Current Events > No need for full border wall, Trump says

(+) Yeah! (+)

So he's basically describing a fucking fence, right?
---

Smashingpmkns posted...

So he's basically describing a fucking fence, right?

Well he said plenty of times that the wall has gotten ten feet higher, so maybe it's larger than a fence, but a large portion of the wall is going to be underground to stop all the illegal moles from coming to america

Because we all know that American moles are the best moles
---

Tmaster148 posted...

He pretty much dropped that the moment he got elected president. Surprised that didn't see more outrage from his fanbase.

You think his fanbase have memories long enough to remember what he actually says?
---

WizardPowers posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

He pretty much dropped that the moment he got elected president. Surprised that didn't see more outrage from his fanbase.

You think his fanbase have memories long enough to remember what he actually says?

Considering his fanbase still brings up Clinton all the time, I don't think they have quite forgotten her.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Says the guy getting butthurt when Trump supporters have been going on racist tirades all over America. That lady in the Sprint store calling the Latino workers various slurs and threatening to beat him up, the latest duckbear topic, etc.

Yes, things like this are annoying especially when I am in the middle of studying for boards. I don't get what you are trying to get at? I have already said that both sides have stupid people in them. I can easily pull up videos showing the far left abusing/attacking other people too. I am just pointing out that a lot of independent voters couldn't stand the "holier than thou" attitude that has accompanied the liberal base this past election season. Meanwhile, the heavy liberal base of gamefaqs is circlejerking in topics like these and not realizing their terrible attitude is what caused him to be elected in the first place.
---

So you want me to believe that independents decided to vote for someone who was preaching hateful rhetoric the entire election?

I can understand not voting for Hilary (hint: I didn't either) but stop making it seem like Trump was a viable option. Literally Mickey Mouse would of been a better choice.
---

Appollyn posted...

I am just pointing out that a lot of independent voters couldn't stand the "holier than thou" attitude that has accompanied the liberal base this past election season.

more like the "use some common fucking sense" attitude
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

So you want me to believe that independents decided to vote for someone who was preaching hateful rhetoric the entire election?

Liberals were preaching hateful rhetoric as well. Thing is, being hateful towards and alienating white people in this country just isn't going to pay out for you in the polls.

Whether it's intentional or not, a straight white Christian male is something liberals attack simply for being that. When a party pretty much announces they want nothing to do with them, and they happen to make up a good part of the population, then you kinda reap what you sow.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

So you want me to believe that independents decided to vote for someone who was preaching hateful rhetoric the entire election?

I can understand not voting for Hilary (hint: I didn't either) but stop making it seem like Trump was a viable option. Literally Mickey Mouse would of been a better choice.

Independent voters favored Trump by 6 points on election day -
https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/groups-voted-2016/
---

So we aren't even gonna get a wall now?

I don't know what King Master Trump has planned, but I'm sure it will shook us all
---

HylianFox posted...

Appollyn posted...

I am just pointing out that a lot of independent voters couldn't stand the "holier than thou" attitude that has accompanied the liberal base this past election season.

more like the "use some common fucking sense" attitude

You are just proving my point dude.
---

Appollyn posted...

HylianFox posted...

Appollyn posted...

I am just pointing out that a lot of independent voters couldn't stand the "holier than thou" attitude that has accompanied the liberal base this past election season.

more like the "use some common fucking sense" attitude

You are just proving my point dude.

so using common sense = holier than thou

got it
---

Appollyn posted...

I am just pointing out that a lot of independent voters couldn't stand the "holier than thou" attitude that has accompanied the liberal base this past election season. Meanwhile, the heavy liberal base of gamefaqs is circlejerking in topics like these and not realizing their terrible attitude is what caused him to be elected in the first place.

If you voted for Trump for petty reasons then you're basically just a republican and don't want to admit it. Democrats and independents didn't vote for Trump or Hillary if they were unhappy with them.

But no you are very much oversimplifying things. I'll give you that the neoliberal rhetoric definitely gave Trump an edge, but the neocon rhetoric gave Hillary the same edge. Mostly the election just amounted to people being fed up with shitty choices handed out by politicians. Also Trump gained a lot of media spotlight because he's an ass, so naturally the uninformed voter such as yourself would have followed him like moths to a flame. The media got their own come uppance when Trump started trashing them though.
---

HylianFox posted...

Appollyn posted...

HylianFox posted...

Appollyn posted...

I am just pointing out that a lot of independent voters couldn't stand the "holier than thou" attitude that has accompanied the liberal base this past election season.

more like the "use some common fucking sense" attitude

You are just proving my point dude.

so using common sense = holier than thou

got it

Essentially, "the liberal opinion is common sense and the other sides view is ignorant and uneducated". You're right, that couldn't possibly be portrayed as a holier than thou attitude.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

Appollyn posted...

I am just pointing out that a lot of independent voters couldn't stand the "holier than thou" attitude that has accompanied the liberal base this past election season. Meanwhile, the heavy liberal base of gamefaqs is circlejerking in topics like these and not realizing their terrible attitude is what caused him to be elected in the first place.

If you voted for Trump for petty reasons then you're basically just a republican and don't want to admit it. Democrats and independents didn't vote for Trump or Hillary if they were unhappy with them.

But no you are very much oversimplifying things. I'll give you that the neoliberal rhetoric definitely gave Trump an edge, but the neocon rhetoric gave Hillary the same edge. Mostly the election just amounted to people being fed up with shitty choices handed out by politicians. Also Trump gained a lot of media spotlight because he's an ass, so naturally the uninformed voter such as yourself would have followed him like moths to a flame. The media got their own come uppance when Trump started trashing them though.

I didn't vote Trump for petty reasons. I aligned with his views more than Clinton's. That whole excel sheet I was talking about was regarding a Trump vs Sanders scenario...which unfortunately didn't happen. But yes, if I was objectively stuck between 2 candidates based on my point system and I couldn't decide then their party base could sway my opinion. It would either be that or flipping a coin considering both candidates would have been equal in my eyes. If you loved two teams equally would you rather have the team with the mediocre fanbase win or the slightly less sucky fanbase win? That's what I was getting at.

Every one of those political tests with 100+ questions either put me a very slightly left or right. And considering, I was split between Sanders and Trump that validates me being an independent/centrist. Plenty of us voted for candidates we were unhappy with.
---

Appollyn posted...

Every one of those political tests with 100+ questions either put me a very slightly left or right. And considering, I was split between Sanders and Trump that validates me being an independent/centrist. Plenty of us voted for candidates we were unhappy with.

You know what the sad thing is? That test was posted here, and a big majority of people got results that their views were more aligned with Stein or Johnson, yet neither were even in the running. It's just fucking crazy how they can pop out two shitty candidates and then go "you gotta vote for one of these two. If you vote for one you're a crybaby, if you vote for the other you're a bigot. If you vote for someone else then you're useless, if you don't vote then why are you even here?"

There's just no winning in this climate. If there's anything, ANYTHING that I want in the political realm, is for one more party to be a legit threat to win. Just something, something that is introduced where it's not always "this or that" because if you don't like either then you're just fucked.
---

I have to wonder what Trump could possibly have offered that an actual sane person could agree with. There were a couple of talking points I agreed with him on, but I knew he'd fuck them up because the guy is a dunce. Like okay I'm in on blocking out the middle East entirely, but surely Mr moneybags will still want that oil money yes? Yes. Trump has some pretty obvious issues. At least he's as stupid as he seemed during the elections though, and not some diabolical supervillain.

Frankly if you're making spreadsheets and shit to try to align yourself with the best candidate you can't see the forest through the trees.
---

WaterLink posted...

Appollyn posted...

Every one of those political tests with 100+ questions either put me a very slightly left or right. And considering, I was split between Sanders and Trump that validates me being an independent/centrist. Plenty of us voted for candidates we were unhappy with.

You know what the sad thing is? That test was posted here, and a big majority of people got results that their views were more aligned with Stein or Johnson, yet neither were even in the running. It's just fucking crazy how they can pop out two shitty candidates and then go "you gotta vote for one of these two. If you vote for one you're a crybaby, if you vote for the other you're a bigot. If you vote for someone else then you're useless, if you don't vote then why are you even here?"

There's just no winning in this climate. If there's anything, ANYTHING that I want in the political realm, is for one more party to be a legit threat to win. Just something, something that is introduced where it's not always "this or that" because if you don't like either then you're just fucked.

I agree. It would have been awesome if during the primary's Trump made his own party and Sanders made his own as well. Would have doubled our current party system in just one election cycle.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

I have to wonder what Trump could possibly have offered that an actual sane person could agree with. There were a couple of talking points I agreed with him on, but I knew he'd fuck them up because the guy is a dunce. Like okay I'm in on blocking out the middle East entirely, but surely Mr moneybags will still want that oil money yes? Yes. Trump has some pretty obvious issues. At least he's as stupid as he seemed during the elections though, and not some diabolical supervillain.

Frankly if you're making spreadsheets and shit to try to align yourself with the best candidate you can't see the forest through the trees.

I make a spreadsheet to have an objective decision on the matter. It filters out all the stupid political comments you get with politics. Get a list of all the issues you care about, assign points based on how important they are to you, and do your homework to find the candidate's stance on the issue. There are very few issues that require the hostility that people on both sides have for each other. I do not care about a candidate making a stupid comment. Their policies is what will affect the country for years to come.
---

Well, that's what I mean about not seeing the forest through the trees. Trump's policies are clearly extreme right and always have been. You can't be a centrist and agree with him about much.
---

And that's why I voted for Johnson. That's why I vote for 3rd party many times. That's just where my views align. I'm not going to vote against what I align with because it's the thing to do. No, a vote for 3rd party is a vote for more options. And I wish more people would do the same. We could realistically legitimize other parties and we could have more than two options. But no, if you're not for one of the two established parties then you're fucking useless it seems. If there's anything the people on those two sides can agree on, it's that for some reason.

It's just sad. If you're not with them fully then you're against them in their eyes. Even if you agree with things on both sides, you're an enemy to both.
---

WaterLink posted...

sktgamer_13dude posted...

So you want me to believe that independents decided to vote for someone who was preaching hateful rhetoric the entire election?

Liberals were preaching hateful rhetoric as well. Thing is, being hateful towards and alienating white people in this country just isn't going to pay out for you in the polls.

Whether it's intentional or not, a straight white Christian male is something liberals attack simply for being that. When a party pretty much announces they want nothing to do with them, and they happen to make up a good part of the population, then you kinda reap what you sow.

>liberals point out that Trump has a huge base of racists who support him
>that's hateful rhetoric

lel
---

I mean I'd be all for a good third party candidate, but let's face it, not going to happen unless one of the two parties we have crashes and burns hard. Third party candidates are better off just listing themselves as Democrat or republican in America, even if they clearly aren't. That's why our system gets so skewed too, but it's always been that way and endured somehow.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

WaterLink posted...

sktgamer_13dude posted...

So you want me to believe that independents decided to vote for someone who was preaching hateful rhetoric the entire election?

Liberals were preaching hateful rhetoric as well. Thing is, being hateful towards and alienating white people in this country just isn't going to pay out for you in the polls.

Whether it's intentional or not, a straight white Christian male is something liberals attack simply for being that. When a party pretty much announces they want nothing to do with them, and they happen to make up a good part of the population, then you kinda reap what you sow.

>liberals point out that Trump has a huge base of racists who support him
>that's hateful rhetoric

lel

The authoritarian Utopia of perfect equality that the far left believes in tends to be fairly hateful. There wasn't an argument that the far right isn't hateful.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

>liberals point out that Trump has a huge base of racists who support him
>that's hateful rhetoric

That's not what I'm talking about and you know it. Just like you're drawing from the extremes of the right and I can draw out extremes from the left. Just like the degenerates on the right that hate foreigners and the darkies there are people on the left that despise white people and those with a dick. It goes both ways and neither is more moral than the other.

All I'm saying is that one makes up a greater portion of the country so alienating them is just naturally going to hurt you more in the polls.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

Well, that's what I mean about not seeing the forest through the trees. Trump's policies are clearly extreme right and always have been. You can't be a centrist and agree with him about much.

What would I be then if I was split between him and Sanders? A centrist is just someone who see's the pro's and con's from both sides so you fall in the middle of political spectrum. Technically, you could have the most far right candidate and most far left candidate, vote for one of them, and still be considered a centrist.
---

WaterLink posted...

sktgamer_13dude posted...

>liberals point out that Trump has a huge base of racists who support him
>that's hateful rhetoric

That's not what I'm talking about and you know it. Just like you're drawing from the extremes of the right and I can draw out extremes from the left. Just like the degenerates on the right that hate foreigners and the darkies there are people on the left that despise white people and those with a dick. It goes both ways and neither is more moral than the other.

All I'm saying is that one makes up a greater portion of the country so alienating them is just naturally going to hurt you more in the polls.

rofl.

No one hates white people and/or males. It's all in your head dude.

Women and minorities wanting equality =/= whites and men are being hated.

Keep shitposting though.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

I mean I'd be all for a good third party candidate, but let's face it, not going to happen unless one of the two parties we have crashes and burns hard. Third party candidates are better off just listing themselves as Democrat or republican in America, even if they clearly aren't. That's why our system gets so skewed too, but it's always been that way and endured somehow.

Also, it's rare that:
1)Some one worth voting for will run 3rd-party and 2)Actually be on the ballot in your state.

I mean, last year, the most "legit" 3rd-party candidates were Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, and an egg mcmuffin. Not exactly inspiring.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

No one hates white people and/or males. It's all in your head dude.

Women and minorities wanting equality =/= whites and men are being hated.

That's what they claim. But then they start justifying their claim.

I will never know what it's like to be black. I will never know what it's like to be a woman. I don't claim to know the experience. But I've seen personally people of that sex and race lead successful lives. It can be done. Extraordinary circumstances aside, I refuse to believe that all of the problems dealing with these groups are because of white males and their "privilege". Especially when I see so many white males completely fail at life. Difference is, they don't have a built in excuse when they don't measure up to standards.
---

Appollyn posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

Well, that's what I mean about not seeing the forest through the trees. Trump's policies are clearly extreme right and always have been. You can't be a centrist and agree with him about much.

What would I be then if I was split between him and Sanders? A centrist is just someone who see's the pro's and con's from both sides so you fall in the middle of political spectrum. Technically, you could have the most far right candidate and most far left candidate, vote for one of them, and still be considered a centrist.

Ok that makes more sense, but then I'd have to ask why throw away your vote on someone you don't want? Or for that matter why tilt the scales further to a conservative platform when that platform is already more powerful than the left?
---

Lol how does anyone believe this man?
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

Lol how does anyone believe this man?

Why wouldn't they. He's still building the wall it just needs holes in it so people don't get 60 pound bags of drugs dropped on them killing them.

And it may have holes and be shaped like a fence and look like a fence but it's really a wall with safety precautions.
---

Excuse me mister President but:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/02/us/us-mexico-border-wall-tunnels.html

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/01/16/cartels-reviving-sealed-tunnels-along-u-s-mexico-border.html
---

Why not buy a 20 trillion dollars no trespassing sign? Or better yet, 20 trillion no trespassing signs for a dollar.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

Why not buy a 20 trillion dollars no trespassing sign? Or better yet, 20 trillion no trespassing signs for a dollar.

20 trillion signs sound good. That's about one every mile on the Mexico border
---