US Elections 2016

[Hurlshort]

 

It's pretty weird to think of our second largest trade partner as an enemy.  Of course it is also weird to talk about building a massive militarized wall between our 3rd largest trade partner.  Actually when you look at our trade with Mexico, what stands out is how much we export TO them.  China is practically a one way relationship, whereas Mexico is buying nearly as much as they are selling.

 

So yeah, let's build a wall with the country that takes in over 200 billion US products a year.  Yay for diplomacy.  

Well it's not like the wall would mean no more trade between us and Mexico.

 

 

It doesn't seem odd to spend billions of dollars building a fence between us and someone we do a tremendous amount of business with?  How much money do we think we will save by building this 2,000 mile long barrier?  Of course, Trump also wants Mexico to foot the bill, which sounds insane.  

 

I just don't see how anyone can justify this in economic terms.  

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/09/this-is-what-trumps-border-wall-could-cost-us.html

 

I know it's not breitbart, so WoD won't trust it.  

Edited January 19, 2016 by Hurlshot

[Meshugger]

 

 

It's pretty weird to think of our second largest trade partner as an enemy.  Of course it is also weird to talk about building a massive militarized wall between our 3rd largest trade partner.  Actually when you look at our trade with Mexico, what stands out is how much we export TO them.  China is practically a one way relationship, whereas Mexico is buying nearly as much as they are selling.

 

So yeah, let's build a wall with the country that takes in over 200 billion US products a year.  Yay for diplomacy.  

Well it's not like the wall would mean no more trade between us and Mexico.

 

 

It doesn't seem odd to spend billions of dollars building a fence between us and someone we do a tremendous amount of business with?  How much money do we think we will save by building this 2,000 mile long barrier?  Of course, Trump also wants Mexico to foot the bill, which sounds insane.  

 

I just don't see how anyone can justify this in economic terms.  

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/09/this-is-what-trumps-border-wall-could-cost-us.html

 

I know it's not breitbart, so WoD won't trust it.  

 

 

Shush now, here you're sitting in the front row of the greatest show on earth, the US, and worrying about small things when there's greatness at the horizon. Athens had its Acropolis, Rome had its Colosseum and China had its Great Wall; now it is your turn. Let the God Emperor build his Wall and you will be part of history in the making.

[Gfted1]

I dont really know a lot about or understand the brewhaha over the "wall". But per wiki, we've already constructed a significant Mexico–United States barrier of various different construction walls. Why is everyone paniced over "Trump's wall"? Whats he doing different? Does it incorporate drones some how?

[Sarex]

Does it incorporate drones some how?

 

Hahaha

[Volourn]

"MPs to debate call to ban Donald Trump from UK"

 

Making them as bad as Trump. Full of hate and anti freedom.

[Oerwinde]

"MPs to debate call to ban Donald Trump from UK"

 

 

Making them as bad as Trump. Full of hate and anti freedom.

Supposedly in the UK if a petition hits a certain number of people parliament has to debate the topic. This is one of those.

[Calax]

I dont really know a lot about or understand the brewhaha over the "wall". But per wiki, we've already constructed a significant Mexico–United States barrier of various different construction walls. Why is everyone paniced over "Trump's wall"? Whats he doing different? Does it incorporate drones some how?

I don't think it's "Panicked" or anything. Instead they view it as an example of the absurdity we should expect from "President Trump". The underlying factors of things like illegal immigration etc are known and incredibly complex, as is the discussion of allowing immigration and at what rates. Trumps only response to the entire question is "Stick a wall in front of them and that'll do 'er!" like some jumped up trucker on moonshine. And he somehow expects that they'll magically pay for it too.  That's the reason it constantly comes up, it shows how Trump is the bull in the china shop without any clue.

[Barothmuk]

Supposedly in the UK if a petition hits a certain number of people parliament has to debate the topic. This is one of those.

And no one thought to make them debate why Mr. Cameron porked a piggy?

 

What a **** country.

[ShadySands]

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

It's pretty weird to think of our second largest trade partner as an enemy.  Of course it is also weird to talk about building a massive militarized wall between our 3rd largest trade partner.  Actually when you look at our trade with Mexico, what stands out is how much we export TO them.  China is practically a one way relationship, whereas Mexico is buying nearly as much as they are selling.

 

So yeah, let's build a wall with the country that takes in over 200 billion US products a year.  Yay for diplomacy.  

Well it's not like the wall would mean no more trade between us and Mexico.

 

 

It doesn't seem odd to spend billions of dollars building a fence between us and someone we do a tremendous amount of business with?  How much money do we think we will save by building this 2,000 mile long barrier?  Of course, Trump also wants Mexico to foot the bill, which sounds insane.  

 

I just don't see how anyone can justify this in economic terms.  

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/09/this-is-what-trumps-border-wall-could-cost-us.html

 

I know it's not breitbart, so WoD won't trust it.  

 

One wonders how we ever build a road in this country, if one fence is supposed to be more than the entire national highway budget. Anyway, Trump's plan isn't to build a fence everywhere, it's basically the secure fence for accessible areas authorized in 2006 and never built. The things you keep saying about trade and fence are ridiculous. A fence would simply mean everyone has to use the legal crossing points they're supposed to use now. Edited January 20, 2016 by Wrath of Dagon

[Hurlshort]

Yes, I'm sure the immigrants that travel for days over remote deserts and mountains will encounter a fence and be like "oh no, a fence, better turn around now."  Those fences need to be heavily patrolled in order to be any use at all.  

 

Why are you so quick to burn money on stupid projects like this?  Take some fiscal responsibility, show me the proof that this will somehow help the American economy in any meaningful way.   

[Zoraptor]

That's the reason it constantly comes up, it shows how Trump is the bull in the china shop without any clue.

It's not meant to be workable though, it's meant to be... aspirational, for want of a better term. How will it work? Very well. Practicalities be damned. Sure, for anyone who looks at it critically it looks monumentally stupid but it isn't aimed at people like that but at people who will go "yeah, that guy knows the real problems and how to get things done!". The sort of person who voted Bush because he'd be a nice guy to have a beer with (history of substance abuse and privileged son of multi millionaire family be damned) and because he wouldn't put up with any crap from anyone. That's a perfectly good group to aim for and no matter how silly it may look it's a strategy that has worked so far.

 

 

 

Supposedly in the UK if a petition hits a certain number of people parliament has to debate the topic. This is one of those.

And no one thought to make them debate why Mr. Cameron porked a piggy?

 

I think it has to be couched as something that Parliament can debate/ have an effect on, such as Trump's supposed hate speech. So you'd have to find a way to make Dave's quasi-amorous deceased porcine interactions politically relevant rather than just amusing/ embarrassing. I don't think even something like "David Cameron's, uh, 'private member' is haram, and thus would be offensive to the Saudis or other muslims if he met them" would fit the, hm, bill. Unfortunately.

Edited January 20, 2016 by Zoraptor

[Raithe]

[Elerond]

 

 

Supposedly in the UK if a petition hits a certain number of people parliament has to debate the topic. This is one of those.

And no one thought to make them debate why Mr. Cameron porked a piggy?

 

I think it has to be couched as something that Parliament can debate/ have an effect on, such as Trump's supposed hate speech. So you'd have to find a way to make Dave's quasi-amorous deceased porcine interactions politically relevant rather than just amusing/ embarrassing. I don't think even something like "David Cameron's, uh, 'private member' is haram, and thus would be offensive to the Saudis or other muslims if he met them" would fit the, hm, bill. Unfortunately.

 

There has been over 5000 petitions so far, from which 19 has so far got enough votes to be debated, although The Petitions Committee has decided not to debate two of those 19 nineteen topics. I didn't find topic about Cameron's escapade with pork, but it maybe there but just using words that I didn't figure out.  

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions?state=all

 

Also during Trump debate there were two topics under discussion

 

Block Donald J Trump from UK entry and Don't ban Trump from the United Kingdom (although this only had 44k votes so it was included in debate by parliament's own decision, probably to prevent need to debate same topic again in future)

[Meshugger]

http://mic.com/articles/132961/bernie-sanders-just-opened-up-his-most-massive-lead-yet-in-new-hampshire#.GFkXADirD

 

itshappening.gif

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yes, I'm sure the immigrants that travel for days over remote deserts and mountains will encounter a fence and be like "oh no, a fence, better turn around now."  Those fences need to be heavily patrolled in order to be any use at all.  

 

Why are you so quick to burn money on stupid projects like this?  Take some fiscal responsibility, show me the proof that this will somehow help the American economy in any meaningful way.

It doesn't need to be as heavily patrolled as empty space they patrol now. Either we follow laws or we don't, either we have sovereignty over our borders or we don't. Btw, DHS just reported that in 2015 half a million aliens overstayed their visas, and the government isn't doing a damn thing about it. American citizenship means nothing now, it's a free-for-all.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

Looks like the Bern will stump the trump.

[Barothmuk]

Looks like the Bern will stump the trump.

Clinton will win, obnoxious liberals will praise this as a victory for progressivism, the right will be emboldened to support even stupider and more destructive economic policies, and the moderate to far left will continue to be completely irrelevant all the while being blamed for everything.

[Calax]

Yes, I'm sure the immigrants that travel for days over remote deserts and mountains will encounter a fence and be like "oh no, a fence, better turn around now."  Those fences need to be heavily patrolled in order to be any use at all.  

 

Why are you so quick to burn money on stupid projects like this?  Take some fiscal responsibility, show me the proof that this will somehow help the American economy in any meaningful way.   

And it's not like we're just talking about cyclone fencing here. The closest I can conceptualize to this in terms of how it's been made and of what for similar purposes would be something like the Folsom or Hoover dam

[BruceVC]

 

Looks like the Bern will stump the trump.

Clinton will win, obnoxious liberals will praise this as a victory for progressivism, the right will be emboldened to support even stupider and more destructive economic policies, and the moderate to far left will continue to be completely irrelevant all the while being blamed for everything.

 

 

Correct and a Clinton victory is a victory for  a progressive future

 

This is a good thing young grasshopper, lets not be negative 

[Raithe]

For more rimshots from outside of America..

 

[WDeranged]

[Gfted1]

British MPs debate Trump ban, label him 'crazy,' a 'buffoon,' a 'wazzock'.

 

Stay classy, UK.

[Meshugger]

Banning Trump from the UK would certainly show him that he is wrong on immigration.

[Elerond]

Banning Trump from the UK would certainly show him that he is wrong on immigration.

 

By targeting singular person that has accused to done something that should prevent him to come in UK instead of putting in general ban for all Americans for example?

 

EDIT: Is this you saying that you don't support any form of bans for any people when it comes to matters of immigration? Or are you just saying that it is choice between no bans or banning whole groups of people?

Edited January 21, 2016 by Elerond