The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Just two weeks and America will once again be great. You're gonna be so proud of your president. This is a thread to talk about how great, and how proud.
Ground Rules:
Don't be dickholes.
This is not a general politics thread.
Not a 2016 election thread.
Shut up.
--
Out in California land they hired conservative boogeyman Eric Holder to represent the state in any upcoming litigation against the Trump White House. Some part of that just has to be the Holder name, right?
I anxiously await for Trump to mock the Navy for their climate change research before he presumably rejects any spending proposals to make adjustments for it.
Two weeks to go until his inauguration and at this point I am absolutely convinced that Trump's presidency is going to wind up being seen as some bizarre collective fever dream.
I really don't want the California state government to be baiting Trump into fucking Californians over, because he can fuck us over and has no qualms about doing it for the pettiest reasons. But a lot of this "Jerry Brown gonna stand up to Trump!" narrative seems ginned up by the media. Of course, Jerry Brown is going to say he'll stand up to Trump, just like any Democratic politician in any state would. Doesn't mean he's looking for a fight.
I really don't want the California state government to be baiting Trump into fucking Californians over, because he can fuck us over and has no qualms about doing it for the pettiest reasons. But a lot of this "Jerry Brown gonna stand up to Trump!" narrative seems ginned up by the media. Of course, Jerry Brown is going to say he'll stand up to Trump, just like any Democratic politician in any state would. Doesn't mean he's looking for a fight.
I'm waiting for him to threaten to nuke LA if he doesn't get his Emmy.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
If California wants to butter up Trump while doing exactly what they want, they should persuade Hollywood to give him a "Special lifetime achievement Oscar." This will make him so happy he will not care whatever else they do.
I'd really prefer if he doesn't have to stomp California into the dirt cause my parents, brother, sister-in-law, and 10 month old niece live there.
He's going to rip apart so many families over the course of his presidency.
Who's doing the ripping? This past X-mas my brother (Lives in California) refused to visit my family for the holidays because they live in a permanent red state. There has been lots of disagreement politically over the last 8 years between us but we never wanted to seperate ourselves from his life or blame him because he was on the other side. Now its okay for him to do that to us? I was extremely pissed to find this out (of course after the election).
I think California is just looking for every available way to flip the bird to the incoming adminstration.
They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.
What's sad is that Calexit means that the state inmediatly gets a visit from the Chinese Navy looking to annex a new colony.
States can't leave the union. Period.
The notion of that always bothered me from a legal perspective, despite being a fierce anti-Confederate myself. You'd figure if a majority of state delegations voted to allow a state to leave, then that would constitute mutual consent or something. I could easily see conservatives being behind that in theory, on the mistaken assumption that the blue states are the takers, so if a blue state wanted out a majority of state delegations could be pushed to approve.
I get that the legal standard doesn't exist for that, but it should. No union should be binding in perpetuity since all government comes from consent, even if a small-l liberal view of secessionism goes to dangerous places (whether for the ulterior motives of secessionists or just to prevent large, functional states from becoming a nest of small, weak countries that have less of an ability to provide for their citizens).
Our political climate is so crazy that it doesn't seem that implausible that there could be enough states that want California out of the union to pass that amendment.
You should be so lucky, trump is probably going to try to get the crazyhorse carving changed to his likeness because those four other guys got their faces carved into a mountain.
I think California is just looking for every available way to flip the bird to the incoming adminstration.
They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.
What's sad is that Calexit means that the state inmediatly gets a visit from the Chinese Navy looking to annex a new colony.
States can't leave the union. Period.
The notion of that always bothered me from a legal perspective, despite being a fierce anti-Confederate myself. You'd figure if a majority of state delegations voted to allow a state to leave, then that would constitute mutual consent or something. I could easily see conservatives being behind that in theory, on the mistaken assumption that the blue states are the takers, so if a blue state wanted out a majority of state delegations could be pushed to approve.
I get that the legal standard doesn't exist for that, but it should. No union should be binding in perpetuity since all government comes from consent, even if a small-l liberal view of secessionism goes to dangerous places (whether for the ulterior motives of secessionists or just to prevent large, functional states from becoming a nest of small, weak countries that have less of an ability to provide for their citizens).
One state leaving damages all the states with the repercussion. It's to prevent some tiny state like Vermont from destabilizing a nation of hundreds of millions because of the short sighted extremism at the state capital.
I think California is just looking for every available way to flip the bird to the incoming adminstration.
They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.
What's sad is that Calexit means that the state inmediatly gets a visit from the Chinese Navy looking to annex a new colony.
States can't leave the union. Period.
The notion of that always bothered me from a legal perspective, despite being a fierce anti-Confederate myself. You'd figure if a majority of state delegations voted to allow a state to leave, then that would constitute mutual consent or something. I could easily see conservatives being behind that in theory, on the mistaken assumption that the blue states are the takers, so if a blue state wanted out a majority of state delegations could be pushed to approve.
I get that the legal standard doesn't exist for that, but it should. No union should be binding in perpetuity since all government comes from consent, even if a small-l liberal view of secessionism goes to dangerous places (whether for the ulterior motives of secessionists or just to prevent large, functional states from becoming a nest of small, weak countries that have less of an ability to provide for their citizens).
One state leaving damages all the states with the repercussion. It's to prevent some tiny state like Vermont from destabilizing a nation of hundreds of millions because of the short sighted extremism at the state capital.
If that's your goal, you failed completely. Your entire country just got destabilized hard because of the extremism a few (shitty) states' capital.
I think California is just looking for every available way to flip the bird to the incoming adminstration.
They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.
What's sad is that Calexit means that the state inmediatly gets a visit from the Chinese Navy looking to annex a new colony.
States can't leave the union. Period.
The notion of that always bothered me from a legal perspective, despite being a fierce anti-Confederate myself. You'd figure if a majority of state delegations voted to allow a state to leave, then that would constitute mutual consent or something. I could easily see conservatives being behind that in theory, on the mistaken assumption that the blue states are the takers, so if a blue state wanted out a majority of state delegations could be pushed to approve.
I get that the legal standard doesn't exist for that, but it should. No union should be binding in perpetuity since all government comes from consent, even if a small-l liberal view of secessionism goes to dangerous places (whether for the ulterior motives of secessionists or just to prevent large, functional states from becoming a nest of small, weak countries that have less of an ability to provide for their citizens).
One state leaving damages all the states with the repercussion. It's to prevent some tiny state like Vermont from destabilizing a nation of hundreds of millions because of the short sighted extremism at the state capital.
States can 100% leave, you would "just" need a constitutional amendment to do it
Also I ain't super happy about Megyn Kelly leaving Fox because while she's not someone I consider a nice person, she was practically the only popular voice on FOX who ever willing to criticize the GOP.
I think California is just looking for every available way to flip the bird to the incoming adminstration.
They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.
What's sad is that Calexit means that the state inmediatly gets a visit from the Chinese Navy looking to annex a new colony.
States can't leave the union. Period.
The notion of that always bothered me from a legal perspective, despite being a fierce anti-Confederate myself. You'd figure if a majority of state delegations voted to allow a state to leave, then that would constitute mutual consent or something. I could easily see conservatives being behind that in theory, on the mistaken assumption that the blue states are the takers, so if a blue state wanted out a majority of state delegations could be pushed to approve.
I get that the legal standard doesn't exist for that, but it should. No union should be binding in perpetuity since all government comes from consent, even if a small-l liberal view of secessionism goes to dangerous places (whether for the ulterior motives of secessionists or just to prevent large, functional states from becoming a nest of small, weak countries that have less of an ability to provide for their citizens).
"states can't leave the union" is misleading
States can't leave the union without the consent of 3/4ths of the states.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
0
GoodKingJayIIIThey wanna get mygold on the ceilingRegistered Userregular
Also I ain't super happy about Megyn Kelly leaving Fox because while she's not someone I consider a nice person, she was practically the only popular voice on FOX who ever willing to criticize the GOP.
The easy answer is to treat Fox like the faux journalism that it is and just not watch them at all.
Also I ain't super happy about Megyn Kelly leaving Fox because while she's not someone I consider a nice person, she was practically the only popular voice on FOX who ever willing to criticize the GOP.
The thing about megan kelly that John stewart pointed out years ago, is that she only opposes the GOP/conservatives/FOX when it directly and personally effects her.
I think California is just looking for every available way to flip the bird to the incoming adminstration.
They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.
What's sad is that Calexit means that the state inmediatly gets a visit from the Chinese Navy looking to annex a new colony.
States can't leave the union. Period.
The notion of that always bothered me from a legal perspective, despite being a fierce anti-Confederate myself. You'd figure if a majority of state delegations voted to allow a state to leave, then that would constitute mutual consent or something. I could easily see conservatives being behind that in theory, on the mistaken assumption that the blue states are the takers, so if a blue state wanted out a majority of state delegations could be pushed to approve.
I get that the legal standard doesn't exist for that, but it should. No union should be binding in perpetuity since all government comes from consent, even if a small-l liberal view of secessionism goes to dangerous places (whether for the ulterior motives of secessionists or just to prevent large, functional states from becoming a nest of small, weak countries that have less of an ability to provide for their citizens).
"states can't leave the union" is misleading
States can't leave the union without the consent of 3/4ths of the states.
Dude: can you imagine if new york seceded, and then refused to grant trump entry?
Posts
They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
What's sad is that Calexit means that the state inmediatly gets a visit from the Chinese Navy looking to annex a new colony.
He's going to rip apart so many families over the course of his presidency.
I'm waiting for him to threaten to nuke LA if he doesn't get his Emmy.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Of course he is. #draintheswamp
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Who's doing the ripping? This past X-mas my brother (Lives in California) refused to visit my family for the holidays because they live in a permanent red state. There has been lots of disagreement politically over the last 8 years between us but we never wanted to seperate ourselves from his life or blame him because he was on the other side. Now its okay for him to do that to us? I was extremely pissed to find this out (of course after the election).
Likely the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
Also all the dead people from lack of medical care and covered up police abuse.
(not that he wouldn't actually say that for real, but still...)
can I have a cry gents?
I'm gonna have a cry.
*sobs*
Don't think he's not going to try that.
States can't leave the union. Period.
The notion of that always bothered me from a legal perspective, despite being a fierce anti-Confederate myself. You'd figure if a majority of state delegations voted to allow a state to leave, then that would constitute mutual consent or something. I could easily see conservatives being behind that in theory, on the mistaken assumption that the blue states are the takers, so if a blue state wanted out a majority of state delegations could be pushed to approve.
I get that the legal standard doesn't exist for that, but it should. No union should be binding in perpetuity since all government comes from consent, even if a small-l liberal view of secessionism goes to dangerous places (whether for the ulterior motives of secessionists or just to prevent large, functional states from becoming a nest of small, weak countries that have less of an ability to provide for their citizens).
Well, they are currently redoing the paper currency designs
You should be so lucky, trump is probably going to try to get the crazyhorse carving changed to his likeness because those four other guys got their faces carved into a mountain.
Which is more likely: "In Trump we Trust" or "In God we Trump"?
E Pluribus Trump
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
One state leaving damages all the states with the repercussion. It's to prevent some tiny state like Vermont from destabilizing a nation of hundreds of millions because of the short sighted extremism at the state capital.
If that's your goal, you failed completely. Your entire country just got destabilized hard because of the extremism a few (shitty) states' capital.
States can 100% leave, you would "just" need a constitutional amendment to do it
You think Trump is going to be involved in the creation of a coin of any type other than gold?
"states can't leave the union" is misleading
States can't leave the union without the consent of 3/4ths of the states.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
The easy answer is to treat Fox like the faux journalism that it is and just not watch them at all.
The thing about megan kelly that John stewart pointed out years ago, is that she only opposes the GOP/conservatives/FOX when it directly and personally effects her.