Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Up until now, only four men elected President have never held office prior to their election: Zachary Taylor, Ulysses Grant, Herbert Hoover, and Dwight Eisenhower. That being said, Taylor, Grant, and Eisenhower were all military men while Hoover headed the U.S. Food Administration and then Secretary of Commerce before being elected. William Taft wasn't elected, but he did serve as governor of the Philippines from 1901 to 1903, after which he was appointed Secretary of War (also of note, Taft was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court eight years after he left office).
Donald Trump is the only person with no experience in government or the military to be elected President in the history of the nation.
That doesn't really help the argument, more like makes it so the two most recent times have also happened to coincide with the worst financial crashes in modern history
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
djones520 wrote: Might want to check your facts again. Last time both houses of Congress, and POTUS were the same party, it was 2008.
Interestingly enough, this seems to have been trending based on an Ann Coulter tweet.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
Just Tony wrote: Let's see, breaking a law is still breaking a law, no matter how you frame it. If you think the punishment is too severe, become a legislator and change it, or petition your legislator to do so. And yes, when laws are allowed to be violated without enforcement, that further laws get broken until a line is drawn.
So it's ok to change the laws, but ignoring the laws to get the exact same result is unacceptable? You seem to be far too concerned with some weird moral purity thing about obeying laws and not nearly concerned enough about the practical consequences.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cuda1179 wrote: What punishment would you give for stealing a low-end used car? That's equivalent to what an illegal immigrant takes every year they are here.
{citation needed}
Well, according to ABC news they have a net impact of $7,700 per year, per individual.
CNN also estimates there are 1.8 million illegal minors enrolled in schools. At $11,000 each to educate( according to Concordia University), that's another $20 Billion. That's an average of $1500 for every illegal immigrant in this country. (However, that's not counting the other 4 million children born to illegal immigrants while in this country. That could arguable be added too).
"Jonathan Pie" is a satirical character created by a comedian named Tom Walker.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
To be honest though we have been riding a bull market for a few years now and it is due for a return to normal fairly soon. Now will trumps bad economic plans exacerbate the coming return to normal, only time will tell.
Here's another fun fact: it's the first time since 1928 that the Congress, Senate, and POTUS, have all been controlled by the same party.
1928 being 1 year before 1929, and we all know what happened in 1929
If you mean the Great Depression, the things that caused it had been in motion for many years before the president took office in 1929.
And the Affordable Housing Act is what caused the '08 recession. '08, right? I know Cat didn't lay me off until second week of '09, but other companies were slamming doors shut before that.
Here's another fun fact: it's the first time since 1928 that the Congress, Senate, and POTUS, have all been controlled by the same party.
1928 being 1 year before 1929, and we all know what happened in 1929
If we ignore 2005, 2003, 1993. 1979, 1977, 1967, 1965, 1963, 1961, (EDIT: 1953 too for that matter), 1951, 1949, and every single year of FDR's presidency.
How the hell did this stupid rumor get started? Is this what Anne Coulter said? Jesus...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/13 23:06:19
Here's another fun fact: it's the first time since 1928 that the Congress, Senate, and POTUS, have all been controlled by the same party.
1928 being 1 year before 1929, and we all know what happened in 1929
If you mean the Great Depression, the things that caused it had been in motion for many years before the president took office in 1929.
And the Affordable Housing Act is what caused the '08 recession. '08, right? I know Cat didn't lay me off until second week of '09, but other companies were slamming doors shut before that.
Yes the crisis happened with Bush in office, so a divided gov't. When Obama was sworn in in 2009 is when the Ds had both houses of the legislature and the presidency.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
whembly wrote: Yeah... I expected Bannon, Kellyanne Conway or one of his kids.
You forget, Trump and Priebus had a very cold relationship during the Primary.
No, I didn't forget, which is why I followed that up with, "You didn't actually believe all of his 'drain the swamp' nonsense, did you?"
He absolutely had no intentions of getting rid of Washington insiders or the establishment, regardless of how chilly his relationship with any of them was during the primary.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
whembly wrote: Yeah... I expected Bannon, Kellyanne Conway or one of his kids.
You forget, Trump and Priebus had a very cold relationship during the Primary.
No, I didn't forget, which is why I followed that up with, "You didn't actually believe all of his 'drain the swamp' nonsense, did you?"
He absolutely had no intentions of getting rid of Washington insiders or the establishment, regardless of how chilly his relationship with any of them was during the primary.
Or, he realizes he needs to work with the congress critters, to get his priorities turned into legislation, and Rinse enables that.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
First and foremost, I've been on dakka a while now, and hopefully most people know me, and they'll know that I'm not the sort of person who follows Ann Coulter!
Please give me some credit. I'm not perfect, but I'd never knowingly listen to her!
Secondly, I could be digging a deeper hole, and I might have to spin my out of this, and if I'm wrong again, so be it. I'll survive.
My earlier point should have included SCOTUS, becuase as far as I'm aware, Trump gets to pick new judges right?
So Scotus will be a majority pro-Conservative/GOP.
Add that to GOP Congress/Senate/POTUS and you have all 3 branches under GOP control and supposedly, that hasn't happened since 1928.
Or am I wrong?
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
CptJake wrote: Or, he realizes he needs to work with the congress critters, to get his priorities turned into legislation, and Rinse enables that.
Do you realize that what I wrote and what you wrote are not mutually exclusive?
He knew from the get-go that he had to work with Congressional leaders, you know, the establishment, if he wanted to get anything accomplished. I mean for feth's sake, anyone that knows how Washington works would have told you that, but that didn't stop him from running a campaign against the elites (which he is one) and the establishment (which he needs). He was never going to drain the swamp, he was just going to roll up his $1000 trousers and wade on in.
But as people with good sense have discussed in this thread, he didn't win the Presidency because of racists and sexists and homophobes or whatever else, he won because he sold himself as the change that the people who felt left behind by Washington needed. So far, filling his circle with people Preibus, his children, the donor class, and lobbyists doesn't signal to me that he intends on keeping any of those promises.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/11/13 23:29:42
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
CptJake wrote: Or, he realizes he needs to work with the congress critters, to get his priorities turned into legislation, and Rinse enables that.
Do you realize that what I wrote and what you wrote are not mutually exclusive?
He knew from the get-go that he had to work with Congressional leaders, you know, the establishment, if he wanted to get anything accomplished. I mean for feth's sake, anyone that knows how Washington works would have told you that, but that didn't stop him from running a campaign against the elites (which he is one) and the establishment (which he needs). He was never going to drain the swamp, he was just going to roll up his $1000 trousers and wade on in.
But as people with good sense have discussed in this thread, he didn't win the Presidency because of racists and sexists and homophobes or whatever else, he won because he sold himself as the change that the people who felt left behind by Washington needed. So far, filling his circle with people Preibus, his children, the donor class, and lobbyists doesn't signal to me that he intends on keeping any of those promises.
In politics promises aren't made to the poor people, they only get statements of possibility. If you're rich enough, and send enough of that wealth into the political sphere, you can get promises.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/13 23:32:50
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
CptJake wrote: Allegedly Rinse Pubis gets along very well with Speaker Ryan, and since Trump really needs the House to go along with his agenda it may be a smart pick.
We'll see, I read somewhere that the Tea Party did not want Priebus in that job, so we'll see how well that works out. The House Freedom Caucus is full of those guys, right? And they don't play well with others in Congress.
By the way, was that spelling intentional or auto-correct? Either way, funny.
Joe: I hid all the pens from Trump
Obama: Why?
Joe: Because he bringing his own.
Obama: ???
Joe: HE'S BRINGING HIS OWN PENCE
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/13 23:37:09
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
Add that to GOP Congress/Senate/POTUS and you have all 3 branches under GOP control and supposedly, that hasn't happened since 1928.
Functionally no party has ever controlled all 3 branches, because SCOTUS is not elected and not under the purview of any political party. Going by appointees, from 1972-2016 the majority of sitting Court Justices were appointed by Republicans (with Trump's election this will not change anytime soon). If you mean the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives, the GOP has controlled all three at once in 2003-2007, 1953-1955, and 1931-1933.
CptJake wrote: Allegedly Rinse Pubis gets along very well with Speaker Ryan, and since Trump really needs the House to go along with his agenda it may be a smart pick.
By the way, was that spelling intentional or auto-correct? Either way, funny.
Gotta be intentional, because it Ben Carson said it:
tags fixed.
Reds8n
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/14 08:42:57
whembly wrote: Gotta be intentional, because it Ben Carson said it:
Oh man, I totally had forgotten about that!
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
Besides being a rabid creationist, another reason not to have Carson as Sec of Ed. is because every time he talks people fall asleep. As if kids aren't sleeping in class already
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
