What is left in the Donald Trump/Vladimir Putin CHECK LIST?

[westwall]

So suppose Trump really does work for Vladimir Putin.

And Putin gave Trump a "Check List" of things he wants done.

So what is left to do on that speculative "Check List".

We can start with what Trump and the Republicans have already "accomplished":

1. Trump has divided the nation. CHECK

2. Trump has insulted our allies. CHECK

3. Trump has mocked our Intelligence Agencies causing great mistrust. CHECK

4. Trump has given SECRET Material to Russia and established a way to do it. CHECK

5. Trump has lifted sanctions against Russia. CHECK

6. Trump helped Russia out of nuclear arms agreements without them starting it. CHECK

7. Trump lifted sanctions against billionaire Russian Oligarchs. CHECK

8. Trump has given the KKK, the Aryan Nation and the Alt White great hope. CHECK

So let's look at what is left to accomplish:

9. Disband NATO

10. Pass more SECRET Material over to Russia.

11. Destroy all of our Intelligence agencies so they no longer protect America.

12. Destroy trade agreements by pulling out of them and replacing them with tariffs.

13. Destroy our economy (see #12)

14. Pull out of Syria and Afghanistan and leave the Middle East to Russia.

15. Destroy American democracy.

16. ..........

So what am I missing on this list?

Did I pretty much cover everything?

obama divided this country too....check.....

Obama didn’t divide the country. Republicans divided the country because they hate black people. And clearly Obama is black.

The hell he didn't. It takes someone as brain dead as you to make such a ridiculous statement.

 

[westwall]

for the far right maybe.... obama did not do much to bring the middle together....

He carried their vote in 2012.
But to be honest, who was the last president who's focus was on the middle class and making their life better? Eisenhower? Maybe Jimmy Carter? That's about the only two I can think of.

Carters policies screwed over the middle class big time. They couldn't afford to buy a house under him with a interest rate hovering near 17%.

Yep, inflation was high during the Cater years.
View attachment 243762
Inflation was on the rise when he assumed the presidency. But he and Volcker didn't meet the challenge.
But if you don't think he was focused on the middle class and tried to make things better, you're opinion is solely driven by embedded hyper-ideological goose-stepping.
His life time actions, speak for themselves.

My opinion is that Carter was a very nice man, who cared deeply about the people, but he was not competent in dealing with the issues, and he listened to bad advice.

The problem that liberals have in general is they don't care about how bad the results of a particular solution to a problem are, so long as the person instigating them has a nice sounding philosophy.

Eventually you are going to have to figure out that fighting for something, and making it worse, is not a smart thing to do. Sometimes it is best to leave things alone until you have a good handle on the problem, and even more important, a LOGICAL, not emotional, response to fix it.

You may discover that people are more aware than you think they are. You may find out, that you are not aware as you think you are.
When you address emotion, with liberals empathy is a major emotion to that demographic sector, With conservatives, the major emotion that drives them is fear. To think one ideology is more logical than the other, would be a flawed. Actually, it depends on the issue.
Here are a couple good reads.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/calling-truce-political-wars/
Why Liberal Hearts Bleed and Conservatives Don't
Enlighten yourself.

Enlighten yourself, I merely stated a fact. Liberals have a problem in that they shoot first, and then aim later. It is all about "doing something". The problem is most often their solutions are far worse than the original problems. I remember back in the 1970's the Kaibab plateau was a favorite spot for hunters. The local environmentalists felt that killing those poor deer was a bad, bad thing so they lobbied, and got hunting outlawed on the Plateau.

Within a couple of years the Plateau was a wasteland. With no natural predators the deer population exploded and they ate every bit of vegetation on the Plateau, then died of starvation. Of course all the other critters that relied on the vegetation died too. Now, with the global warming fraud in full swing, once the data stopped supporting their flawed theory, they began falsifying the data to make it fit.

I hate to break it to you, but that is ethically, and morally bankrupt.

The ends DO NOT justify the means.

When you begin acting like they do, it is YOU who are the fascist.

 

[kiwiman127]

He carried their vote in 2012.
But to be honest, who was the last president who's focus was on the middle class and making their life better? Eisenhower? Maybe Jimmy Carter? That's about the only two I can think of.

Carters policies screwed over the middle class big time. They couldn't afford to buy a house under him with a interest rate hovering near 17%.

Yep, inflation was high during the Cater years.
View attachment 243762
Inflation was on the rise when he assumed the presidency. But he and Volcker didn't meet the challenge.
But if you don't think he was focused on the middle class and tried to make things better, you're opinion is solely driven by embedded hyper-ideological goose-stepping.
His life time actions, speak for themselves.

My opinion is that Carter was a very nice man, who cared deeply about the people, but he was not competent in dealing with the issues, and he listened to bad advice.

The problem that liberals have in general is they don't care about how bad the results of a particular solution to a problem are, so long as the person instigating them has a nice sounding philosophy.

Eventually you are going to have to figure out that fighting for something, and making it worse, is not a smart thing to do. Sometimes it is best to leave things alone until you have a good handle on the problem, and even more important, a LOGICAL, not emotional, response to fix it.

You may discover that people are more aware than you think they are. You may find out, that you are not aware as you think you are.
When you address emotion, with liberals empathy is a major emotion to that demographic sector, With conservatives, the major emotion that drives them is fear. To think one ideology is more logical than the other, would be a flawed. Actually, it depends on the issue.
Here are a couple good reads.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/calling-truce-political-wars/
Why Liberal Hearts Bleed and Conservatives Don't
Enlighten yourself.

Enlighten yourself, I merely stated a fact. Liberals have a problem in that they shoot first, and then aim later. It is all about "doing something". The problem is most often their solutions are far worse than the original problems. I remember back in the 1970's the Kaibab plateau was a favorite spot for hunters. The local environmentalists felt that killing those poor deer was a bad, bad thing so they lobbied, and got hunting outlawed on the Plateau.

Within a couple of years the Plateau was a wasteland. With no natural predators the deer population exploded and they ate every bit of vegetation on the Plateau, then died of starvation. Of course all the other critters that relied on the vegetation died too. Now, with the global warming fraud in full swing, once the data stopped supporting their flawed theory, they began falsifying the data to make it fit.

I hate to break it to you, but that is ethically, and morally bankrupt.

The ends DO NOT justify the means.

When you begin acting like they do, it is YOU who are the fascist.

Wow!
You state an opinion drenched in narrow ideological ad hominem.
and demonstrate your inability to recognize reason beyond ideological wall that surrounds you.

 

[deanrd]

So suppose Trump really does work for Vladimir Putin.

And Putin gave Trump a "Check List" of things he wants done.

So what is left to do on that speculative "Check List".

We can start with what Trump and the Republicans have already "accomplished":

1. Trump has divided the nation. CHECK

2. Trump has insulted our allies. CHECK

3. Trump has mocked our Intelligence Agencies causing great mistrust. CHECK

4. Trump has given SECRET Material to Russia and established a way to do it. CHECK

5. Trump has lifted sanctions against Russia. CHECK

6. Trump helped Russia out of nuclear arms agreements without them starting it. CHECK

7. Trump lifted sanctions against billionaire Russian Oligarchs. CHECK

8. Trump has given the KKK, the Aryan Nation and the Alt White great hope. CHECK

So let's look at what is left to accomplish:

9. Disband NATO

10. Pass more SECRET Material over to Russia.

11. Destroy all of our Intelligence agencies so they no longer protect America.

12. Destroy trade agreements by pulling out of them and replacing them with tariffs.

13. Destroy our economy (see #12)

14. Pull out of Syria and Afghanistan and leave the Middle East to Russia.

15. Destroy American democracy.

16. ..........

So what am I missing on this list?

Did I pretty much cover everything?

obama divided this country too....check.....

Obama didn’t divide the country. Republicans divided the country because they hate black people. And clearly Obama is black.

The hell he didn't. It takes someone as brain dead as you to make such a ridiculous statement.

You can’t blame Obama because Republicans are racist. Birther anyone?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Invite Putin here with an army of occupation to liberate the country from democrat tyranny.

 

[westwall]

Carters policies screwed over the middle class big time. They couldn't afford to buy a house under him with a interest rate hovering near 17%.

Yep, inflation was high during the Cater years.
View attachment 243762
Inflation was on the rise when he assumed the presidency. But he and Volcker didn't meet the challenge.
But if you don't think he was focused on the middle class and tried to make things better, you're opinion is solely driven by embedded hyper-ideological goose-stepping.
His life time actions, speak for themselves.

My opinion is that Carter was a very nice man, who cared deeply about the people, but he was not competent in dealing with the issues, and he listened to bad advice.

The problem that liberals have in general is they don't care about how bad the results of a particular solution to a problem are, so long as the person instigating them has a nice sounding philosophy.

Eventually you are going to have to figure out that fighting for something, and making it worse, is not a smart thing to do. Sometimes it is best to leave things alone until you have a good handle on the problem, and even more important, a LOGICAL, not emotional, response to fix it.

You may discover that people are more aware than you think they are. You may find out, that you are not aware as you think you are.
When you address emotion, with liberals empathy is a major emotion to that demographic sector, With conservatives, the major emotion that drives them is fear. To think one ideology is more logical than the other, would be a flawed. Actually, it depends on the issue.
Here are a couple good reads.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/calling-truce-political-wars/
Why Liberal Hearts Bleed and Conservatives Don't
Enlighten yourself.

Enlighten yourself, I merely stated a fact. Liberals have a problem in that they shoot first, and then aim later. It is all about "doing something". The problem is most often their solutions are far worse than the original problems. I remember back in the 1970's the Kaibab plateau was a favorite spot for hunters. The local environmentalists felt that killing those poor deer was a bad, bad thing so they lobbied, and got hunting outlawed on the Plateau.

Within a couple of years the Plateau was a wasteland. With no natural predators the deer population exploded and they ate every bit of vegetation on the Plateau, then died of starvation. Of course all the other critters that relied on the vegetation died too. Now, with the global warming fraud in full swing, once the data stopped supporting their flawed theory, they began falsifying the data to make it fit.

I hate to break it to you, but that is ethically, and morally bankrupt.

The ends DO NOT justify the means.

When you begin acting like they do, it is YOU who are the fascist.

Wow!
You state an opinion drenched in narrow ideological ad hominem.
and demonstrate your inability to recognize reason beyond ideological wall that surrounds you.

I have a feeling that I am way older than you, so I have experienced the Democrat failures to actually help those they claim to want to, and the resultant worsening of the issues.

So, either the actual intent of the Democrats was to fix things but fucked it up due to incompetence, or they intended the results that happened, which makes them scum bags. I'll let you choose which one you think they are.

 

[charwin95]

So suppose Trump really does work for Vladimir Putin.

And Putin gave Trump a "Check List" of things he wants done.

So what is left to do on that speculative "Check List".

We can start with what Trump and the Republicans have already "accomplished":

1. Trump has divided the nation. CHECK

2. Trump has insulted our allies. CHECK

3. Trump has mocked our Intelligence Agencies causing great mistrust. CHECK

4. Trump has given SECRET Material to Russia and established a way to do it. CHECK

5. Trump has lifted sanctions against Russia. CHECK

6. Trump helped Russia out of nuclear arms agreements without them starting it. CHECK

7. Trump lifted sanctions against billionaire Russian Oligarchs. CHECK

8. Trump has given the KKK, the Aryan Nation and the Alt White great hope. CHECK

So let's look at what is left to accomplish:

9. Disband NATO

10. Pass more SECRET Material over to Russia.

11. Destroy all of our Intelligence agencies so they no longer protect America.

12. Destroy trade agreements by pulling out of them and replacing them with tariffs.

13. Destroy our economy (see #12)

14. Pull out of Syria and Afghanistan and leave the Middle East to Russia.

15. Destroy American democracy.

16. ..........

So what am I missing on this list?

Did I pretty much cover everything?

16. Hide his tax returns.

 

[deanrd]

Yep, inflation was high during the Cater years.
View attachment 243762
Inflation was on the rise when he assumed the presidency. But he and Volcker didn't meet the challenge.
But if you don't think he was focused on the middle class and tried to make things better, you're opinion is solely driven by embedded hyper-ideological goose-stepping.
His life time actions, speak for themselves.

My opinion is that Carter was a very nice man, who cared deeply about the people, but he was not competent in dealing with the issues, and he listened to bad advice.

The problem that liberals have in general is they don't care about how bad the results of a particular solution to a problem are, so long as the person instigating them has a nice sounding philosophy.

Eventually you are going to have to figure out that fighting for something, and making it worse, is not a smart thing to do. Sometimes it is best to leave things alone until you have a good handle on the problem, and even more important, a LOGICAL, not emotional, response to fix it.

You may discover that people are more aware than you think they are. You may find out, that you are not aware as you think you are.
When you address emotion, with liberals empathy is a major emotion to that demographic sector, With conservatives, the major emotion that drives them is fear. To think one ideology is more logical than the other, would be a flawed. Actually, it depends on the issue.
Here are a couple good reads.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/calling-truce-political-wars/
Why Liberal Hearts Bleed and Conservatives Don't
Enlighten yourself.

Enlighten yourself, I merely stated a fact. Liberals have a problem in that they shoot first, and then aim later. It is all about "doing something". The problem is most often their solutions are far worse than the original problems. I remember back in the 1970's the Kaibab plateau was a favorite spot for hunters. The local environmentalists felt that killing those poor deer was a bad, bad thing so they lobbied, and got hunting outlawed on the Plateau.

Within a couple of years the Plateau was a wasteland. With no natural predators the deer population exploded and they ate every bit of vegetation on the Plateau, then died of starvation. Of course all the other critters that relied on the vegetation died too. Now, with the global warming fraud in full swing, once the data stopped supporting their flawed theory, they began falsifying the data to make it fit.

I hate to break it to you, but that is ethically, and morally bankrupt.

The ends DO NOT justify the means.

When you begin acting like they do, it is YOU who are the fascist.

Wow!
You state an opinion drenched in narrow ideological ad hominem.
and demonstrate your inability to recognize reason beyond ideological wall that surrounds you.

I have a feeling that I am way older than you, so I have experienced the Democrat failures to actually help those they claim to want to, and the resultant worsening of the issues.

So, either the actual intent of the Democrats was to fix things but fucked it up due to incompetence, or they intended the results that happened, which makes them scum bags. I'll let you choose which one you think they are.

The way Republicans remember history and history are so at odds.

After Reagan (Iran Contra, dead Marines) ---- The Clinton Economy and balanced budget

After Bush (Iraq, Tax cuts for billionaires, ruined economy) ---- The Obama years and recovery, more people covered with healthcare, took down bin Laden to the laughter of the GOP.

Republicans go on endlessly about how awful the Democrats are. Then you compare that imagined vitriol with reality and you see something entirely different.

 

[westwall]

My opinion is that Carter was a very nice man, who cared deeply about the people, but he was not competent in dealing with the issues, and he listened to bad advice.

The problem that liberals have in general is they don't care about how bad the results of a particular solution to a problem are, so long as the person instigating them has a nice sounding philosophy.

Eventually you are going to have to figure out that fighting for something, and making it worse, is not a smart thing to do. Sometimes it is best to leave things alone until you have a good handle on the problem, and even more important, a LOGICAL, not emotional, response to fix it.

You may discover that people are more aware than you think they are. You may find out, that you are not aware as you think you are.
When you address emotion, with liberals empathy is a major emotion to that demographic sector, With conservatives, the major emotion that drives them is fear. To think one ideology is more logical than the other, would be a flawed. Actually, it depends on the issue.
Here are a couple good reads.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/calling-truce-political-wars/
Why Liberal Hearts Bleed and Conservatives Don't
Enlighten yourself.

Enlighten yourself, I merely stated a fact. Liberals have a problem in that they shoot first, and then aim later. It is all about "doing something". The problem is most often their solutions are far worse than the original problems. I remember back in the 1970's the Kaibab plateau was a favorite spot for hunters. The local environmentalists felt that killing those poor deer was a bad, bad thing so they lobbied, and got hunting outlawed on the Plateau.

Within a couple of years the Plateau was a wasteland. With no natural predators the deer population exploded and they ate every bit of vegetation on the Plateau, then died of starvation. Of course all the other critters that relied on the vegetation died too. Now, with the global warming fraud in full swing, once the data stopped supporting their flawed theory, they began falsifying the data to make it fit.

I hate to break it to you, but that is ethically, and morally bankrupt.

The ends DO NOT justify the means.

When you begin acting like they do, it is YOU who are the fascist.

Wow!
You state an opinion drenched in narrow ideological ad hominem.
and demonstrate your inability to recognize reason beyond ideological wall that surrounds you.

I have a feeling that I am way older than you, so I have experienced the Democrat failures to actually help those they claim to want to, and the resultant worsening of the issues.

So, either the actual intent of the Democrats was to fix things but fucked it up due to incompetence, or they intended the results that happened, which makes them scum bags. I'll let you choose which one you think they are.

The way Republicans remember history and history are so at odds.

After Reagan (Iran Contra, dead Marines) ---- The Clinton Economy and balanced budget

After Bush (Iraq, Tax cuts for billionaires, ruined economy) ---- The Obama years and recovery, more people covered with healthcare, took down bin Laden to the laughter of the GOP.

Republicans go on endlessly about how awful the Democrats are. Then you compare that imagined vitriol with reality and you see something entirely different.

Care to educate the class on how clinton "balanced" the budget?

 

[xyz]

Trump still has to completely bankrupt the US government, he runs it like his businesses.

He hasn't started the civil war resident Drumpflers have promised.

There must be something else...

 

[PoliticalChic]

You may discover that people are more aware than you think they are. You may find out, that you are not aware as you think you are.
When you address emotion, with liberals empathy is a major emotion to that demographic sector, With conservatives, the major emotion that drives them is fear. To think one ideology is more logical than the other, would be a flawed. Actually, it depends on the issue.
Here are a couple good reads.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/calling-truce-political-wars/
Why Liberal Hearts Bleed and Conservatives Don't
Enlighten yourself.

Enlighten yourself, I merely stated a fact. Liberals have a problem in that they shoot first, and then aim later. It is all about "doing something". The problem is most often their solutions are far worse than the original problems. I remember back in the 1970's the Kaibab plateau was a favorite spot for hunters. The local environmentalists felt that killing those poor deer was a bad, bad thing so they lobbied, and got hunting outlawed on the Plateau.

Within a couple of years the Plateau was a wasteland. With no natural predators the deer population exploded and they ate every bit of vegetation on the Plateau, then died of starvation. Of course all the other critters that relied on the vegetation died too. Now, with the global warming fraud in full swing, once the data stopped supporting their flawed theory, they began falsifying the data to make it fit.

I hate to break it to you, but that is ethically, and morally bankrupt.

The ends DO NOT justify the means.

When you begin acting like they do, it is YOU who are the fascist.

Wow!
You state an opinion drenched in narrow ideological ad hominem.
and demonstrate your inability to recognize reason beyond ideological wall that surrounds you.

I have a feeling that I am way older than you, so I have experienced the Democrat failures to actually help those they claim to want to, and the resultant worsening of the issues.

So, either the actual intent of the Democrats was to fix things but fucked it up due to incompetence, or they intended the results that happened, which makes them scum bags. I'll let you choose which one you think they are.

The way Republicans remember history and history are so at odds.

After Reagan (Iran Contra, dead Marines) ---- The Clinton Economy and balanced budget

After Bush (Iraq, Tax cuts for billionaires, ruined economy) ---- The Obama years and recovery, more people covered with healthcare, took down bin Laden to the laughter of the GOP.

Republicans go on endlessly about how awful the Democrats are. Then you compare that imagined vitriol with reality and you see something entirely different.

Care to educate the class on how clinton "balanced" the budget?

1. "Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term, and one can go to the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total outstanding debt through Clintons term.

Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to climb.
the national debt did not go down one year during the Clinton administration."
How much surplus did the US have when Clinton left office



2. Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?

1993

4,351,044

1994

4,643,307

1995

4,920,586

1996

5,181,465

1997

5,369,206

1998

5,478,189

1999

5,605,523

2000

5,628,700



end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/ (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!



3.Analogy that explains the bogus "Clinton Surplus"

1. You go to the bank and borrow $5,000 to take a trip to the Bahamas

2. You cancel the daily paper while you're away

3.When you return, you look at the household budget, and note that you saved $10 by not getting the paper delivered....never considering the Bahamas loan you're going to have to pay back $5,000 for the trip....

...you begin hooping and hollering 'I have a surplus! Yippee!'

4. You function this way because you're an idiot.

 

[RandomPoster]

Trump : Strong leader that loves his country and puts his country's citizens before those of other countries. Check
Putin: Strong leader that loves his country and puts his country's citizens before those of other countries. Check

 

[westwall]

Enlighten yourself, I merely stated a fact. Liberals have a problem in that they shoot first, and then aim later. It is all about "doing something". The problem is most often their solutions are far worse than the original problems. I remember back in the 1970's the Kaibab plateau was a favorite spot for hunters. The local environmentalists felt that killing those poor deer was a bad, bad thing so they lobbied, and got hunting outlawed on the Plateau.

Within a couple of years the Plateau was a wasteland. With no natural predators the deer population exploded and they ate every bit of vegetation on the Plateau, then died of starvation. Of course all the other critters that relied on the vegetation died too. Now, with the global warming fraud in full swing, once the data stopped supporting their flawed theory, they began falsifying the data to make it fit.

I hate to break it to you, but that is ethically, and morally bankrupt.

The ends DO NOT justify the means.

When you begin acting like they do, it is YOU who are the fascist.

Wow!
You state an opinion drenched in narrow ideological ad hominem.
and demonstrate your inability to recognize reason beyond ideological wall that surrounds you.

I have a feeling that I am way older than you, so I have experienced the Democrat failures to actually help those they claim to want to, and the resultant worsening of the issues.

So, either the actual intent of the Democrats was to fix things but fucked it up due to incompetence, or they intended the results that happened, which makes them scum bags. I'll let you choose which one you think they are.

The way Republicans remember history and history are so at odds.

After Reagan (Iran Contra, dead Marines) ---- The Clinton Economy and balanced budget

After Bush (Iraq, Tax cuts for billionaires, ruined economy) ---- The Obama years and recovery, more people covered with healthcare, took down bin Laden to the laughter of the GOP.

Republicans go on endlessly about how awful the Democrats are. Then you compare that imagined vitriol with reality and you see something entirely different.

Care to educate the class on how clinton "balanced" the budget?

1. "Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term, and one can go to the US Treasury Department and looking through the history of the total outstanding debt through Clintons term.

Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to climb.
the national debt did not go down one year during the Clinton administration."
How much surplus did the US have when Clinton left office



2. Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?

1993

4,351,044

1994

4,643,307

1995

4,920,586

1996

5,181,465

1997

5,369,206

1998

5,478,189

1999

5,605,523

2000

5,628,700



end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/ (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!



3.Analogy that explains the bogus "Clinton Surplus"

1. You go to the bank and borrow $5,000 to take a trip to the Bahamas

2. You cancel the daily paper while you're away

3.When you return, you look at the household budget, and note that you saved $10 by not getting the paper delivered....never considering the Bahamas loan you're going to have to pay back $5,000 for the trip....

...you begin hooping and hollering 'I have a surplus! Yippee!'

4. You function this way because you're an idiot.

Yup. The dishonesty of these idiots, like derpy here, is a wonder to behold.

 

[Correll]

So suppose Trump really does work for Vladimir Putin.

....

No, it is stupid to just assume that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So suppose Trump really does work for Vladimir Putin.

....

No, it is stupid to just assume that.

'Stupid' is his specialty.