Angry Trump slams Democrats' investigations after cutting infrastructure meeting short

We have the ability to prove on the internet what computer was used.

I will say that this forum got it wrong when I got blamed for a post I never made. Someone gamed the system. A simple Q to me, did you say that would have absolved me and not penalized me for some other person's statement.

 

LA, SF, Anaheim etc. are not in Republican states.

I do think that upon the elimination of the minimum wage state, local and federal government should subsidize the wages of unskilled and less desirable workers to get them into the productive workforce and keep them there. Many of the homeless have criminal records and drug problems that might otherwise idle them for life.

 

The temporary housing scheme depicted near the end of the Grapes of Wrath film is a good rather detailed model of an approach that might work.

 

Interesting post. . .I found myself--a liberal--in agreement with you--a conservative--on MOST of the issues cited in your post. That give me hope. Even in those areas where I disagree, like the state's rights issue, I feel we have common ground. You appear to be the kind of "conservative" I, or other liberals, could work with. Our country needs more leaders like that.

The Electoral College is a complicated issue. I understand your views & respect them. You agree with the founding fathers that the larger, more powerful states shouldn't be allowed to overpower the smaller, weaker states in the Presidential elections. There's some validity to that view. From my perspective, the status of individual states has blurred over time. When the nation was founded in the 1700s, states were far more autonomous than now. Individual citizens often regarded themselves as citizens of their respective states rather than the nation as a whole. The Civil War started in large part due to that perception. But since the Civil War, most Americans have gradually come to regard themselves as citizens of the U.S. as a whole, and a resident of the particular state they happen to live or work in at any given time. Members of Congress are all elected to represent the state whose voters elect them. Thru them, every state has representation in the national legislature. The President was originally thought of as the President of the "United States"--or President of the states. Today, Americans have become more connected with democratic principles, and regard the President more as the President of the people. It's more than a hypothetical argument. It's an important distinction in the functioning of the President & his work. Does he represent the interests of the states themselves as political entities, or does he represent the people--the citizens directly? Most voters interpret him as their direct leader, whether true or not. Under the Electoral College, individual votes only count to determine the majority, and the majority determines which candidate gets that state's final support. Outside that state, individual votes for President don't count, and become unimportant. In a real democracy, candidates are elected by the total of individual votes, regardless of the state they're from. Under the Electoral College, the states actually elect the President. State Electors usually vote for the candidate winning the majority of votes within their state borders, but not always. Electors are permitted to ignore their state's voters, & sometimes do. This makes individual citizen votes at risk of being ignored or irrelevant. Powerful state political families or organizations can potentially buy the vote of an elector & thus propel their candidate into office around the will of the voters. This is rare, but it has happened. Direct popular elections would reflect the will of the citizenry more accurately than the Electoral College. Often I've heard potential voters excuse their lack of voting by saying, "What difference does it make if I don't vote? My vote doesn't really count anyway." In 2016, the results in California illustrated how & why so many voters feel this way. California helped give Hillary over 3 million more total popular votes than Trump, nationally. But the Electoral College didn't reflect that popular difference, & gave the Presidency to Trump. Both systems--the EC & direct vote--have problems associated with them. The EC was helpful early in our history because it gave the states more say. Today, with most Americans regarding states as simply the place they happen to be living or working now, the differences in state's power seems less important than having every citizen feel his or her vote actually does count toward electing their President. That's why I support abandoning the EC & going to direct vote for Presidents.

 

I think the level of concern is rising in the House. I think they'll increase their subpoenas & may eventually impeach, based on their findings along the way.

 

That is the first I have ever heard of. We in my republican city do not have a serious homeless problem nor a trash nor a narcotics needle problem.

Perhaps due to our enormous Asian population.

 

What “Republican City” in California do you live?

 

Nevada has tried to take the control of this country over, and it is run by Democrats, by passing a state law that says, no matter what their citizens vote on the president, these Democrats intend to ignore that and simply agree with the popularity contest system and give all votes to the popularity contest winner. Using that law, NV would have put Hillary in office as the president.

If CA passes such a law, it could backfire on them and have the rest of the states select who they want as president and give us the middle finger. At the moment Democrats are safe.

 

Fremont, CA

 

Democrat ideology says you want to punish the poor and indeed the mentally ill.

 

Your whole argument seems to be built around the contention that "most Americans regarding states as simply the place they happen to be living or working now". I disagree with that claim (in some parts). I have lived in many different States in my life, but always considered myself an Oregonian. How I felt about different laws in the different States did have some influence as to the length of time I spent in other States. I had no desire to change the laws of those other States and learned to adapt to that State's laws. They were not necessarily good laws or bad laws....just laws that I felt influenced my life. However, the different laws in the different States DID provide me some options and choices as to where I felt was most advantageous for me and my family to live. It gave me Freedom of Choice.

It is sad to say, but most voters are uninformed and apathetic towards politics and actual facts. If an exit poll was conducted asking voters WHY they voted for a certain candidate (maybe it has been done), I would expect most voters vote along party line, because of how a candidate looks, how well of a public speaker the candidate is.....anything but the composite of issues that a candidate stands for. This was a very major concern to the Founding Fathers.....and it exists 10-fold today. It was the driving factor for the creation of the Electoral College. Without the Electoral College, candidates would only need to focus on 2-3 major States and could win an election by promising and granting those specific State some very major concessions at the expense of the other States. Kind of completely kills the concept of a "Union" that this country was created on.

 

Union was well respected at one time. Today Democrats can't tell you what it is. Sadly voters are not literate as to voting. They were fooled by Hillary as an example. Trump went over the grain and it seems his supporters wanted things changed and lost hope with Obama who was a shuck and jive con artist.

 

44% Democrat 36% Republican. Last time Fremont voted for Republican was GHW Bush in 88. Clinton won twice, Gore, Kerry, Obama twice and Hillary Clinton in 2016....Real GOP stronghold...lol

 

I see nothing in my post to lead you to this conclusion. Please enlighten me how you came to it.

 

Soon I will be in Idaho. Fremont is one of the best communities in America set up & established by republicans.

By the way 44 percent is not even a majority.

Furthermore I do not see in my city claims by our mayors to admit what party they are. We get more done at the mayors level than what takes place in DC.

 

There's certainly a reality behind the term "dirty politics."

 

Well, no worries there...., but you just guaranteed Fremont will vote for the D candidate.... can you live with that?

 

Neither is 36%. But you will love Idaho. White Republicans as far as the eye can see. Beautiful scenery, mountains, lakes, great hunting and fishing. Winter can be a little rough unless you are a skier or snowboarder in which case it is great. Good luck up there Robert. I hope you enjoy it.

 

The founders were not fans of direct democracy which usually ends with some form of tyranny. They were very concerned with the tendency of the real power to take political action to concentrate at the center. Jefferson even proposed an additional check on central power toward the end of his life. A local ward system to allow Americans to actively participate in public affairs all the time.


"Jefferson himself knew well enough that what he proposed as
the 'salvation of the republic' actually was the salvation of the
revolutionary spirit through the republic. His expositions of the
ward system always began with a reminder of how 'the vigour
given to our revolution in its commencement' was due to the
'little republics', how they had 'thrown the whole nation into
energetic action', and how, at a later occasion, he had felt 'the
foundations of the government shaken under [his] feet by the
New England townships', 'the energy of this organization' being
so great that 'there was not an individual in their States whose
body was not thrown with all its momentum into action'. Hence,
he expected the wards to permit the citizens to continue to do
what they had been able to do during the years of revolution,
namely, to act on their own and thus to participate in public
business as it was being transacted from day to day. By virtue of
the Constitution, the public business of the nation as a whole
had been transferred to Washington and was being transacted
by the federal government, of which Jefferson still thought as
4 the foreign branch' of the republic, whose domestic affairs were
taken care of by the state governments."
ON REVOLUTION, Hannnah Arendt, Penguin Classics, NY, NY, 2006. p. 251.
https://archive.org/stream/OnRevolution/ArendtOn-revolution_djvu.txt

 

Again, you make some valid points I'd not considered. I enjoy your posts. Thanks.

I share similar experiences living in different states, but unlike you, never really formed a bond with any one more than others. There were some I liked more than others, for different reasons, and there were some I didn't enjoy living in much, for different reasons. I really do feel I'm a citizen of the whole U.S. rather than any single state alone. I have also traveled extensively, visiting 49 of the 50 states, most several times. I oppose expansive states rights on the basis that having every state with different regulations can be both confusing & legally challenging. For example, on the abortion issue. . .if Alabama has a law forbidding abortion altogether while a neighboring state--say Florida--permits abortions during the first trimester, pregnant women might be tempted to go to FL for their abortion. However, if Alabama provided for the punishment of 10 years imprisonment for any woman who left the state to get an abortion in another state, that would set up the situation where the human rights of an American citizen would be different in the different states, which is possibly unconstitutional. For minor things such as driving regulations, that's acceptable, but when incarceration or imprisonment & the loss of human rights is involved, it becomes much more serious. This is where I believe state's rights have to be curtailed & the basic human rights of every American be guaranteed & protected by federal oversight. [By the way, the new Alabama Abortion Ban passed last week actually DOES punish women who leave Alabama for abortions in other states, with 10 years in prison. How Pro-Life is that when that woman is already the mother of other children & a wife?]

 

The part where you want states to lose their rights, and just have CA NY and TX decide how the country as a whole functions.

The entire point of a Constitutional Republic, and the limited rights enumerated to the federal government, is to ensure freedom by intentionally NOT consolidating power.

Your entire post was a giant oxymoron of calling for freedom while demanding power be invested in a single monolithic entity.

In other words, you did not describe freedom and you certainly didn't call for less government control.

 

CA and NY just decided to build a toxic waste dump in Arizona.

Yay straight democracy.

 

Both of you posters are class acts.

A lot of law varies per states. Laws against coal would not work well in CA. In West VA perhaps.
Abortion is not a fundamental right. Her right to life is one. I would think it extends to her child. I would like to read a good post that argues clearly that one can have a right but deny it to others.
The general arguments made by Democrats do not cut the mustard. A good way to tell is that some resort to shouting matches and base it all on their feelings. That is an incorrect path to argue law.

 

Trumps tanks on the russian Border prove he is very anti Russian.

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-...-being-moved-to-Russian-border/7541485871778/
U.S. Army tanks being moved to Russian border
By
Andrew V. Pestano


An American M1A2 Abrams Tank moves quickly into firing position during a live-fire training exercise on Jan. 30 at Karlikie Range, Zagan, Poland. The exercise, the first between the U.S. 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division and the Polish 11th Armored Cavalry Division, took place after a formal welcome ceremony for the American Soldiers. The American forces arrived in Poland earlier this month to begin a nine-month “heel-to-toe” rotation to bolster ties with NATO allies. Photo by Staff Sgt. Corinna Baltos/U.S. Army/UPI

Jan. 31 (UPI) -- The U.S. Army will send M1A2 Abrams main battle tanks to the Baltic states of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania along Russia's borders ahead of a NATO operation in the spring.

The tanks participated in joint drills between U.S. and Polish forces but some are being moved to the Baltic states to await a deterrence operation set to reassure the United States' European allies that Washington, D.C., is committed to their defense, The Wall Street Journal reported.

 

Would you agree to the border wall if Russia defeated Mexico and put tanks on our border the way Trump put tanks on Russia's Border?

You claim to be a whiz on history and our constitution. I would love for you to provide evidence. Just charge right in once you are capable.

I want the fence finished for a lot of reasons. It is not to prove a claim of bigotry. Bigots first decide and in a few cases may research something. I see many democrats shooting their faces off unable to back up a thing they claim.