• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Official promises Trump has walked back thread

M

Mxylplyx

Diamond Member
1. Conway and Giuliani have already mostly dismissed the possibility of pursuing Clinton on criminal charges.
2. All mentions of the Muslim ban have now completely disappeared from his website.
3. According to Giuliani, their first priority is tax reform. Building a wall will "take awhile". Didn't he say at his rally the wall was a day 1 priority?

Feel free to add more. I'd imagine about every one of his crazy policy positions will eventually end up here, which is a good thing.
 
Money is at the forefront of many people's minds. I don't think you'll hear many complaints about lower taxes being first on the to-do list.
 
So much for wanting to control the financial system:

Dismantling and replacing of the Dodd-Frank Act financial-sector law with pro-growth policies. This means that banks will be allowed to not only engage in prop trading again, but to invest directly in hedge funds. “The Dodd-Frank economy does not work for working people. Bureaucratic red tape and Washington mandates are not the answer,” says statement on Trump’s official transition website.
Click to expand...

So he plans to repeal Dodd-Frank but not reinstate Glass-Steagall. Welcome to the wild west of banking once again. That will surely help those rust belters that voted for him. He is looking at Goldman Sachs veteran Steven Mnuchin for treasury, not so much of a non-establishment guy after all.

Also I don't see how appointing people like Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, Chris Christie, Reince Priebus, lobbyists and corporate execs to positions is "draining the swamp." Maybe someone can clarify that for the rest of us?
 
I'm loving this in a way. The 'anti-establishment' candidate was really the establishment candidate after all.
 
Adding more: when the market started to drop with the election results, Carl Icahn rushed in to cover everyone.
Trump, the real Wall Street candidate.
 
I'm expecting at any moment for the Donald to announce that he's admitting the refugees and signing the TPP.
 
I just know one thing, bigotry has been on serious incline very publicly since his win was announced. All the hatred, the negative condescending remarks, the middle fingers, childish name calling to Trump supporters...w..t...f people?
Everyone has for years been making all these anti bigotry speeches and it's like someone took their pacifier and they rage like a toddler as everyone else makes excuses. Even the media...does no one hear hypocrisy all of a sudden?

Whats to be expected about why Trump won? We live in a country where it's ok to be racist if you're minority because you won't be called out as being a racist despite discrimination because it's re-labled as "protester" and your race is depicted by the color of your skin regardless of what that individual would want because segregation of races is ok except that segregation was not ok in the past. it's not ok to spank your child but yet it's ok to spank your child, it's ok to receive over $60k in benefits so long as you don't work and have kids, except that it's not ok at all because you're put into a single category and judged as a worthless bum as we continue to say it's ok with our votes and tax dollars. it's ok to hover your children to the point where they cannot ride a bus on their own but yet it's not ok for them to be fully dependent as they turn into adults except that it's still ok and it's completely acceptable for them to be overly sensitive and have public tantrums so long as it's in a large group under a label called "protesting" and it's even ok for a news anchor to make up a story, just try not to get caught next time *wink, nudge. It is also ok to be white so long as you can't find work except your jobless bum ass best be getting a job. It's ok to think like a communist because you want to control how others think except that it's not ok to be communist.....oh and there's STD's that won't show symptoms for years except there is no way that you could have it so a good idea is to avoid any STD test because you lack symptoms and if symptom arises, ignore it because the media doesn't like to talk about AIDS because it's ok to ignore anything you don't want to hear because fairies are not ok except unicorns are and finally (if you made it this far I congrats) it's not ok to own a console except that it's ok to have one if you have a PC except that .... I could go on all day with these

There's truth in what I say except it hurts so it's not truth and should be ignored because of preferences to the perception of reality which means I must be a bigot, dumbass racist, whatever, I'm sick of hearing your guy's hypocritical shit.

Jaskalas said:
I told hysterical Neanderthals for months that a "Muslim ban" was not happening.
But haters needed reasons to hate, so they clung onto it.
Click to expand...

He hasn't left office yet, give the man some time geez. No one is going around touting about all the fails that Obama said in his campaign much less critique what he said on his first meeting at the White House.
 
Jaskalas said:
I told hysterical Neanderthals for months that a "Muslim ban" was not happening.
But haters needed reasons to hate, so they clung onto it.
Click to expand...

'Reasons to hate' of course being the explicit promises of someone running for president, quoted verbatim.

I have no idea why you think 'oh but he was just lying about that' is a good response either.
 
Vic said:
I'm loving this in a way. The 'anti-establishment' candidate was really the establishment candidate after all.
Click to expand...

While an anti-establishment candidate like Trump is possible, I'm not sure an anti-establishment administration is. You've got to have people who understand how to deal with the federal system/bureaucracy or you're just flailing about pointlessly. I know some people think you can just walk in and fire everybody, but that's not really how it works.

Christie, Giuliani, and Newt aren't the first people we think of when we think of the establishment, but they aren't exactly off the street either.

As for Trump walking back his promises, I'm fine with that. I'd rather he walk them back and disappoint the people who voted for him than implement his promises and turn this country into a dumpster fire. Anyone who was paying attention knew he might change positions at the drop of a hat.
 
Muslim ban is back up.

So if you care about the First Amendment, or freedom in general, regardless of who you are, when they ask, answer: Muslim.
 
Poor Donald. He has a very big problem. He actually won. And there is no way he can possibly deliver on all those promises he made.
 
Balt said:
While an anti-establishment candidate like Trump is possible, I'm not sure an anti-establishment administration is. You've got to have people who understand how to deal with the federal system/bureaucracy or you're just flailing about pointlessly. I know some people think you can just walk in and fire everybody, but that's not really how it works.

Christie, Giuliani, and Newt aren't the first people we think of when we think of the establishment, but they aren't exactly off the street either.

As for Trump walking back his promises, I'm fine with that. I'd rather he walk them back and disappoint the people who voted for him than implement his promises and turn this country into a dumpster fire. Anyone who was paying attention knew he might change positions at the drop of a hat.
Click to expand...

You think this country isn't going to turn into a dumpster fire when he does walk his promises back? All those angry people who voted for him are going to be a hell of a lot angrier when they find out they were conned. And that might happen before he even takes the oath of office.
 
Vic said:
You think this country isn't going to turn into a dumpster fire when he does walk his promises back? All those angry people who voted for him are going to be a hell of a lot angrier when they find out they were conned. And that might happen before he even takes the oath of office.
Click to expand...

Oh I'm sure they'll be pissed, but at whom? Can't blame the 'lamestream media' or 'libtards' for electing Trump, and they can't elect more tea partiers until 2018.

And if there's more Bundy-type foolishness, I guess we'll see how much they like their 'law and order' candidate after they get Waco'd.
 
How is Trump anti establishment? He IS the establishment; a rich ass cowboy businessman that fucks everybody else over, with the policies to boot. It's not the little guy who's going to get astounding tax breaks, and it's not the environment that's going to be protected; respectively, it's the rich, and it's what will be destroyed.

The anti establishment candidate was Bernie Sanders, but he didn't make it far at all.
 
fskimospy said:
'Reasons to hate' of course being the explicit promises of someone running for president, quoted verbatim.

I have no idea why you think 'oh but he was just lying about that' is a good response either.
Click to expand...

A statement quoted...
You paint it under a context of hatred.
I paint it under practical implementation.
Aggressive screening of Islamic countries, or specific terrorist countries. Maybe tougher screening for all immigrants.
 
Here is the "Muslim Ban".

Protect the economic well-being of the lawful immigrants already living here by curbing uncontrolled foreign worker admissions
  • Select immigrants based on their likelihood of success in the U.S. and their ability to be financially self-sufficient.
  • Vet applicants to ensure they support America’s values, institutions and people, and temporarily suspend immigration from regions that export terrorism and where safe vetting cannot presently be ensured.
  • Enforce the immigration laws of the United States and restore the Constitutional rule of law upon which America’s prosperity and security depend.
Is that really unreasonable? How would you handle the situation?

1- Let any and all immigrants in, enjoy the crime/poverty problems.
2- Close the borders, no more immigrants at all.
3- Allow some immigrants in, but not all, using some sensible criteria (such as Donald's, above).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top