Sounds about right. Every once in a while we nip that elusive thing.
Good to get a little 'tail' once in a while.
Conservative Politics & Daily Events Discussion
-
-
-
Good to get a little 'tail' once in a while.
with all this talk about dogs...
I thought I should throw this one in, about the wall. After all "top dog" said the Mexicans are going to pay for the wall, in electrical campaign and he told us that he keeps his word.
He said he would.
Time he just got started then.
-
Display Morewith all this talk about dogs...
I thought I should throw this one in, about the wall. After all "top dog" said the Mexicans are going to pay for the wall, in electrical campaign and he told us that he keeps his word.
He said he would.
Time he just got started then.
If the new Dem house doesn’t block it - Trumps new trade agreement with Mexico will more than pay for the wall - just depends on who has the better spin
-
If the new Dem house doesn’t block it - Trumps new trade agreement with Mexico will more than pay for the wall - just depends on who has the better spin
I wish there wasn't spin on stuff like that. It should be hard numbers, indisputable, but...politicians.
-
Good to get a little 'tail' once in a while.
But not when it's the gov telling you to bend over.
-
If the new Dem house doesn’t block it - Trumps new trade agreement with Mexico will more than pay for the wall - just depends on who has the better spin
So it's dead simple.
He can build it & the Mexicans pay. The Democrats have no need (or grounds) to object. Everyone wins.
-
So it's dead simple.
He can build it & the Mexicans pay. The Democrats have no need (or grounds) to object. Everyone wins.
That would require common sense - terribly lacking with our country’s politicians these days
-
That would require common sense - terribly lacking with our country’s politicians these days
It actually requires agreement, which is where the problem lies. If the trade deal nets the U.S. more money over previous deals. That is where hard math gets twisted by politics. You gain in sectors (A,D,K) but lose in sectors (F,G,Z) the spin machines fire up and confuse the crap out of the math.
IF there is a Net increase, you still need agreement as to where that money goes. And the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round.
-
It actually requires agreement, which is where the problem lies. If the trade deal nets the U.S. more money over previous deals. That is where hard math gets twisted by politics. You gain in sectors (A,D,K) but lose in sectors (F,G,Z) the spin machines fire up and confuse the crap out of the math.
IF there is a Net increase, you still need agreement as to where that money goes. And the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round.
-
But Mr Trump did say that Mexico will pay for the wall, in his electrical promises, so Mexico will pay for it.
After all he's a president and could, certainly, never lie. No need for the Democratic party to say yes.
-
I think the wall is a waste of money and will be generally ineffective FunCycle . However, if your stats are f
But Mr Trump did say that Mexico will pay for the wall, in his electrical promises, so Mexico will pay for it.
After all he's a president and could, certainly, never lie. No need for the Democratic party to say yes.
They will pay directly or indirectly, that is he part that people do not understand but they still pay
-
They will pay directly or indirectly, that is he part that people do not understand but they still pay
Exactly - Trump only said Mexico would pay, he didn't specify how they would pay - I think most reasonable people never expected Mexico to cut a check directly for the wall, It always seemed more reasonable that the payment would come more indirectly through money saved by the "better deals" that Mr Trump also said he would negotiate
The Idea that Trump said Mexico would pay directly was only something the media tried to sell so that they could then try to spin things the way they wanted and only the nuts still try to push this
-
Exactly - Trump only said Mexico would pay, he didn't specify how they would pay - I think most reasonable people never expected Mexico to cut a check directly for the wall, It always seemed more reasonable that the payment would come more indirectly through money saved by the "better deals" that Mr Trump also said he would negotiate
The Idea that Trump said Mexico would pay directly was only something the media tried to sell so that they could then try to spin things the way they wanted and only the nuts still try to push this
Can anyone prove what you just said or is this all just more political BS people say to make themselves feel good? Show me the money trail. Show me some sort of contract between the U.S. and Mexico. Bet you can't.
-
Can anyone prove what you just said or is this all just more political BS people say to make themselves feel good? Show me the money trail. Show me some sort of contract between the U.S. and Mexico. Bet you can't.
why does there need to be a contract? why do we even need to make Mexico feel like they are paying?
Why not just re make the trade deals so we get the money and keep things friendly so they can save face
if the U.S. gets money from Mexico that we were not getting before Trump because of a trade deal Trump makes and the money is put in the government pot and then Trump gets the congress to give him the money for the wall out of that same pot - - it is fair to say that Mexico paid for the wall
Its also a smart way to do this kind of business because it lets both sides say they won
-
Display More
why does there need to be a contract? why do we even need to make Mexico feel like they are paying?
Why not just re make the trade deals so we get the money and keep things friendly so they can save face
if the U.S. gets money from Mexico that we were not getting before Trump because of a trade deal Trump makes and the money is put in the government pot and then Trump gets the congress to give him the money for the wall out of that same pot - - it is fair to say that Mexico paid for the wall
Its also a smart way to do this kind of business because it lets both sides say they won
All you just said is crooked/lame brain politics makes the best politics...
-
Exactly - Trump only said Mexico would pay, he didn't specify how they would pay - I think most reasonable people never expected Mexico to cut a check directly for the wall, It always seemed more reasonable that the payment would come more indirectly through money saved by the "better deals" that Mr Trump also said he would negotiate
The Idea that Trump said Mexico would pay directly was only something the media tried to sell so that they could then try to spin things the way they wanted and only the nuts still try to push this
FunCycle people understand the concept of Mexico paying directly or indirectly for the wall. It's a simple concept. The question that is unanswered and frankly too complicated to get a clear answer is, was Trumps "great" deal a money maker? "Fox News said..." is not an answer with any validity.
Edward Neal Trump did say Mexico would pay directly, that he would talk to the Mexican President. Remember, The Mexican President told Trump "Mexico isn't paying for the Fucking wall"?
Then Trump said, "We'll pay for it and Mexico will pay us back".
Then Trump said, "We'll close the border and squeeze Mexico to pay for the wall".
Then Trump said, "We'll get the money from Mexico with sanctions"
Then Trump said, "We'll get them to pay for it through a new trade deal".
Moving the line as it were. Much like "The Great Beautiful, Best Wall in the World" turned into
"a concrete standard wall",
to a "wall but not across the whole border",
to "wall in some parts fence in other places and some places there won't be anything"
to "metal slats in some parts, repairing some existing fence and adding some fencing and some places won't get anything"
Yeah, Trump has been so clear. This is what you expect from a moron that doesn't know a damn thing about how things work, yet thinks he is, "smarter than everybody", "knows more than anybody" and is unwilling to take advice from experts or simply pause and think about a situation before spewing a bunch of lies.
-
Display MoreIn case anyone still believes that the PRESS is doing their job to report the news and not create the news, please do yourself a favor and read this article from the Left Wing Washington Post
Here is their own headlines of the Government shutdown
"Three dead in national park accidents as shutdown wears on"
Trump administration officials decided to leave the scenic parks open even as the Interior Department has halted most of its operations — a departure from previous extended shutdowns
Now why would anyone not want to blame Trump for causing innocent lives to be lost in his power struggle for funding of the border wall? Well folks, by the time you finish the article, you'll be thanking Trump for actually SAVING lives due to the shutdown
Three days after most of the federal workforce was furloughed on Dec. 21, a 14-year-old girl fell 700 feet to her death at the Horseshoe Bend Overlook, part of the Glen Canyon Recreation Area in Arizona. The following day, Christmas, a man died at Yosemite National Park in California after suffering a head injury in a fall. On Dec. 27, a woman was killed by a falling tree at Great Smoky Mountains National Park, which straddles the borders of North Carolina and Tennessee.
The deaths follow a decision by Trump administration officials to leave the scenic — but sometimes deadly — parks open even as the Interior Department has halted most of its operations. During previous extended shutdowns, the National Park Service barred public access to many of its sites across the nation to substantially decrease the risk of park damage and visitor injury.
National Park Service spokesman Jeremy Barnum said in an interview that seven people have died in national parks since the shutdown began. Officials believe that four of the deaths were suicides, he added.
To put this in different terms, in the 15 days of the Government shutdown, 7 people have dies in the open Federal Parks - THREE of the deaths were from accidents that nobody could have predicted, much less stopped from happening no mater how many Park Rangers were on duty those days. And FOUR of the deaths were suicides - while horrible, they were in no way connected to not having Park Rangers or anything to do with the government shutdown.
Now, the next paragraph will tie it all together
An average of six people die each week in the park system, he said, a figure that includes accidents like drownings, falls, and motor vehicle crashes, natural causes such as heart attacks and suicides. Drowning, automobile accidents and falls are among the top causes of death at national parks.
REALLY? So while your headlines attempt to blame the President for three deaths, you really should be thanking hime for saving more than 7 lives so far at the national Parks alone
I doubt the Democrats will do anything to point out the fake news and give the president the credit while they do their damnest to give him all the BLAME!
Sorry brother, you can't show that an article proves it's headline is biased and call it "Fake News". It was obviously accurate reporting with a biased headline. It's sad they went that route, but it doesn't make it Fake News. The headline was even truthful, though misleading.
-
I like the idea of using Ell Capps 14 billion to build the wall,that way Mexico is indirectly paying for the wall.Or has all that money already been stollen?
