Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Who is believeable, Trump or Sanders?

Who is believeable, Trump or Sanders?

+4
boards of FL
Hospital Bob
2seaoat
Wordslinger
8 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Who is believable?

Who is believeable, Trump or Sanders? I_vote_lcap20%Who is believeable, Trump or Sanders? I_vote_rcap 20% [ 2 ]
Who is believeable, Trump or Sanders? I_vote_lcap80%Who is believeable, Trump or Sanders? I_vote_rcap 80% [ 8 ]
Total Votes : 10


Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Vote on it.

2seaoat



If turnouts continue to be large, it will not matter. The political revolution has begun. One old guy telling the truth. Rumpled clothes and rumpled hair, but the intellect to actually make necessary changes in America.....not by himself but with massive turnout which will change the senate, and change the house to being ever closer to a democratic majority......fifty seat swing and the revolution will begin.......and it cannot start soon enough. What I heard old white Republicans saying about Bernie in Navarre yesterday shocked me. The man is connecting with young and old, and if Hillary does win the primary, the revolution will still continue as people know who is responsible for the theft of this great nation.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Unfortunately, nothing will change until House district gerrymandering is addressed. Until that happens, we will have bat-shit crazy republicans controlling the house from impenetrable districts.


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:If turnouts continue to be large, it will not matter. The political revolution has begun. One old guy telling the truth. Rumpled clothes and rumpled hair, but the intellect to actually make necessary changes in America.....not by himself but with massive turnout which will change the senate, and change the house to being ever closer to a democratic majority......fifty seat swing and the revolution will begin.......and it cannot start soon enough. What I heard old white Republicans saying about Bernie in Navarre yesterday shocked me. The man is connecting with young and old, and if Hillary does win the primary, the revolution will still continue as people know who is responsible for the theft of this great nation.

The fix is in from the democratic establishment... the super delegates are and will tow the line for hillary.

Bernie has at best shifted the dialogue and talkingpoints... which may (should) prove a liability in the gen election.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Pkrbum: We know who you don't like for President. Who do you like? (Not including Attila-the-Hun)

Guest


Guest

I'm undecided. I'll concede that I don't necessarily like any of them... certainly not in whole.

Markle

Markle

Bob wrote:You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

Both President Reagan and President Clinton were easily able to work with members of the opposite party.

Why is it impossible for Lame Duck President Obama to work with Republicans?

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Markle wrote:
Bob wrote:You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

Both President Reagan and President Clinton were easily able to work with members of the opposite party.

Why is it impossible for Lame Duck President Obama to work with Republicans?

Simple: Just after Obama's 1st inauguration, the republican leader of the senate stated that the primary objective of the republican party was to replace Obama. And from that moment till now, the republicans in congress have done all they could do to stymie anything the president wanted to do -- including by the way -- some ideas that had been initially promulgated by the republicans.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Markle wrote:
Bob wrote:You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

Both President Reagan and President Clinton were easily able to work with members of the opposite party.

Why is it impossible for Lame Duck President Obama to work with Republicans?

Because it's a different time and a different Congress,  Markle.
Today the Congress is as divided as at any time since the Civil War.
Simply because the two political parties are at war with each other.
There is no President on either side who can overcome that.

Guest


Guest

Bob wrote:
Markle wrote:
Bob wrote:You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

Both President Reagan and President Clinton were easily able to work with members of the opposite party.

Why is it impossible for Lame Duck President Obama to work with Republicans?

Because it's a different time and a different Congress,  Markle.
Today the Congress is as divided as at any time since the Civil War.
Simply because the two political parties are at war with each other.
There is no President on either side who can overcome that.

I disagree, Bob. A President with genuine character and a true love for moving this country forward - taking everyone with him/her not just the chosen few - will bring both sides together. I don't think we are truly as far apart as things are portrayed. Do we have both ends of the political spectrum on this forum? Yes. Does Boards bring us all together? No. However, given the right pairings of conversation even he and PKRBum were civil on a thread today. Shocked Same thing can happen in Washington. Everyone has to draw down the arrogance, the narcissism, and work toward the common good.

Not picking on Boards but I felt it was a good example. Laughing

Guest


Guest

Why would we want the congress to go along with a leftist ideologue that wants to expand the nanny state exponentially, spend more money by magnitudes, and regulate what's left of our production and energy completely out of business?

Y'all can call that obstruction or anything else you want... I call it good work. If he had realistic ideas they'd listen.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

SheWrites wrote:
Bob wrote:
Markle wrote:
Bob wrote:You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

Both President Reagan and President Clinton were easily able to work with members of the opposite party.

Why is it impossible for Lame Duck President Obama to work with Republicans?

Because it's a different time and a different Congress,  Markle.
Today the Congress is as divided as at any time since the Civil War.
Simply because the two political parties are at war with each other.
There is no President on either side who can overcome that.

I disagree, Bob.  A President with genuine character and a true love for moving this country forward - taking everyone with him/her not just the chosen few - will bring both sides together.  I don't think we are truly as far apart as things are portrayed.  Do we have both ends of the political spectrum on this forum? Yes.  Does Boards bring us all together?  No.  However, given the right pairings of conversation even he and PKRBum were civil on a thread today. Shocked  Same thing can happen in Washington.  Everyone has to draw down the arrogance, the narcissism, and work toward the common good.
 

Do you think Trump or Sanders or Clinton or Cruz could do that?  Right now they're all we've got.

Markle

Markle

Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:
Bob wrote:You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

Both President Reagan and President Clinton were easily able to work with members of the opposite party.

Why is it impossible for Lame Duck President Obama to work with Republicans?

Simple:  Just after Obama's 1st inauguration, the republican leader of the senate stated that the primary objective of the republican party was to replace Obama.  And from that moment till now, the republicans in congress have done all they could do to stymie anything the president wanted to do -- including by the way -- some ideas that had been initially promulgated by the republicans.

Hmmmm...that's strange. Because Democrats were the majority in both the House and Senate. Lame Duck President Obama could do anything he wished.

Sal

Sal

Obama is a pragmatic centrist.

He twisted himself into a pretzel trying to accommodate the Repukes.

After seven years, he wized up.

Markle

Markle

Salinsky wrote: Obama is a pragmatic centrist.

He twisted himself into a pretzel trying to accommodate the Repukes.

After seven years, he wized up.
Who is believeable, Trump or Sanders? LOL_zpsrc5py0ql

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

SheWrites wrote:
Bob wrote:
Markle wrote:
Bob wrote:You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

Both President Reagan and President Clinton were easily able to work with members of the opposite party.

Why is it impossible for Lame Duck President Obama to work with Republicans?

Because it's a different time and a different Congress,  Markle.
Today the Congress is as divided as at any time since the Civil War.
Simply because the two political parties are at war with each other.
There is no President on either side who can overcome that.

I disagree, Bob.  A President with genuine character and a true love for moving this country forward - taking everyone with him/her not just the chosen few - will bring both sides together.  I don't think we are truly as far apart as things are portrayed.  Do we have both ends of the political spectrum on this forum? Yes.  Does Boards bring us all together?  No.  However, given the right pairings of conversation even he and PKRBum were civil on a thread today. Shocked  Same thing can happen in Washington.  Everyone has to draw down the arrogance, the narcissism, and work toward the common good.

Not picking on Boards but I felt it was a good example.  Laughing

Love for moving this country forward can't work in a nation poisoned by white racism. Obama made a tremendous effort to connect IN ANY WAY with the republicans after his first inauguration and was rebuffed totally -- because of republican racism. Face the truth woman, if Obama had been white the republicans would have worked with him on a number of issues. Reality

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Markle wrote:
Salinsky wrote:  Obama is a pragmatic centrist.

He twisted himself into a pretzel trying to accommodate the Repukes.

After seven years, he wized up.
Who is believeable, Trump or Sanders? LOL_zpsrc5py0ql


Once again, faced with truth from the other side with which he has no answer to articulate, Semi-sane Markle dives into his box of cliched graphics. Can you say DESPERATE?

Guest


Guest

PkrBum wrote:Why would we want the congress to go along with a leftist ideologue that wants to expand the nanny state exponentially, spend more money by magnitudes, and regulate what's left of our production and energy completely out of business?

Y'all can call that obstruction or anything else you want... I call it good work. If he had realistic ideas they'd listen.

And many times, standing firm in ideology is the exact thing that causes oppression - while they say they are standing against it in the name of freedom.

For the common good... It's more than one way. Time to think and get off the extreme partisan stupidity.

dumpcare



Bob wrote:
Markle wrote:
Bob wrote:You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

Both President Reagan and President Clinton were easily able to work with members of the opposite party.

Why is it impossible for Lame Duck President Obama to work with Republicans?

Because it's a different time and a different Congress,  Markle.
Today the Congress is as divided as at any time since the Civil War.
Simply because the two political parties are at war with each other.
There is no President on either side who can overcome that.

I tend to agree with most of this, it is different times and basically a republican party that is splintered today with really two faction's, the young and the old. If Obama had not have to deal with the young tea party and just the so called establishment things may have gotten done. It was the young gun hotshots disrupting the republican's, way before it's time because of the older leftover's. The age difference in congress and senate have been raised with their own values and came head to head with different decade's of other's value's. It may or may not ever work itself's out. Now the decade or two behind Rubio and Cruz do not feel like them.

Excuse me if this doesn't make since, I'm feeling the effects of some drugs I had to take before going for a minor procedure. Getting hard to spell lol.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

Markle wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:
Bob wrote:You do realize that as long as the two houses of Congress are divided,  either Sanders or Trump as President will not be able to do most of the things they're both promising voters they'll do.

Both President Reagan and President Clinton were easily able to work with members of the opposite party.

Why is it impossible for Lame Duck President Obama to work with Republicans?

Simple:  Just after Obama's 1st inauguration, the republican leader of the senate stated that the primary objective of the republican party was to replace Obama.  And from that moment till now, the republicans in congress have done all they could do to stymie anything the president wanted to do -- including by the way -- some ideas that had been initially promulgated by the republicans.

Hmmmm...that's strange.  Because Democrats were the majority in both the House and Senate.  Lame Duck President Obama could do anything he wished.

ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER LIE from MARKLE.

http://factleft.com/2012/01/31/the-myth-of-democratic-super-majority/

One of the standard Republican talking points is that the Democrats had a filibuster-proof, super majority for two years between 2008 and 2010. This talking point is usually trotted out when liberals complain that the Republicans filibustered virtually every piece of legislation proposed by Obama or the Democrats during Obama’s presidency. The implication is that Democrats had ample opportunity to pass legislation and that the reason they didn’t pass more legislation doesn’t have anything to do with the Republicans.

It is also used to counter any argument that Republican legislation, (passed during the six years of total Republican control,) has anything to do with today’s problems. They claim that the Democrats had a super majority for two years and passed all kinds of legislation, (over Republican objection and filibuster,) that completely undid all Republican policies and legislation, and this absolves them from today’s problems.

The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period, insufficient time to undo even a small portion of the legislation passed during six years of Republican control. Here are the details:

To define terms, a Filibuster-Proof Majority or Super Majority is the number of votes required to overcome a filibuster in the Senate. According to current Senate rules, 60 votes are required to overcome a filibuster.

Here is a time-line of the events after the 2008 election:

1. BALANCE BEFORE THE ELECTION. In 2007 – 2008 the balance in the Senate was 51-49 in favor of the Democrats. On top of that, there was a Republican president who would likely veto any legislation the Republicans didn’t like. Not exactly a super majority.

2. BIG GAIN IN 2008, BUT STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. Coming out the 2008 election, the Democrats made big gains, but they didn’t immediately get a Super Majority. The Minnesota Senate race required a recount and was not undecided for more than six months. During that time, Norm Coleman was still sitting in the Senate and the Balance 59-41, still not a Super Majority.

3. KENNEDY GRAVELY ILL. Teddy Kennedy casthis last vote in April and left Washington for good around the first of May. Technically he could come back to Washington vote on a pressing issue, but in actual fact, he never returned, even to vote on the Sotomayor confirmation. That left the balance in the Senate 58-41, two votes away from a super majority.

4. STILL NO SUPER MAJORITY. In July, Al Frankin was finally declared the winner and was sworn in on July 7th, 2009, so the Democrats finally had a Super Majority of 60-40 six and one-half months into the year. However, by this point, Kennedy was unable to return to Washington even to participate in the Health Care debate, so it was only a technical super majority because Kennedy could no longer vote and the Senate does not allow proxies. Now the actual actual balance of voting members was 59-40 not enough to overcome a Republican filibuster.

5. SENATE IS IN RECESS. Even if Kennedy were able to vote, the Senate went into summer recess three weeks later, from August 7th to September 8th.

6. KENNEDY DIES. Six weeks later, on Aug 26, 2009 Teddy Kennedy died, putting the balance at 59-40. Now the Democrats don’t even have technical super majority.

7. FINALLY, A SUPER MAJORITY! Kennedy’s replacement was sworn in on September 25, 2009, finally making the majority 60-40, just enough for a super majority.

8. SENATE ADJOURNS. However the Senate adjourned for the year on October 9th, only providing 11 working days of super majority, from September 25th to October 9th.

9. SPECIAL SESSIONS. During October, November and December, the Senate had several special sessions to deal with final passage of ACA and Budget appropriations.

October = 13th – 15th, 20th – 22nd, 27th, 29th = 8 days
November = 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th 16th, 17th, 19th, 21st = 8 days
December = 1st, 3rd - 8th, 10th – 13th, 15th – 18th, 19th, 21st – 24th = 20 days

Total Special Session Days = 36.

8. SCOTT BROWN ELECTED. Scott Brown was elected on January 19th 2010. The Senate was in session for 10 days in January, but Scott Brown wasn’t sworn into office on February 4th, so the Democrats only had 13 days of super majority in 2010.
Summary:

Regular Session: 11 working days
Special Session: 36 working days
Lame Duck Session: 13 working days

The Democrats only had 60 days of Super Majority between 2008 and 2010.

Discussion: One of the central themes of the Republican argument is that the Democrats had a super majority for two full years and so they had plenty of time pass new legislation or undo any problems that were caused by six years of Republican control of all three branches of government. This is argument is used by the Republicans immunize themselves against any responsibility for ongoing problems that might have been caused by their policies.

However, the fact is that the Democrats had a super majority for a total of 60 days, which is no where near the two years that Republicans are always claiming. On top of that, the period of Super Majority was split into short sessions, none of which was longer than five days. In addition, the special session time was entirely devoted to budget issues and Republican amendments to the ACA.

Given the glacial pace that business takes place in the Senate, this was way too little time for the Democrats pass any meaningful legislation, let alone get bills through committees and past all the obstructionistic tactics the Republicans were using to block legislation. No one can seriously expect that the Democrats could undo in 60 days all the damage that Republicans created in six years.

Further, these Super Majorities count Joe Lieberman as a Democrat even though he was by this time an Independent. Even though he was Liberal on some legislation, he was very conservative on other issues and opposed many of the key pieces of legislation the Democrats and Obama wanted to pass. For example, he was adamantly opposed to “Single Payer” health care and vowed to support a Republican Filibuster if it ever came to the floor. He even threatened to caucus with the Republicans if legislation came to the floor that he didn’t like.

Summary:

1. 1/07 – 12/08 – 51-49 – Ordinary Majority.
2. 1/09 – 7/14/09 – 59-41 – Ordinary Majority. (Coleman/Franklin Recount.)
3. 7/09 – 8/09 - 60-40 – Technical Super Majority, but since Kennedy is unable to vote, the Democrats can’t overcome a filibuster
4. 8/09 – 9/09 - 59-40 – Ordinary Majority. (Kennedy dies)
5. 9/09 – 12/24- 60-40 – Super Majority for 47 working days.
6. 1/10 – 2/10 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 13 working days

Total Time of the Democratic Super Majority: 60 Working days.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_111_1.htm
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/resources/pdf/2009_calendar.pdf
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/resources/pdf/2010_calendar.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Minnesota,_2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress

Guest


Guest

He said majority... not super majority. Does the trigger to throw out a talkingpoint feel like a pang or an itch?

It must be terrible to read comments that don't conform to your revision and ideology. Deep breaths comrade.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

PkrBum wrote:He said majority... not super majority. Does the trigger to throw out a talkingpoint feel like a pang or an itch?

It must be terrible to read comments that don't conform to your revision and ideology. Deep breaths comrade.


Frankly, there's no sense quibbling over spilt milk.  And the republican war against Obama did, in fact, bring the nation to a point where establishment politicians -- of both stripes -- are hated by the majority of the people -- particularly the young.  This is exactly why Trump and Sanders are runaway winners.

The democrats and republicans took themselves to the planet dysfunctional, and now we're going to, at last, see real change!!

Down with Amerika Inc.!!

Guest


Guest

Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:He said majority... not super majority. Does the trigger to throw out a talkingpoint feel like a pang or an itch?

It must be terrible to read comments that don't conform to your revision and ideology. Deep breaths comrade.


Frankly, there's no sense quibbling over spilt milk.  And the republican war against Obama did, in fact, bring the nation to a point where establishment politicians -- of both stripes -- are hated by the majority of the people -- particularly the young.  This is exactly why Trump and Sanders are runaway winners.

The democrats and republicans took themselves to the planet dysfunctional, and now we're going to, at last, see real change!!

Down with Amerika Inc.!!

Sanders has NO chance... the fix is in. He kicked her ass and should have been storming into nevada and s.c.

Instead the super delegates fell in behind hillary like dominoes. I do have to give y'all credit for conformity.

Where is all the leftist angst and revolution that the establishment democratic machine is screwing bernie? Well?

fucking lemmings

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

PkrBum wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:He said majority... not super majority. Does the trigger to throw out a talkingpoint feel like a pang or an itch?

It must be terrible to read comments that don't conform to your revision and ideology. Deep breaths comrade.


Frankly, there's no sense quibbling over spilt milk.  And the republican war against Obama did, in fact, bring the nation to a point where establishment politicians -- of both stripes -- are hated by the majority of the people -- particularly the young.  This is exactly why Trump and Sanders are runaway winners.

The democrats and republicans took themselves to the planet dysfunctional, and now we're going to, at last, see real change!!

Down with Amerika Inc.!!

Sanders has NO chance... the fix is in. He kicked her ass and should have been storming into nevada and s.c.

Instead the super delegates fell in behind hillary like dominoes. I do have to give y'all credit for conformity.

Where is all the leftist angst and revolution that the establishment democratic machine is screwing bernie? Well?

fucking lemmings

Idiot loser.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Who is believeable, Trump or Sanders?

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum