2017 Trump Inauguration Thread

Post Reply New Topic

Ivanka looked lovely.

I'm really sorry. I didn't mean any offense. In the U.S. it's usually used in a joking context but it's not necessarily an insult. The term "no ____" is often used after showing an unusual amount of affection to a same-sex friend, like a guy saying that another guy has a nice haircut. It's mainly guys who do it, girls don't care as much. That's what I was referring to. I forgot that American slang is not universal, which is very xenophobic of me.

I know you didn't mean any offense and it didn't offend me and maybe didn't offend anyone here. It was just a heads up. I've just looked back at my recent posts and it would appear that I'm on some sort of moral crusade , I apologise for mentioning it. Maybe my time would be better spent if I worried about what offends me rather that what I think others find offensive. I can't realy explain this behaviour other than that I identify with people with AS and would like to help where I can ( due to the fact that some people with AS say things without meaning offence but are actually offensive ) and in my twisted mind pointing out things like this is the way I think I'm helping - I'll stop now

http://mashable.com/2017/01/20/marijuan ... BIICJWXkqw

I notice some people are saying things like: "Now Trump will have to appease the protesters marching around the country."

And I'm wondering: What do they mean??? Didn't "their side" lose the election? Why would he see it necessary to "appease" a bunch of crying children?

And there's a group no one seems to talk about....the (almost) half of the millions of voters that voted for Trump. The whiners see nothing wrong in disrespecting these American voters and their wishes expressed at the ballot box. They're just like selfish little children who see someone else getting a toy when they do not.

What are they supposed to expect? That a bunch of whiners screaming in the streets (or the more sane ones that do not) will expect Trump to accede to their wishes(?) because they make loud noises or break windows? Or maybe they just want to ruin it for everyone else? This is disruption for disruption's sake...very un-American.

These are people that have no honor. They attack our Democratic voting rights (this year only) and complain about the process, but where were their complaints when there was still a possibility of the electoral system favoring THEM? This illustrates their "phony-ness."

My daughter asked me: "But weren't you among the protesters on the streets of Chicago in '68?" My answer: "Yes, I was, but THAT was BEFORE the election, during the Democratic Convention....and it was the police that rioted, not the protesters." Makes a difference.

Well people aren't nessisarly 'crying children' when they use their right to protest, there is no justification for acting violent and breaking stuff that is not protected by the constitution...but this attitude of calling people crybabies, crying children, whiners and things like that simply for using freedom of speech and the right to protest even if the protest remains peaceful is problematic in my opinion. Yes if people are unhappy enough about this to be taking to the streets in protest then yes the logical thing for trump to do would be consider why they're so unhappy with the prospect of his presidency and take into account some of that when making decisions rather than alienating his opposition even further.

The people acting violent have no honor, but protesting in general is one of our rights, and its not un-american to use it.

Off topic a bit but I am surprised that in an Autism forum how many fashion/style/how they looked and acted comments there were in this thread.

I appreciate fashion and finely crafted garments. I dress for comfort; my sweatpant and cardigan ensemble isn't quite up to snuff.

Protesters are a gift to Trump, every time these people smash something or block a road they create new Trump supporters. People do not like agitators, these demonstrations have never won anybody any support. All Trump needs to do is triangulate the center away from the left flank of the Democratic party which they're making an easy job of doing, Democrats are in a desperate situation with the 2018 midterms looming, they're going to lose seats in the senate so the question is if the GOP can capture a filibuster proof majority. They're worried about getting wiped out further on the state level too and the effects that will have in redistricted in 2020, this GOP majority does not seem like it will be going anywhere for awhile.

...How is an : attack our Democratic voting rights : being done ?
What do you mean ? Do you man by all of the protestrs on Inauguration Day or just by the violent minrity ? Or, do you even mean all subsequent prtestors against Trump (such as the likelyconsiderably larger number of protestorsto-day , Saturdy) ?
I dn,t think , if you mean criticism of the Electoral College , that the violents , anyay , are bothering much with that .
In 2012 Trump , on Election Night , when there apparently was a point when it looked possible that Obama would squeak out an electoral victry but popular loss , put out tweets that arguably called for violent action against an Obama victory (I have posted about them here before , they can still be found oonline .) ! This isn,t interfering ?






ofprotestos there will be to-day , saturday)

="ZenDen"]I notice some people are saying things like: "Now Trump will have to appease the protesters marching around the country."

And I'm wondering: What do they mean??? Didn't "their side" lose the election? Why would he see it necessary to "appease" a bunch of crying children?

And there's a group no one seems to talk about....the (almost) half of the millions of voters that voted for Trump. The whiners see nothing wrong in disrespecting these American voters and their wishes expressed at the ballot box. They're just like selfish little children who see someone else getting a toy when they do not.

What are they supposed to expect? That a bunch of whiners screaming in the streets (or the more sane ones that do not) will expect Trump to accede to their wishes(?) because they make loud noises or break windows? Or maybe they just want to ruin it for everyone else? This is disruption for disruption's sake...very un-American.

These are people that have no honor. They attack our Democratic voting rights (this year only) and complain about the process, but where were their complaints when there was still a possibility of the electoral system favoring THEM? This illustrates their "phony-ness."

My daughter asked me: "But weren't you among the protesters on the streets of Chicago in '68?" My answer: "Yes, I was, but THAT was BEFORE the election, during the Democratic Convention....and it was the police that rioted, not the protesters." Makes a difference.[/quote]

...You,ll recall that Karl Rove used to talk about : creating a conttinuous Republican era : (like the post-Civil War Repulican long hold on the Presidency - or the FDR-Truman Democratic period of that) , and I recall people responding to the 2006 Congress landslide by the Democrats as : no one will vote for a conservative ever again : .
Yeah .







te="Jacoby"]Protesters are a gift to Trump, every time these people smash something or block a road they create new Trump supporters. People do not like agitators, these demonstrations have never won anybody any support. All Trump needs to do is triangulate the center away from the left flank of the Democratic party which they're making an easy job of doing, Democrats are in a desperate situation with the 2018 midterms looming, they're going to lose seats in the senate so the question is if the GOP can capture a filibuster proof majority. They're worried about getting wiped out further on the state level too and the effects that will have in redistricted in 2020, this GOP majority does not seem like it will be going anywhere for awhile.[/quote]

Trump is the duly elected president of the United States. That said, he was duly elected buy a bunch of people who were tricked by a Soviet Style propaganda campaign. It does leave the question open of what legitimacy actually means in such a situation.

That was some inaugural address. It sounded a lot like a declaration of civil war to me. I bet that a lot of people whom I like won't have a place in Real America, judging by the removal of civil rights from whitehouse.gov

Keep America carnal!

Agitation seemed to work for the Founding Fathers, it seemed to work for the civil rights protesters in the 60s, it seemed to work for the anti-Apartheid people.

Maybe in 50 years, we will be speaking positively of today's agitators, just like how we speak of the aforementioned.

OK then, let's do a thought experiment. Here's the premise: You dispute what I say (and won't back down) and I think you're very wrong and I get very angry and tell everyone I know about it in such a way as they are angry at you also.

Then I find you're getting married, so I tell all my friends and we surround the church holding the ceremony your bridal party is at and we make sure to make a lot of noise and disruption so as to spoil this special day for you. Pretty disgusting on my part, wouldn't you say?

What have I accomplished besides making an ass of myself? It's NOT "if" they have a right to protest, but how they use their rights. These demonstrators show a lack of respect for anything except what they want.....doesn't fly with me. I have "Freedom of Speech" but I don't use it to yell in someone's face.

The time to protest was before the election....these are just crybabies that didn't get what they wanted.....and the hell with the "rights" of people that legally voted Trump to be our President. I have no sympathy for such.

But YOU say Trump should understand and do something because, after all, these people actually came out to protest.

Trump is not new to this sort of thing. He is aware other people have different opinions. All of these things were debated to the point of nauseousness before the election....these are just the same people with a whine in their voice and a rock in their hand and shouldn't receive any special treatment.

But think about this: The first of a series of votes to deflate Obamacare had only one Republican voting with the Democrats. During the second vote there were 9 Republicans that "crossed over." The people in the Republican party who believe Obamacare (and etc.) should not be dumped should petition their representatives in Congress to vote against dumping it.

Here's a surprise for you: All Republican Congresspersons DO NOT have horns and forked tails. And in a working Congress there are agreements "across the aisle" which make the whole thing work....this is the way it was intended and the way it used to be.

I think Trump in the White House is the best opportunity to see both sides of the Senate and House work together...it hasn't happened for a long time. But I think this has a better chance at accomplishing goals than whining and throwing rocks.

Or maybe we will look on them as we now look on the Ku Klux Klan marches in Washington in the 1920s.

Actually it was Obama that signed an Executive order that any American can be locked up at any time without a trial. It was signed I believe on New Years Eve when no one was looking.