The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The Trump Administration

ElkiElki get busyModerator, ClubPA mod
edited January 2017 in Debate and/or Discourse
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?

smCQ5WE.jpg
Elki on
ShadowfireGoodKingJayIIIemp123NightDragonPanda4YouDark Raven XHarry DresdentynicshrykeGiggles_FunsworthwanderingDisruptedCapitalistchrono_travellerA Kobold's Kobold
«134567100

Posts

  • r4dr3zr4dr3z Registered User regular
    Holder? I hardly even know her.

    Smrtnikwandering
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    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.

    Gaddez
  • OrcaOrca Registered User regular
    We're gonna make our OWN country, with healthcare and jobs!

    evilthecat wrote: »
    "Bioware I want to suck on your teets of gamingness".

    The 2012 issue of Fornax. | Steam and Origin: Espressosaurus
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    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.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
    ShadowhopeGiggles_Funsworthwandering
  • BurnageBurnage Registered User regular
    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.

    DarkewolfeLovelyGaddezFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudHarry DresdenTheDrifterRhalloTonnyKalnaur
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    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.

  • HozHoz Cool Cat Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    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.

    Hoz on
    TryCatcherGiggles_Funsworth
  • HozHoz Cool Cat Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    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.
    China doesn't even have the balls to seize Taiwan. Even though everyone would totally look the other way if they did.

    Panda4YouSpoitGnome-InterruptusMagellGennenalyse RuebenTheDriftershrykeSmrtnikMegaMekKaputaGiggles_FunsworthN1tSt4lkerInfamyDeferredHacksawLeon2309
  • Emerlmaster999Emerlmaster999 Phantom Thief Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    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.

    Emerlmaster999 on
    Harry DresdenGiggles_Funsworth
  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    Hoz wrote: »
    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.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    New SEC head is a Goldman lawyer.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    EinzelshrykeMegaMekGiggles_FunsworthN1tSt4lkerchrono_travellerSquigie
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    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.

  • [Expletive deleted][Expletive deleted] The mediocre doctor NorwayRegistered User regular
    New SEC head is a Goldman lawyer.

    Of course he is. #draintheswamp

    Sic transit gloria mundi.
    Panda4YouMegaMekSquigie
  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    Goldman Sachs: We tried in 2008, but in 2018 we're going to succeed goddamnit!

    Taramoor on
    Panda4YouHarry DresdenGiggles_FunsworthSquigie
  • azith28azith28 Registered User regular
    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).

    Stercus, Stercus, Stercus, Morituri Sum
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Lines that aren't in the film do put a smile on my face... Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    azith28 wrote: »
    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?

    Likely the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

    Undead Scottsman on
    Gxh2uVN.jpg
    CptKemzikTNTrooperrockrngerdurandal4532DasUberEdwardEmerlmaster999Gennenalyse RuebenshrykeHacksawSquigie
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    Edit: Doh, fake account.

    Couscous on
    CelestialBadger
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    azith28 wrote: »
    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?

    Likely the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

    Also all the dead people from lack of medical care and covered up police abuse.

    TNTrooperCptKemzikdurandal4532Emerlmaster999Panda4YouLovelyMan in the MistsiTunesIsEvilGennenalyse RuebenshrykeMegaMekGiggles_FunsworthHacksawSquigie
  • MaximumMaximum Registered User regular
    That's not a real Twitter account.

    (not that he wouldn't actually say that for real, but still...)

    TryCatcherFrostwood
  • HozHoz Cool Cat Registered User regular
    Mike Pence is 100% full of shit 24/7 but it's not his style to be inflammatory.

  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    Can

    can I have a cry gents?

    I'm gonna have a cry.

    *sobs*

    ShadowhopelonelyahavaGiggles_Funsworth
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    Panda4YouNobeardSquigie
  • ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    Just wait until he's on US Currency.

    Don't think he's not going to try that.

    Artereis wrote: »
    It's not your fault, Viskod. 1 out of every 10 people just happens to be a monster.
    SleepDacPanda4YouDark Raven XGennenalyse RuebenMrVyngaardtynicSmrtnikGiggles_FunsworthTransporterNobeardjdarksunHacksawCaulk Bite 6Squigie
  • GundiGundi Serious Bismuth Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    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.

    NinjeffSleepMarathonHarry DresdenMegaMekCaptain MarcusNobeardLeon2309
  • Mr KhanMr Khan Get Swole Dream LandRegistered User regular
    Gundi wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    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).

    PolaritieLeon2309
  • KetBraKetBra FISTS OF JUSTICE! Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Just wait until he's on US Currency.

    Don't think he's not going to try that.

    Well, they are currently redoing the paper currency designs

    ohKiGmg.png
    Steam Bnet:KetBra#1692
    SleepGiggles_Funsworth
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    You would need an amendment to provide for a legal secession. Not impossible, but it would be tough.

    GundiGoodKingJayIII
  • HozHoz Cool Cat Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    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.

    Hoz on
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    Just wait until he's on US Currency.

    Don't think he's not going to try that.

    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.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    Will Trump finally mint the Platinum coin?

    Which is more likely: "In Trump we Trust" or "In God we Trump"?

    E Pluribus Trump

    Taramoor on
  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion The Land of Flowers (and Dragons)Registered User regular
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    Gundi wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    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.

    Guns make you stupid. Better to fight your wars with duct tape. Duct tape makes you smart.

    I make Encounter Maps for Pathfinder and D&D! Check them out here: https://falleron.com/
  • mrondeaumrondeau Montréal, CanadaRegistered User regular
    Enc wrote: »
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    Gundi wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    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.

    SleepBigJoeMShadowhopeSpoitCalicaNobodyMortiousMan in the MistsGennenalyse RuebenEtiowsaMrVyngaardMegaMekGiggles_FunsworthDelmainNobeard14357jdarksunHacksawLeon2309Caulk Bite 6
  • KetBraKetBra FISTS OF JUSTICE! Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    Enc wrote: »
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    Gundi wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    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

    KetBra on
    ohKiGmg.png
    Steam Bnet:KetBra#1692
    mrondeauSleep
  • klemmingklemming Registered User regular
    Taramoor wrote: »
    Will Trump finally mint the Platinum coin?

    Which is more likely: "In Trump we Trust" or "In God we Trump"?

    E Pluribus Trump

    You think Trump is going to be involved in the creation of a coin of any type other than gold?

    Nobody remembers the singer. The song remains.
    GaddezmcpSleepEmerlmaster999MagellGennenalyse RuebenGiggles_FunsworthCaulk Bite 6
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    *beat*

    Gaddez on
    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
  • GundiGundi Serious Bismuth Registered User regular
    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.

    DasUberEdwardPLAGiggles_Funsworth
  • AiouaAioua Ora Occidens Ora OptimaRegistered User regular
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    Gundi wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    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
  • GoodKingJayIIIGoodKingJayIII Registered User regular
    Gundi wrote: »
    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.

    torchlight-sig-80.jpg
    Battletag: Threeve#1501
    PSN: Threeve703
    SleepEmerlmaster999dispatch.oMan in the MistsGennenalyse RuebenMrVyngaardshrykeMegaMekTransporterMild ConfusionHacksaw
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Gundi wrote: »
    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.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
    Sleepemp123IncenjucarLovelyNijaelectricitylikesmeEinzelMagellGnome-InterruptusMan in the MistsGennenalyse RuebenKraintHarry DresdenMrVyngaardshrykeGiggles_FunsworthDelmainTransporterHacksawDouglasDangerDisruptedCapitalistSquigie
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    Aioua wrote: »
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    Gundi wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    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?

    Gaddez on
    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
    VoodooVMrVyngaardGiggles_FunsworthNobeardLeon2309Squigie
«134567100
This discussion has been closed.