huge chance to co-opt his presidency by throwing an extended political tantrum when Clinton lost.
Click to expand...


Yup, he's a 90's democrat. They're called republicans now.
 
SBJJ said:
He's gonna release the JFK files. Right is gonna hate that
Click to expand...

What is your reasoning here? I tend to agree with the rest of your post. I simply don't see the partisan angle on the JFK files.
 
b-hop said:
If the owners and great entrepreneurs pay less taxes they could invest more into the company create wealth and jobs, this is good for all people.

The notion the great self-made man must pay less percentage of taxes than the worker is okay by me, and im a ordenary worker.

And yes reducing and eliminate enveronmental regulations helps the manufacturing industry therefore the people too.
Click to expand...
It’s just not true, though. Businesses invest based on need, which is largely driven by forecasted demand and innovation. If you lower taxes and they don’t need more people or equipment they won’t spend it.

As for regulation I’d prefer clean air and water, thanks.
 
HomerThompson said:
Why?
Click to expand...



Mostly because she'd have likely continued to support AQ and Isis to depose Assad.


Let's be honest, terrorist attacks were happening every couple weeks in Europe leading up to Trumps election. There's been a quite noticeable decrease in terrorist activity.
 
bobgeese said:
Do you really think the situation in Syria, or Isis being on the brink of defeat, would be the same under Hillary???


I don't.
Click to expand...

Isis being on the brink of defeat, yes. Militarily there hasn't really been a shift there (if anything, Hillary might actually have been more aggressive. Her hawkishness was one of my biggest problems with her potential presidency).
Hillary's top foreign policy wonk was Jake Sullivan. He was largely the architect of the Iran deal, so I think we've seen some regression in the foreign policy situation already.
 
Ruprecht said:
Isis being on the brink of defeat, yes. Militarily there hasn't really been a shift there (if anything, Hillary might actually have been more aggressive. Her hawkishness was one of my biggest problems with her potential presidency).
Hillary's top foreign policy wonk was Jake Sullivan. He was largely the architect of the Iran deal, so I think we've seen some regression in the foreign policy situation already.
Click to expand...



So, is this the same Hillary that was in charge of the state department when they were running guns from Libya into Syria???

Or are you one of the people who still deny the obama administration was supporting the extremists against Assad?

Hillary wasn't just going to change course.

Come on now...
 
kpt018 said:
It’s just not true, though. Businesses invest based on need, which is largely driven by forecasted demand and innovation. If you lower taxes and they don’t need more people or equipment they won’t spend it.

As for regulation I’d prefer clean air and water, thanks.
Click to expand...
People like to expand their business and make more money, for that they need more workers and equipment.

As far regulation i prefer also clean air and water, and by that should not penalize manufacturing industry. Its require to developed better use of clean process.
 
bobgeese said:
So, is this the same Hillary that was in charge of the state department when they were running guns from Libya into Syria???

Or are you one of the people who still deny the obama administration was supporting the extremists against Assad?

Hillary wasn't just going to change course.

Come on now...
Click to expand...

Well the question of Assad isn't the same as whether ISIS would still be on the brink of defeat.
Trump's public position on Assad has actually shifted since he became president, and he's definitely now on the side that Assad has to go.
Militarily, things really haven't changed.
Would Hillary have been more hawkish? Possibly.
At the moment of course we have Trump's sabre rattling over North Korea thrown into the mix, and if that turns out to be just twitter nonsense, it seriously undercuts the administration's ability to negotiate and act on foreign policy (as he undercut Tillerson).
 
bobgeese said:
Mostly because she'd have likely continued to support AQ and Isis to depose Assad.


Let's be honest, terrorist attacks were happening every couple weeks in Europe leading up to Trumps election. There's been a quite noticeable decrease in terrorist activity.
Click to expand...
The women and Obama they are responsible for the Arab Spring, that cause nothing more than disaster of people being kill, and huge wave of illegal people in Europe and that causes a crisis in our allies.
 
Ruprecht said:
Well the question of Assad isn't the same as whether ISIS would still be on the brink of defeat.
Trump's public position on Assad has actually shifted since he became president, and he's definitely now on the side that Assad has to go.
Militarily, things really haven't changed.
Would Hillary have been more hawkish? Possibly.
At the moment of course we have Trump's sabre rattling over North Korea thrown into the mix, and if that turns out to be just twitter nonsense, it seriously undercuts the administrations ability to negotiate and act on foreign policy (as he undercut Tillerson).
Click to expand...


So, you either have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation, or you're deliberately ducking the obvious. So, I'm going to make the question very clear.

Are you stating that you believe Hillary would have stopped supporting the multiple anti Assad groups?

I don't, I believe we'd be mired in conflict there for a long time, with the potential for escalation of the situation. You should at very least give the Trump administration some credit in that regard.


LOL at NK sabre rattling amounting to anything. Everything they're doing is NK 101 and they've been doing it for decades. Trump will prove they're a paper tiger.
 
bobgeese said:
Child care tax credit I believe.



Trump is a 90's democrat. Problem is, they're called republicans now.
Click to expand...
That is lunacy unless you just started following politics
 
bobgeese said:
So, you either have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation, or you're deliberately ducking the obvious. So, I'm going to make the question very clear.

Are you stating that you believe Hillary would have stopped supporting the multiple anti Assad groups?

I don't, I believe we'd be mired in conflict there for a long time, with the potential for escalation of the situation. You should at very least give the Trump administration some credit in that regard.


LOL at NK sabre rattling amounting to anything. Everything they're doing is NK 101 and they've been doing it for decades. Trump will prove they're a paper tiger.
Click to expand...

You're still supporting multiple, anti-assad groups (although mostly the SDF). In fact policy on supporting the Kurds while telling them to cool their claims of independence hasn't changed at all.
Sure, I think Hillary would have probably continued with the weapons program Trump discontinued, but I don't think that's had a major effect. The program never provided enough to the rebels for them to win, it only spun out the duration of the war.

You seem to miss the point about the NK sabre rattling. Trump has undercut his own administrations ability to negotiate. It was a major act of incompetence. Even more so if he does it and then there's no action.
 
44nutman said:
The worst roast of Trump
Click to expand...

As bad as this was, I gotta give it up to the Sitch for keeping his poise.
I mean every single joke went straight in the toilet but he just kept on going.
 
Ruprecht said:
You're still supporting multiple, anti-assad groups. In fact policy on supporting the Kurds while telling them to cool their claims of independence hasn't changed at all.
Sure, I think Hillary would have probably continued with the weapons program Trump discontinued, but I don't think that's had a major effect.

You seem to miss the point about the NK sabre rattling. Trump has undercut his own administrations ability to negotiate. It was a major act of incompetence. Even more so if he does it and then there's no action.
Click to expand...




There is no negotiating with NK. There never has been.


Read through this excellent article (everyone should), you'll see a very clear pattern emerge. We can not continue to follow this same path.

Here's the difference now, NK's are reaching out to republican think tanks to "help them figure out Trump". We finally have a guy that doesn't shake in his boots at NK sabre rattling. Instead, he sabre rattles twice as loud. They can't figure out why their same old tactics aren't working.



The reality of the NK situation, isn't pretty. They have nukes, had em a long time. There is no stopping their program. We can only, punk them on the world stage, letting everyone know they're all talk and no action. Cripple their country with sanctions until some man who is starving to death with nothing else to lose, takes the shot.

The wild card is China. How much pressure are they willing to put on, we'll have to wait and see.

But if you think inviting them to the table for "constructive talks" for the 50th time is going to work...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,654
Messages
55,432,362
Members
174,775
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top