Donald Trump & 2016 Election

[tim_m]

You mean the wall that fell over? 😁

[pilferk]

You mean the wall that fell over? 😁

You'd think, given it's a Trump creation, it'd be able to dodge a little draft.

[COMAMOTIVE]

You mean the wall that fell over? 😁

You'd think, given it's a Trump creation, it'd be able to dodge a little draft.

 

[tim_m]

You mean the wall that fell over? 😁

You'd think, given it's a Trump creation, it'd be able to dodge a little draft.

That was a good one lol. Makes me wonder what it's base of. I know the concrete wasn't dry but you would think it's made of a heavy enough material to withstand a gust of wind.

[pilferk]

That was a good one lol. Makes me wonder what it's base of. I know the concrete wasn't dry but you would think it's made of a heavy enough material to withstand a gust of wind.

OK, so, growing up my dad was a stone mason.  I worked my entire teen years, summers and most holidays, with him (hey, it paid REALLY well!).

The concrete not being cured is only part of the cause, I think.  At least the way we worked.  You are expected to sink about 25 - 30% of anything underground before you mortar it in, if it has a certain weight/weight distribution.  I'd imagine the heavier it is,and the wider it is, the larger that % is.  We were working with granite, mostly, for that kind of vertical build, and the size profiles (and thus the weights) were pretty standard.

Given the height and weight of those sections, I think they guessed wrong in terms of their sunk percentages.  I can't say for sure...I didn't do a lot of 30 foot wall construction and I'm no engineer.  But it sure looks that way to me.

They may have also had an overdig problem, so the surrounding soil was loose.

If the walls had been up for more than 24 to 48 hours, I'd think the curing of the concrete would have had minimal effect.

And if they hadn't been up that long, the construction foreman is a fucking idiot because, given the weather forecast, they should have just stopped the build until it passed...knowing there wouldn't be enough time to cement (literally) those panels in place.

[tim_m]

That was a good one lol. Makes me wonder what it's base of. I know the concrete wasn't dry but you would think it's made of a heavy enough material to withstand a gust of wind.

OK, so, growing up my dad was a stone mason.  I worked my entire teen years, summers and most holidays, with him (hey, it paid REALLY well!).

The concrete not being cured is only part of the cause, I think.  At least the way we worked.  You are expected to sink about 25 - 30% of anything underground before you mortar it in, if it has a certain weight/weight distribution.  I'd imagine the heavier it is,and the wider it is, the larger that % is.  We were working with granite, mostly, for that kind of vertical build, and the size profiles (and thus the weights) were pretty standard.

Given the height and weight of those sections, I think they guessed wrong in terms of their sunk percentages.  I can't say for sure...I didn't do a lot of 30 foot wall construction and I'm no engineer.  But it sure looks that way to me.

They may have also had an overdig problem, so the surrounding soil was loose.

If the walls had been up for more than 24 to 48 hours, I'd think the curing of the concrete would have had minimal effect.

And if they hadn't been up that long, the construction foreman is a fucking idiot because, given the weather forecast, they should have just stopped the build until it passed...knowing there wouldn't be enough time to cement (literally) those panels in place.

So basically it boils down to someone is woefully incompetent.

[pilferk]

That was a good one lol. Makes me wonder what it's base of. I know the concrete wasn't dry but you would think it's made of a heavy enough material to withstand a gust of wind.

OK, so, growing up my dad was a stone mason.  I worked my entire teen years, summers and most holidays, with him (hey, it paid REALLY well!).

The concrete not being cured is only part of the cause, I think.  At least the way we worked.  You are expected to sink about 25 - 30% of anything underground before you mortar it in, if it has a certain weight/weight distribution.  I'd imagine the heavier it is,and the wider it is, the larger that % is.  We were working with granite, mostly, for that kind of vertical build, and the size profiles (and thus the weights) were pretty standard.

Given the height and weight of those sections, I think they guessed wrong in terms of their sunk percentages.  I can't say for sure...I didn't do a lot of 30 foot wall construction and I'm no engineer.  But it sure looks that way to me.

They may have also had an overdig problem, so the surrounding soil was loose.

If the walls had been up for more than 24 to 48 hours, I'd think the curing of the concrete would have had minimal effect.

And if they hadn't been up that long, the construction foreman is a fucking idiot because, given the weather forecast, they should have just stopped the build until it passed...knowing there wouldn't be enough time to cement (literally) those panels in place.

So basically it boils down to someone is woefully incompetent.

I had another thought. It could be shitty concrete that didnt meet construction parameters. Kinda like what happened with Yankee Stadium.

So: i would say most likely incompetence or outright shady practices.

[sandman]

trump won the Iowa caucus.

he's going to win the impeachment scam today.

Kick-ass SOTU speech where he got dems to lose their minds and act out of character.

Poll numbers highest they have been.

he might be right....I think i'm starting to get sick of all this winning! 

[tim_m]

trump won the Iowa caucus.

he's going to win the impeachment scam today.

Kick-ass SOTU speech where he got dems to lose their minds and act out of character.

Poll numbers highest they have been.

he might be right....I think i'm starting to get sick of all this winning! 

Really? I didn't see his name on the ballot.

By winning you mean the first time members of both parties will vote to convict?

One time, compared to the thousands they've gotten under his lol

Umm yeah, I know Gallup is usually pretty good but I'm not trusting any poll that didn't mention anything about it's methodology or margin of error. Polls that high are typically only calling landlines. Which is a terrible metric. Hardly anyone has them anymore and the ones that do are elderly Republicans.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Trial over.  What a waste of time and money.

Time to move on to solving real problems that matter.

[GypsySoul]

trump won the Iowa caucus.
 

Really? I didn't see his name on the ballot.

Unlike the Democrat Iowa Caucus, the Republican Iowa Caucus results have been 100% reported. 

I have to admit that if I saw the name Joe Walsh on the ballot, I might hesitate which button I would press. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/02/03/iowa-caucus-donald-trump-wins-overwhelming-republican-support/4651696002/

2020 Iowa caucus: President Trump recaptures overwhelming Iowa Republican support

Results
100% reporting

Candidate:  Trump Donald   Total Votes:  31,464    % Votes:  97.1    Delegates:  39
                  Weld Bill                                  426                     1.3                       1     
                  Walsh Joe                                348                      1.1                      0
                  Other                                      151                      0.5                      0

[tim_m]

There was never any doubt on the winner for the Republican side though. You had 3 candidates and only one had a chance to win. Way more candidates on the democratic side and larger margin of error. They should've tested the app they used though. At least there is a paper trail for the first time. It is unfortunate the errors occurred but i'd rather they get the votes right more then anything.

[tim_m]

Trial over.  What a waste of time and money.

Time to move on to solving real problems that matter.

No, no it wasn't. What Trump did was wrong, an abuse of power and many republicans have admitted that but lack the balls to go against Trump.

[jarmo]

Trial over.  What a waste of time and money.

In a sense, yes, in another sense no....

Waste of time and money because everyone knew the Republicans didn't think there were any wrongdoings. So the outcome wasn't a surprise.

On the other hand, a president needs to be held accountable for his actions. You can't just ask foreign nations for help to win elections. Not how a democracy is supposed to work. A lot of shady stuff happens all the time, but in this case it was out in the open... So something had to be done.







/jarmo

[Dr. Blutarsky]

It is pretty disputed that Trump was asking Ukraine for help to win the 2020 election. This was the case the democrats were trying to make and couldn't. House dems rushed it, which was a big blunder on their part.  If there was something there they should have taken their time to gather the evidence they claimed was out there. Sitting on the articles for a month then dropping a weak & rushed case on the senate via the impeachment articles was destined for failure when you need a 2/3 majority to convict , it makes no sense how they handles all of this unless the ultimate goal was to damage him politically. And just the opposite has occurred  looking at the poll numbers.  

So moving forward, people will have their chance to keep Trump or get rid of him come November.

 

 

[tim_m]

It was not disputed, many Republican senators said what he did was wrong, but claimed he learned his lesson. So they voted against conviction, but any sane person who saw Trump's speech today will know that's simply untrue. You know as well as I do the reason for not having all the evidence is because Trump blocked the witnesses that could've provided that info. They were gonna have to go to court to force testimony and that could've gone on got many months and they didn't want to have it drag out into the election. If Trump is innocent why did he try so hard to hide the truth.

[pilferk]

Trial over.  What a waste of time and money.

In a sense, yes, in another sense no....

Waste of time and money because everyone knew the Republicans didn't think there were any wrongdoings. So the outcome wasn't a surprise.

On the other hand, a president needs to be held accountable for his actions. You can't just ask foreign nations for help to win elections. Not how a democracy is supposed to work. A lot of shady stuff happens all the time, but in this case it was out in the open... So something had to be done.

/jarmo

I'd argue in every sense "no".

Better to stand up for what's right, and lose, than to turn a blind eye to potential lawlessness and abuses of power.  The outcome was never in doubt....but the process needed to happen.  I don't think you can argue that going through the process is EVER a waste of time and money.  And if you think it is....again, I would think that person would also have to have been violently against the Clinton impeachment...since he, too, wasn't removed from office.  In this case, with this process, outcome can't entirely define it's value.

The only people disputing there was wrongdoing are the ones totally in the tank for Trump.  The ones who make excuses time after time after time, no matter what he does.

The ones who, as he said, would vote for him if he shot someone in the middle of 5th avenue.  I'm pretty sure this isn't hyperbole anymore, if it ever was.

There was more then enough evidence. The House did things the right way. The Repubs who complain it was too fast would likewise have complained if it dragged on into the spring, because it would have been too slow.  No matter what process the House adopted, they would have found something to bitch about, to try to delegitimize it.  His supporters weren't going to accept any outcome that showed there was wrongdoing, no matter what the evidence said, and no matter what the timeline was.  That's the simple truth.

And the White House refused to comply with subpeonas, so I'm not sure what more the house could do in their phase of the investigation (not trial...you know, where witnesses and evidence are supposed to appear).  They could have fought that process through the courts (where they'd already won a couple decisions on this front), but then the investigation would have likely dragged on through summer, and Repubs would bitch that it was taking too long and effecting the election.

The fact is, there was one bipartisan contingent this week, and that contingent voted that Trump was Guilty.  The Repubs were NEVER going to vote, en masse, to remove their boi.  Because to them, party power is more important than the country, and its institutions (which they've spent 3 years butchering to ensure they can stay in power).

Its apparent that no matter what this president does, no matter what laws he breaks, no matter how badly he behaves....his supporters refuse to acknowledge it or act to stop him.  They want an autocrat.  They prefer party over country.  And their identity is so tied to their support for this guy, they will not/can not admit any wrongdoing (or even him BEING wrong).  It hurts their feelings too much to consider they voted for a bad president.

[tim_m]

Trial over.  What a waste of time and money.

In a sense, yes, in another sense no....

Waste of time and money because everyone knew the Republicans didn't think there were any wrongdoings. So the outcome wasn't a surprise.

On the other hand, a president needs to be held accountable for his actions. You can't just ask foreign nations for help to win elections. Not how a democracy is supposed to work. A lot of shady stuff happens all the time, but in this case it was out in the open... So something had to be done.

/jarmo

I'd argue in every sense "no".

Better to stand up for what's right, and lose, than to turn a blind eye to potential lawlessness and abuses of power.  The outcome was never in doubt....but the process needed to happen.  I don't think you can argue that going through the process is EVER a waste of time and money.  And if you think it is....again, I would think that person would also have to have been violently against the Clinton impeachment...since he, too, wasn't removed from office.  In this case, with this process, outcome can't entirely define it's value.

The only people disputing there was wrongdoing are the ones totally in the tank for Trump.  The ones who make excuses time after time after time, no matter what he does.

The ones who, as he said, would vote for him if he shot someone in the middle of 5th avenue.  I'm pretty sure this isn't hyperbole anymore, if it ever was.

There was more then enough evidence. The House did things the right way. The Repubs who complain it was too fast would likewise have complained if it dragged on into the spring, because it would have been too slow.  No matter what process the House adopted, they would have found something to bitch about, to try to delegitimize it.  His supporters weren't going to accept any outcome that showed there was wrongdoing, no matter what the evidence said, and no matter what the timeline was.  That's the simple truth.

And the White House refused to comply with subpeonas, so I'm not sure what more the house could do in their phase of the investigation (not trial...you know, where witnesses and evidence are supposed to appear).  They could have fought that process through the courts (where they'd already won a couple decisions on this front), but then the investigation would have likely dragged on through summer, and Repubs would bitch that it was taking too long and effecting the election.

The fact is, there was one bipartisan contingent this week, and that contingent voted that Trump was Guilty.  The Repubs were NEVER going to vote, en masse, to remove their boi.  Because to them, party power is more important than the country, and its institutions (which they've spent 3 years butchering to ensure they can stay in power).

Its apparent that no matter what this president does, no matter what laws he breaks, no matter how badly he behaves....his supporters refuse to acknowledge it or act to stop him.  They want an autocrat.  They prefer party over country.  And their identity is so tied to their support for this guy, they will not/can not admit any wrongdoing (or even him BEING wrong).  It hurts their feelings too much to consider they voted for a bad president.

Even the ones that admit he did something wrong and they say he learned his lesson are changing what they're saying, look at Collins she went from lesson learned to I hope he did. They're so in on this got, so terrified what he could do to their cushy jobs that they can't see the forest through the trees. At least one had the guts to stand up to Trump. I don't agree with Romney on issues but I've never questioned his integrity. It reminds me of a movie quote from the movie Dave. I ought to care more about doing where right then what's popular, and if not maybe I shouldn't have this job in the first place. Remember when the investigation started, Pelosi said doing what's right is worth losing the house.


Also, I want to make this abundantly clear, I will not mince words. If we were sitting here talking about Obama having done this and we had all this evidence to show it, I would 100% support impeachment, conviction and removal because right matters. Nobody is above the law, not even the president regardless of party affiliation.

[tim_m]

https://www.axios.com/iowa-caucus-phone-line-pro-trump-trolls-72996dc7-6548-4219-a566-5f1c9d382895.html?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100

Whoops

[COMAMOTIVE]

Trial over.  What a waste of time and money.

In a sense, yes, in another sense no....

Waste of time and money because everyone knew the Republicans didn't think there were any wrongdoings. So the outcome wasn't a surprise.

On the other hand, a president needs to be held accountable for his actions. You can't just ask foreign nations for help to win elections. Not how a democracy is supposed to work. A lot of shady stuff happens all the time, but in this case it was out in the open... So something had to be done.

/jarmo

I'd argue in every sense "no".

Better to stand up for what's right, and lose, than to turn a blind eye to potential lawlessness and abuses of power.  The outcome was never in doubt....but the process needed to happen.  I don't think you can argue that going through the process is EVER a waste of time and money.  And if you think it is....again, I would think that person would also have to have been violently against the Clinton impeachment...since he, too, wasn't removed from office.  In this case, with this process, outcome can't entirely define it's value.

The only people disputing there was wrongdoing are the ones totally in the tank for Trump.  The ones who make excuses time after time after time, no matter what he does.

The ones who, as he said, would vote for him if he shot someone in the middle of 5th avenue.  I'm pretty sure this isn't hyperbole anymore, if it ever was.

There was more then enough evidence. The House did things the right way. The Repubs who complain it was too fast would likewise have complained if it dragged on into the spring, because it would have been too slow.  No matter what process the House adopted, they would have found something to bitch about, to try to delegitimize it.  His supporters weren't going to accept any outcome that showed there was wrongdoing, no matter what the evidence said, and no matter what the timeline was.  That's the simple truth.

And the White House refused to comply with subpeonas, so I'm not sure what more the house could do in their phase of the investigation (not trial...you know, where witnesses and evidence are supposed to appear).  They could have fought that process through the courts (where they'd already won a couple decisions on this front), but then the investigation would have likely dragged on through summer, and Repubs would bitch that it was taking too long and effecting the election.

The fact is, there was one bipartisan contingent this week, and that contingent voted that Trump was Guilty.  The Repubs were NEVER going to vote, en masse, to remove their boi.  Because to them, party power is more important than the country, and its institutions (which they've spent 3 years butchering to ensure they can stay in power).

Its apparent that no matter what this president does, no matter what laws he breaks, no matter how badly he behaves....his supporters refuse to acknowledge it or act to stop him.  They want an autocrat.  They prefer party over country.  And their identity is so tied to their support for this guy, they will not/can not admit any wrongdoing (or even him BEING wrong).  It hurts their feelings too much to consider they voted for a bad president.

Even the ones that admit he did something wrong and they say he learned his lesson are changing what they're saying, look at Collins she went from lesson learned to I hope he did. They're so in on this got, so terrified what he could do to their cushy jobs that they can't see the forest through the trees. At least one had the guts to stand up to Trump. I don't agree with Romney on issues but I've never questioned his integrity. It reminds me of a movie quote from the movie Dave. I ought to care more about doing where right then what's popular, and if not maybe I shouldn't have this job in the first place. Remember when the investigation started, Pelosi said doing what's right is worth losing the house.


Also, I want to make this abundantly clear, I will not mince words. If we were sitting here talking about Obama having done this and we had all this evidence to show it, I would 100% support impeachment, conviction and removal because right matters. Nobody is above the law, not even the president regardless of party affiliation.

Don't know you so have no reason to doubt your sincerity on this but if you believe that the Democratic House would have went through that show if it were a Democratic president in office - you are not being very realistic.

Same with Republicans on the Benghazi thing - they never would have went after a Republican Sec of State in the same way they did Hillary.

It's all about wielding your political power when you have it.

Blow up the 2 party system already