WhitewalkerInPhilly

...I am going to screencap the part where you said that Fox News is not a fair and worthwhile source. Just for the record. How about NPR News? Pretty much the most straight line, centrist reporting? (https://www.allsides.com/news-source/npr-media-bias) https://www.npr.org/2019/01/09/683474397/7-takeaways-from-president-trumps-oval-office-address https://www.npr.org/2019/01/08/683205814/fact-check-trumps-oval-office-pitch-for-a-border-wall

It's the only way I see anyone who isn't Republican would see a "crisis". Of course immigration needs fixing, but come on...a continual drop in crossings since 2006? Well over a decade? Zero terrorists crossing the Southern border, our of 4000 caught a year? Drugs coming...through legal checkpoints, rather than where the wall would protect? (according to the DEA) https://www.npr.org/2019/01/08/683205814/fact-check-trumps-oval-office-pitch-for-a-border-wall Locking kids up in cages, on the other hand...

Well, because of your poor syntax, I am not sure of which you mean: that is was a loss for both sides, or that I felt dumber by watching. I can, in fact, provide both. Here is the collection of the ones where pundits were...shall we say mixed: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/facing-pressure-networks-fact-check-trump-speech/2019/01/08/9ee81efc-13c3-11e9-ab79-30cd4f7926f2_story.html?utm_term=.47281e3f703b Here in particular is one from Fox News: Regarding that it was a wash: Now, as to the parts that made my brain hurt. In particular, the line from the president: "this situation could be solved in a 45 minute meeting" Mostly because...it's true. The government shutdown could be finished in 45 minutes. The House just passed a bunch of spending bills to reopen the government. The Senate, back in 2018, passed those measures by unanimous vote. All that would be necessary to reopen the government would be for Trump to sign in, and then go about brokering a deal to get more border wall funding. Hell, I think there's a good chance that if this continues much longer, the House can get a 2/3rds majority for a veto override. And, again, unanimous Senate passage so we could solve it easily if Trump says "ok, I'll finish off the shutdown I chose to own" or Republican House leadership releases their people to vote their conscience, this would be over in a heartbeat.

Really? Because from all the reactions come this morning it's that it was a loss for both. It certainly has for my brainstem. I feel dumber after watching all of Trump's speeches. It would certainly explain you lot.

Sorry, I had to step away because your lunacy was too much to take. Look, Trump called all immigrants from Mexico rapists. You asked for specific evidence, I provided it in quote and video form. Now about this "If "some good" people are in a group, can that entire group be "all bad"? " bit? Well, it's rather simple: Trump has admitted to forcefully grabbing women's genetalia. His ex-wife has stated that he "Made Me Feel ‘Violated’ During Sex" He endorsed Roy Moore, the man banned from a shopping mall for his pedophilic tendencies. Trump nominated a man who has multiple accusations of sexual assault to the Supreme Court. Simply put, it seems that Donald Trump does not think that rape disqualifies people from being "good people" It explains a lot, doesn't it?

... Dude. I mean, I suppose that it makes sense that modern Republicans have a hard time parsing the context of five to seven sentences into a full thought. But this is just sad...

Right...I'm talking to the group where " I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the *****. You can do anything" is the preferred joke and not horribly rape-y.

Speaking of cherry picking, let's hit literally the sentences before "When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you." It is literally the people coming from Mexico that he is describing. Blanket statement. I don't know how you can be that willfully ignorant, but here we are.

Dude, I posted the entire effin quote. How much more context do you need? ... Right. I need to remind myself about your "completely ignoring objective reality" disorder.

Well that's funny, because from what he stated, he literally said all Mexicans coming from Mexico were rapists. Now, maybe he is just so unintelligible that he didn't mean that, but: A) If he is that unintelligible, it should have disqualified him from the jump B) It means that people elected him thinking he said that C) Considering his record, he probably meant that

…. "They're rapists" No "some are rapists". No "We need a wall to deter human trafficking" It was simply stating that the people coming from Mexico and South America are thus: "They are rapists." I was right about the apart about you rejecting objective reality.

How about video? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/06/16/trump_mexico_not_sending_us_their_best_criminals_drug_dealers_and_rapists_are_crossing_border.html But just to be safe, here is the full quote Now the bold emphasis is my own, but this was the man ANNOUNCING HIS CANDIDACY. And not only is he stating that crime, drugs and rape is coming from immigrants, he is also throwing in this patented "I bet Middle Easterners are in there too!" although he admits he has zero evidence. I don't know why I bother. You are going to reject objective reality like you always do.

...and you think that what she's done since winning has, in any way...decreased her chances for reelection? It's been 26 years since the district voted Republican. I am going to take a wild guess that you haven't been to Astoria lately. I've been there, and people there have set up ICE warnings through social media. There's a reason why it kicked out an establishment Centrist. It's young, urban, and diverse, pretty much the anti-current Republican party (old, bum***** nowhere, old white men who like to yell at people of color on TV). I mean, miracles happen. But man... You talk about Trump living in liberal's heads rent free? ACO is your version of that.

Dude. Her district in the Bronx and includes Astoria in Queens. Until she won her primary, it's hard to imagine a more hardline working class Democratic district. She is going nowhere for the next couple of years, unless she decides to try for Senate.

You might not like her politics, or think she's naïve, but man, she has a sense of humor. I will also second the "I would rather see her dancing than Maxine Waters or Nancy Pelosi"

Well, it's a shame because I love puns. But man, there is zero way that made any sense in Vietnamese, and was purely done for the wordplay. At least it's better than Miso Hani.

Amen. I think this is something we can all agree on.

Dude, look at who started this thread.

To be fair, Trumps has done more than enough on his own to destroy his presidency. The sum total of scandals and corruption just so far should have been the death knell for anyone else. Here's the thing though. Though we might disagree on how to proceed, I don't think that anybody believes that there aren't necessary changes to the immigration system. Hell, even I, dubbed "NPC" by certain dubious minds, acknowledge that there has to be updates and changes to our border security. We need changes, and if we need to take some ideas from both sides of the aisle to get it done, I am ok with that. The problem is that the sticking point is on something that solves none of these problems. The Wall is a stupid, costly object that doesn't solve the problem it's supposed to solve. If you wanted to say, invest $ 5 billion into increased funding for intelligence services, homeland security, DEA and port authority, I would rubber stamp that. But it doesn't solve the problems that are already woven into our economy and communities. And sadly, Trump already walked away from a deal for FULL wall funding that also fixed the latter.

Well hell. The FA and draft market for WR looks pretty wretched.

Yeah. "Oh what, you want to bring up the multiple Pulitzer prize winning news sources independent fact checkers? Everyone knows that facts have a known anti-Trump bias!!!" I don't think that I have seen anyone, ANYONE criticizing Trump against being against human trafficking. It's just that a lot of people think that his ideas as to how to stop them are hideously ineffective stunts that serve only to stoke his fanbase. It's absolutely reasonable to be against something, and criticize how the people in charge are trying to address it. It's like being against communism and going, "Hey, maybe this Joe McCarthy is getting a bit out of hand" or being against heroin and going "maybe locking up potheads isn't helping".

Well, we've seen a sharp mental decline in DJT starting when he wanted to be involved with politics, but that might just be him.

Fair enough, but when do we start giving them money for treating PTSD or school shooting survivors? https://www.complex.com/life/2016/11/veterans-day-millennials-video-games-ptsd Seriously, take a read. For vets, video games are excellent therapeutic tools. They have become so immersive and realistic that developers spend incredible amounts of time trying to make their games look and sound like the real thing, and they can be used in therapy. For people trying to process traumatic events, this gives them a bit of the same mentality that they have adopted, but they can turn it off with games of less realism. If you want to open this up, how about you actually concede the benefits. Now, if this is turning into "THEM THERE KIDS WITH THEIR FORTNITE AND THEIR NEW SPEAK AND I DON'T LIKE IT" this is for you

I also don't rattle off nonsensical drivel, but hey, you do you.

I'm at work, so I can't flip on the tv.