It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Okay --- so WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS?

page: 16
42
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Just in case you haven't seen it yet (which doesn't surprise me in the least) here is an explanation of how this works.



I can only assume you haven't seen it, and really have no idea how this all works.

Clinton won more votes. That's all there is to it.
And it's true. By about half a million votes.




posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: desert


I am willing to "cut him slack" for those 100 days.

I think that is all that is being asked.

Trump is not Jesus. I have said that before, but maybe it bears repeating. Trump won for two main reasons
  • He is an outsider who has never held office. That also means he is not versed in political correctness and his words have to be taken in that context.

  • We (the majority of those who voted Trump) were tired of the false rhetoric. Disagree with a black man = racist. Disagree with a woman = sexist. Disagree with a gay person = homophobe. Those are untrue, slanderous, and ignorant statements worthy of a high school bully, and most of the country knows it. 'Deplorable' was Hillary's ultimate downfall.

What we are now seeing in the riots is a validation of everything we voted against. No one knows if we will see a validation of what we voted for, because Trump has not yet become the President; he has no more legislative/executive power than I do at this time. We want to see him given a chance, just as Obama was given a chance. If he fails to do what the country expected of him, we will find another champion.

But I will never, under any circumstances, cast a vote for anyone who protests democracy. Never. Not even if they stop. That is the ultimate disqualifier to me, even more so than the blatant criminality that disqualified Hillary in my view.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs


Clinton won more votes. That's all there is to it.

That is irrelevant.

If you want the President elected by a simple majority of individual votes, you have to amend the Constitution. Until you get the Constitution amended, your argument on this is completely irrelevant. The rules of the process were well-known to everyone before the election happened, both sides played to win under those rules, and one side won under those rules.

You don't get to change the rules after the contest. That's a middle-school bully tactic.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Buzzy,
For reasons I won't go into, my New Year's Eve Party had to change to a New Year's Eve Cruise Party. It will now undergo another small but significant change. It will now be the New Year's F U 2016 Cruise Party. I thank you!!



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Thank you for your thoughtful replies. Please understand, though, that Hillary never said every Trump supporter was a "deplorable". I was sorry to see Trump supporters not get that; those who were not deplorable should never have put themselves into the group that was called out. Even Kellyanne Conway called out a supporter as "deplorable".

Re democracy.... not every democracy in the world has a way of voting and form of governing as we do. Our type of governing is now, truly, parliamentary. We no longer are able to compromise. Factions don't compromise, and what our Founding Fathers envisioned for their new nation has fallen away.

The Republican faction acted as a party of opposition during the Obama years, and now the Democratic Party must do likewise. There is the slightest chance of compromise still available (not the same chance as under Obama, because the Dems did not hold power in all three branches as the new faction will), but we will see what happens. Trump said 100 days, and that is what I am willing to do. After that, if there is no more on which to compromise or if the Dems cave (even in the 100 days), it is Game On.

So, democracy will still be supported vigorously, just not the way democracy was envisioned by the Founding Fathers. They warned against factions, and some people didn't listen, understand, or chose to be silent about it. We now have a parliamentary democracy, and we will be the party of opposition. We will support our democracy. We still love our country, and we will support our democracy using our new parliamentary system.

I do not support people like Bannon, whether they are far left or far right fringe, I never have and I never will. Anarchists as Bannon has called himself, an anarchist as Lenin he called himself, I will never support.



posted on Nov, 14 2016 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: BuzzyWigs


Clinton won more votes. That's all there is to it.

That is irrelevant.

If you want the President elected by a simple majority of individual votes, you have to amend the Constitution. Until you get the Constitution amended, your argument on this is completely irrelevant. The rules of the process were well-known to everyone before the election happened, both sides played to win under those rules, and one side won under those rules.

You don't get to change the rules after the contest. That's a middle-school bully tactic.

TheRedneck
I was responding to a declaration that it makes no difference. All i said was that it was a fact.

I understand the bloody electoral college sheesh!!!!!

The FACT is that she won more of the POPULAR VOTE. I know it's not the rules. I KNOW THAT.
But it happened ALL THE SAME.


Holy crap. SERIOUSLY? What is the VERY FIRST item I listed in the OP as needing addressed?

you all make me so sad and tired.

edit on 11/14/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Now you're getting it!


I'm using you as an example to inspire my ideas to others... not because I think you need those ideas the most, but because I think your open mind makes you more susceptible to considering them. And because you are the one I am speaking directly to (even though I am primarily speaking indirectly to whoever is reading).

It has been an enjoyable (and fruitful?) discussion Buzzy. Thank you!

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

I understand the bloody electoral college sheesh!!!!!


Me too. I understand it. I understand Representative Democracy.

But, I am a Progressive. I want to move forward, I want to go International Globalization.

I want the higher educated "Movers and Shakers" in charge.

I do not want "Home Sweet Home".

Interesting to me - - Trump is probably closer to what I want then the people that voted for him. I don't think they have a clue who the man is they voted for.

The people he surrounds himself with - - that's a different story.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs


I understand the bloody electoral college sheesh!!!!!

Then you understand the popular vote a moot point.

Let me try it this way: if we play a game of chess, and you win by checkmate, you won the game. If I then started saying, over and over, every time it was mentioned that you won, that it wasn't fair because I took your queen, how would you feel?

You would feel like I was a sore loser and that I was trying to discount your win.

The situation is the same, only with larger implications. Trump won. Period. The next President of the United States will be Donald J. Trump. Hillary Clinton lost. She will NOT be the next President. Anything else is a moot point.

In my analogy above, the proper thing for me to do would be to hang my head at the sound of "checkmate" and then congratulate you on a game well-played. That is actually what I would do, and have done many times. Can you do that in this reality?

I really hope so, because we had a good discussion going on here.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

You know what? I am deeply insulted that you are still talking to me like I really don't know what's going on and how it works. This is not "news" to me.

I am in no way saying he is not the President-Elect. And I thought we had a good talk going too, but now you are looking down your nose at me and insulting my intelligence by implying that I really don't know what the Effing Electoral College is.

My dear flaming god in heaven, WHAT do you not understand about the part of me being thoroughly educated in "Social Studies" and "Civics", dude?

Really?
We've even already touched on communication issues - and now there is NO QUESTION that you are right here implying that I truly am some 'snowflake lily-livered bleeding heart sniveling ignorant blithering idiot' instead of showing some appreciation for the level at which I am able to talk about this stuff.




posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: desert


Please understand, though, that Hillary never said every Trump supporter was a "deplorable".

The problem with that is that almost all, if not all, those who voted for Trump felt the label as being aimed at them. That's not their misunderstanding; it's a tactic that has been used for a very very long time against them.

Disagree with Obama? You're branded a racist, no matter how or why you disagree.

Disagree with Pelosi or Clinton? You're automatically a sexist, no matter how or why you disagree.

Disagree with a gay man? You're now a 'homophobe,' regardless of how or why you disagreed.

HIllary lumped all of those labels into one: 'deplorable.' And everyone who had ever taken a stance against anything Obama, Pelosi, Franken, Reid, Clinton, or anyone else in that particular basket had said or done felt the sting of being improperly called a slur. That term united them under one umbrella. And just as I took the name 'redneck' from a slur back in high school and turned it into a badge of honor, so too did almost half of the country take 'deplorable' and do the same.

Stop with the labels! That's the message to take away from this. Call us what we are: American citizens, with as many rights as anyone else, who simply disagree.

Or keep losing. Y'all's choice.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Well, Buzzy, if you keep bringing up a moot point like it was some sort of revelation, what else am I supposed to think?

Winning the popular vote is irrelevant. That is all I am saying. If you take my stating that fact as dismissive of you... well... sorry.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Welcome to my world.

‘Language: A Key Mechanism of Control’



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

I take exception to the abject refusal on your part to state and acknowledge that you KNOW I KNOW THIS......rather than implying that you think you taught me this.

***********************************
Now ------ since that's all just juvenile crap.........


onto the next steps.

I never thought I'd do this, but GLENN BECK has some respectable things to say about what a disaster Steve Bannon is and I agree with him! I agree with Beck!!!



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Fine, Buzzy, I accept that you know this... now can you accept irrelevancy is not a part of a plan to move forward?

 


I really don't know much about Bannon. Care to fill me in with your impressions?

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 06:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Fine, Buzzy, I accept that you know this... now can you accept irrelevancy is not a part of a plan to move forward?

 


I really don't know much about Bannon. Care to fill me in with your impressions?

TheRedneck


My impressions are that he is dangerous, and is the godfather of the alt-right. When even Glenn Beck is warning against Bannon, there is something deeply wrong.

Fine.

It's all "irrelevant" in your world: the vote count, the take-backs, the backpedaling, the sidewinding....

he's doing all of those things now.

So - electoral college and popular vote totally irrelevant -----

he is now backing out of the things he promised you.

"Would a fence be okay?" "Well, parts of it can be a fence, sure, but a wall, I mean - I know this stuff this is construction, but sure, you know, a partial wall and partial fence and I think they're great people and fantastic people and I have a plan the greatest plan and it's a I'm not kidding a fantastic plan that when I make the deal we'll tear up all that other stuff and Bannon isn't a racist ---- no when he says "a bunch of dykes" he means it in the nudge-nudge-wink-wink fun-luvin way. You know.....and Bannon is not racist!!!!"

Dude. Even BECK calls him deranged.
That's what. I guess we've parted ways here then. Okay. No worries....thanks for playing!!


edit on 11/16/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 06:24 PM
link   
So - now. All of that above being out of the way...... WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS????

Give Trump a chance? I was kinda okay with that until...........Bannon give Bannon a chance?


Erm, no.


edit on 11/16/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
So - now. All of that above being out of the way...... WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS????

Give Trump a chance? I was kinda okay with that until...........Bannon give Bannon a chance?


Erm, no.



Uh Yeah!

I'm at "It is what it is" - - got the title - - blank sheet.

I don't think he can help himself. He's gonna do something that pisses the wrong person off.

So, who his "underlings" are is far more concerning.



posted on Nov, 16 2016 @ 10:01 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs


My impressions are that he is dangerous, and is the godfather of the alt-right. When even Glenn Beck is warning against Bannon, there is something deeply wrong.

I do like Beck (or used to, really haven't listened to him in a while now) but I believe he also was in the 'never-Trump' camp. I really can't hold that against him, but at the same time I'm starting to wonder which dog in this race is his.

As for Bannon, I was really hoping you could give me some more specifics. I like to get information from both sides of that aisle before making a decision.


he is now backing out of the things he promised you.

Not really.

I took Trump's positions as general directions he wanted to take the country... directions I agree with. The wall was at least partially a metaphor for closing the border to illegal trespassers. I would like to see a physical wall, but if we're talking about the Big Bend area, a fence makes more sense. The terrain itself is a natural wall of sorts. There are areas where the preferable method might be no wall or fence, just a section that is heavily patrolled. That's fine if it works. As long as the border is closed.

Same thing with Obamacare. There are a couple good provisions, like pre-existing conditions or family plans extending to young adult children. Those are good; they help people. But the mandate to buy insurance? That has hurt people, many people, because it drove prices through the roof due to establishment of a forced clientele. The insurance companies can pretty much charge whatever they want; the alternative is fines. I want the bad parts gone (which means destroying the whole plan) but a new plan with all of the good and none of the bad. He is still saying yes to that.


Bannon isn't a racist ---- no when he says "a bunch of dykes" he means it in the nudge-nudge-wink-wink fun-luvin way. You know.....and Bannon is not racist!!!!"

OK, so you say Bannon is racist. Fair enough. Can you give me some specifics - instances where he has discriminated against others over their skin color, their gender, their private sex life... I kinda need those specifics because, you know, there's been an awful lot of labels like that flying around and not being targeted at actual racists.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 17 2016 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Personally, I suspect Beck is trying to distance himself from the "alt-right" which I heard him say on a clip that Bannon is "terrifying."
I think Beck is maybe trying to siphon off the more moderates of his listeners to up his own ratings. Limbaugh is "done" as far as I can tell - contract ending, no one renewing.

As for Bannon, yesterday the CEO of Breitbart was interviewed on Morning Edition (NPR), and he whined about how Bannon didn't mean to hurt anyone when he referred to lesbians as a 'bunch of dykes' or something rude like that. That isn't "racism" but it's horribly offensive. The CEO tried to brush it off as a "term of endearment that the LGBT community uses itself". Or some such justification equivalent to using the N word about black people when you ARE NOT black.

Bannon's appointment has been wildly cheered by the White Nationalists, and Breitbart is their fave. Even if he himself isn't - these white supremacists ARE ABSOLUTELY and they "love" him, because of his racism.



Here's a clip:


Stormfont, the oldest neo-Nazi message board on the web, has many users cheering Trump’s decision to appoint Bannon. User Phoenix1933 wrote:

“Stephen Bannon: racist, anti-homo, anti-immigrant, anti-jewish, anti-establishment. Declared war on (((Paul Ryan))) Sounds perfect. Muhahahaha. The man who will have Trump’s ear more than anyone else. Being anti-jewish is not illegal. Nothing you dirty stinking jews can do to keep him out.”


White Nationalists Rejoice at Trump's Appointment of Breitbart's Stephen Bannon

I've never read Breitbart, nor do I know anything about this person except what I'm seeing online. If he's in fact NOT racist, there are lots and lots of admitted racists who love him perhaps misguidedly. I don't want to go mucking about in his archives. All indications are that he is, in fact, very racist and bigoted again everyone but white straight people.




top topics



 
42
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join