QuakerOats;1849685 wrote:MAGA





Denial is not the answer

CenterBHSFan;1849711 wrote:From everything I've read and saw, bigotry was not the reason Trump won. Remember, there were many people who voted for Obama that also voted for Trump so that exposes bigotry as the reason for Trump's election as a fraud.
If you want to call into question bigotry as it relates to a candidate, call into account Hillary and her campaign crew who wanted to make a fuss about Sander being Jewish. For that matter, call into account the whole damn democrat party for putting up Hillary Clinton to begin with.

What you are doing is not the way to protest the fact that Trump is now President. But do not repine for that fact, somebody else that might be worse will come along in our lifetimes.

SportsAndLady;1849736 wrote:Washington Post. Lol

A judge in San Francisco blocked President Donald Trump from withholding funds from so-called sanctuary cities that give safe harbor to undocumented immigrants, marking the administration’s second major policy initiative declared likely unconstitutional.

sleeper;1849681 wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/04/17/racism-motivated-trump-voters-more-than-authoritarianism-or-income-inequality/?utm_term=.a5b18d73cdc7



Reality. Sorry you don't like it.

sleeper;1823351 wrote:It's absolutely absurd to me the amount of blame against white people, particularly white males.

HEY LIBERALS, STOP BLAMING WHITE PEOPLE FOR YOUR OWN PROBLEMS. That's why you lost to frekaing donald J Trump. ffs.

iclfan2;1823358 wrote:The whole racist, sexist angle just pisses me off. The state of SC votes for a minority (Indian) woman governor and a black male republican senator, but they're racist or sexist for not voting Obama or Hillary. Laughable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sleeper;1823359 wrote:Identity politics. It's the D's main weapon.

sleeper;1823130 wrote:A couple of thoughts:

1) One of the reasons that I(and most people) were so confident is the data was strongly in favor of Clinton from Day 1 and leading up to Monday night. If you work for a polling firm, you may be looking for a new job come today/end of the week. There's clearly a massive flaw in polling methodologies and I daresay it's like either that polling centers have become ultra partisan and/or a majority of people surveyed said Clinton but ended up notching Trump on the ballot due to fear of being ostracized for their choice. The question "How did we miss so badly" will be studied for decades and whoever can answer this question has an opportunity to seize the polling market and become stupid rich.

2) I think the Democrat strategy of identity politics ultimately backfired right in their faces. Continuously blaming white people for all the world's problems and calling anyone who supports Trump(or conservative ideas) a racist/bigot/sexist really brought out white voters in mass against Clinton. The statistic was Clinton only got 51% of college educated white women, which is a demographic she was expected to absolutely shit stomp in giving Trump's comments/actions against women; what happened here? Where are all the people who voted for Obama?

3) I'll give credit to Trump. He spent nowhere near the money Clinton did, defied odds to win the Republican nomination, defied odds to win the Presidency, and did it by being openly racist/sexist and a general asshole. This will be studied for decades.

4) We're fucked.

sleeper;1823558 wrote:Could it be that Trump voters were willing to ignore his bigotry and sexism to focus on issues that were more important to them, like the economy and the corruption of DC politics.

I know its shocking to Clinton supporters, but there are other issues out there than just making sure minorities and women don't get their feelz hurt.

sleeper;1823561 wrote:More identity politics. More blaming white people.

That's how you get a Trump in the White House.

sleeper;1823835 wrote:But no problem with Hillary calling black people super predators or half of America deplorables.

sleeper;1849742 wrote:https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-04-25/trump-s-sanctuary-cities-order-blocked-by-federal-judge?utm_content=politics&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-politics



So much winning.

iclfan2;1849749 wrote:Yea, we should be for justices being completely partisan. You're an idiot. Obama appointed judge, in California. I'm sure everyone is shocked


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

iclfan2;1849751 wrote:It isn't unconstitutional. It's one moron in California abusing his power.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sleeper;1849752 wrote:Facts don't care about your feelings. It is unconstitutional.

majorspark;1849762 wrote:Is it unconstitutional for a state or locality to refuse to enforce federal law?

The Constitution vests the spending powers in Congress, not the President, so the Order cannot constitutionally place new conditions on federal funds. Further, the Tenth Amendment requires that conditions on federal funds be unambiguous and timely made; that they bear some relation to the funds at issue; and that the total financial incentive not be coercive. Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves.

sleeper;1849764 wrote:You are welcome to read the ruling of why it is unconstitutional.

majorspark;1849767 wrote:I don't have a problem with this ruling. Its nice to see leftist judges humping the 10th.

Now answer my question. I'll be more specific in case you misunderstood. Is it unconstitutional for a state or locality to refuse to enforce federal immigration law?

majorspark;1849767 wrote:I don't have a problem with this ruling. Its nice to see leftist judges humping the 10th.

Now answer my question. I'll be more specific in case you misunderstood. Is it unconstitutional for a state or locality to refuse to enforce federal immigration law?

sleeper;1849779 wrote:I'm not a lawyer so I'll let the legal experts debate that one.

sleeper;1849750 wrote:Right, Obama's fault, not the 3rd unconstituional EO that Donald Trump has signed. Grow up.

sleeper;1849752 wrote:Facts don't care about your feelings. It is unconstitutional.

majorspark;1849786 wrote:Interesting you defer to the legal experts on this particular constitutional question but not on others. Why might that be given your previous comments?

Azubuike24;1849771 wrote:There needs to be a clear definition of what constitutes "enforcement."

sleeper;1849789 wrote:I've deferred to the legal experts on all 3 of Trump's unconstitutional EO.