Trump predictions
 

Medicare - possibly going away

Social security - possibly going away.

Troops in the Middle East - by summer of 2017

Broken campaign promises so far-
Mexico border wall isn't happening. Banning all muslims isn't happening. Ending lobbyists in DC is not happening.

National Parks might be privatized.

Take note of this. While this country spends the next 4 years focused on trumps insane tweets and bizzare comments, he and the powers at the helm will be very busy with what ever the real agenda is.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And if you think he's crazy, just imagine what would have happened if Bernie were elected. :wavey::laughs:

must be the Oompaluminati

Will he get rid of the EPA like he said?

Will he get rid of Obamacare? I think he will find the 2 suggestions he has already made unworkable and eventually make some minor changes and start calling it Trumpcare - then it will be great.

Will he sue the women who accused him of sexual assualt like he said?

Will he put Hillary in jail like he said?

Will there be "some sort of punishment" for women who get an illegal abortion like he said?

Will there be conflicts of interest bt him and his business interests?

I think he will get in trouble trying to use the FBI or IRS to examine someone who got him upset. Kelly Ann Conway has already stated that Harry Reid "better watch what he says" and Ommarosa has said something along the lines of they are keeping a list and have a long memory.

"Medicare - possibly going away" - based on what, exactly? Replaced with what?

"Social security - possibly going away. " has he said that, or hinted at it?

"Troops in the Middle East - by summer of 2017" we have troops there today. An escalation, isn't necessarily a choice on our part. What if they attack us, we shouldn't respond?

"Mexico border wall isn't happening." Has he said that? I haven't heard that.

"Banning all muslims isn't happening" What he said, is that he wants to temporarily ban Muslims from places that are terrorism hotbeds, until we can ensure that we can do it safely. Does that sound kooky to you? Really? And when did he say it's not happening?

"Ending lobbyists in DC is not happening. " - Mike Pence kicked all lobbyists off the transition team.

He won't be sworn in for 2 months, give him a chance, will ya?

Right, only Democrats can get away with that? Because we know, we know for a fact, that Obama's IRS was targeting conservatives.

Can you pls. post any articles pointing to evidence anyone in the WH had anything to do with that.

I got nothing. Lois Lerner apparently thought it was OK, though, right? But I do have evidence, that Obama didn't immediately (or ever?) fire anyone who was responsible for it.

Obama got sued by the Little Sisters Of the Poor, and they won at the Supreme Court, who concluded that he was trampling their rights. When you get sued for trampling the rights of nuns who dedicate their lives to serve the poor, you have problems.

The targeting was started by low level ees in the Cincinnati office to save time. The IRS targeted lots of different kinds of groups, not just conservative ones (more conserv. Groups had applied), the only organ. whose tax-exempt status was actually denied were progressive ones and that the congress. report was limited to only Tea Party groups at congressional Republicans’ request. The White House didn’t even know about it until shortly before the public did.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In fact the acting irs head was forced to resign.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

First you say that she didn't do anything wrong, that the reason more conservative groups were denied, is because more applied. Then two seconds later, you say she was forced to resign.

So in other words, you are saying "she didn't do anything wrong. But if she did, she got punished."

"The White House didn’t even know about it until shortly before the public did"

And Chris Christie had no knowledge of Bridgegate. Do you believe that? Or are you only naïve with liberals.

I listed several other things, Paul.

Obama's presidency destroyed the Democratic party. Every time Obama is not personally on the ballot, but his policies were, the Dems got creamed. 2010, 2014, 2016.

there is a 22 pg. DC Court ruling that's fairly recent that you can read regarding the IRS targeting....that it occured, continued(s) and was brushed off by the administration tells you all you need to know about the administration....but....Trump and the "alt-right" will control the agency in a few weeks and payback is a bitch...right? :eek5:

regarding Obama's destruction of his party...the numbers nationwide with regard to governorships, legislatures and of course, Washington are historically startling...it's no wonder the left is in a panic....too bad they set some really bad precedents regarding power and positions....

I'm always impressed with the way the pendulum swings.....

Nebestrodamus and Spence and others were guaranteeing a Hillary presidency, implosion of the republican party, disappointment and devastation for the "out of step with the rest of the country" right for the forseeable future.....

keep making predictions guys....:1poke:

I never guaranteed hillarys victory. In fact I was opposed to her from the beginning. Furthermore had the dnc not meddled with the primaries, Bernie would be our next president.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The party is in tatters. If you look at the % of national and state offices that will be held by Dems after this election, it's the lowest percentage since Reconstruction in the late 1800's (that has been reported many times in the media). The Democrats got absolutely mauled at the state level.

And in 2018, if you look at the Senate seats that are up for re-election, TEN are democrats from states that Trump won. If people like what Trump does in the next 2 years, the GOP will win big again in 2018. That is a very, very big "if" at the moment.

And a leading candidate to head the DNC is Keith Ellison, a crazy-angry-liberal Muslim, a supporter of the Nation of Islam, and a rabid anti-Semite. And to top it off, he's a 9/11 truther.

The fact that the people who run that party would even consider such a nut to head their party, tells you that they have misinterpreted the election results, as badly as humanly possible. The country has had enough of radical liberalism. They tolerated it because (for some Godforesaken reason) they like Obama personally. They don't want radical liberalism from anyone else. That is the lesson of this election.

huh?????

"All these people know that she is going to be the next president. It would be career suicide to take this further and risk "payback" next year." signed nebe

"Lets face it. Hillary will defeat Trump in the election and we will have to live with 4 years at least of more divisive politics.. More polarization of a divided nation. Probably more war because Hillary is a Hawk... This makes me really pessimistic about our future." signed nebe

:hee:

Ok I guess I said it but take note that I was opposed to her.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They both are steaming turds
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The wall, more likely a barrier made up of different materials, will happen.

Sanctuary cities most likely will lose some of their federal funding.

Federal agencies hiring freeze is more than likely.

Military buildup more than likely.

Military buildup is definite.
Military action is highly probable.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yep, would be the case for any president in this environment.

What would you do if there was a large-scale terrorist attack on our soil? Of if Syria's president start slaughtering millions of civilians? Nothing?

It depends on the logic and evidence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

90% of the terrorists who hijacked the planes on 9-11 were Saudi but we attack Afghanistan and Iraq.
So much of that era defies logic. I'm getting ready for more of the same.

There's a lot about religion that defies logic as well. Look at pence. A loon who denies evolution and thinks cigarette smoking is not fatal.

Clown car world tour is getting ready to begin.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

buckle up....vrooom ... vroommm

:sled:

That's because Afghanistan was setting up Sanctuary Cities for Al Qaeda...Afghanistan and the Taliban got what it deserved as they granted Safe Haven for their training camps.

Jim, i could not tell you if she resigned. I remember that some guy was forced to resign. He was the acting head so maybe she did resign. I don't know remember either way. sometimes people who are not guilty are forced to take the fall. There was investigations and there was no evidence at all that the White House knew.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"90% of the terrorists who hijacked the planes on 9-11 were Saudi but we attack Afghanistan and Iraq.
So much of that era defies logic. "

Afghanistan, not Saudi Arabia, sponsored Al Queda, gave them money, safe harbor, and sponsorship. Why do you think we attacked Afghanistan, you think Bush threw a dart at a map?

"thinks cigarette smoking is not fatal. "

Did he say that?

True, especially in politics, innocent people are often asked to fall on the sword.

According to the CDC tobacco use is not always fatal, 33% of people who are lifelong smokers of a pack or more a day do NOT die of a smoking related illness and live past the average life expectancy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i believe he received $100,000 from the tobacco industry..

Thank God pot is legal, I think I'm going to need a good buzz on in order to survive the next 4 years.

:uhuh::uhuh::uhuh::uhuh:

i wonder if Mittens Romney will be secretary of state? Im cool with that if it happens.

I don't think Trump will have Guiliani in his admin. bc of how much $ he made making speaches after being mayor. I know how the right complained so much about the Clinton's and the $ they made.

I don't think most conservatives have any quarrel with what she did. If the free market wants to pay her for speaking, that's how a free market is supposed to work.

What we object to, is the hypocrisy involved when Hillary complains about a rigged system that favors insiders (yet takes full advantage of it herself), and when she complains about Wall Street excess (she made a mint speaking to Goldman Sachs). And when she refuses to reveal the transcripts of those speeches, but bashes Trump abut not revealing taxes.

We heard it constantly here that she (a private citizen) should release the transcripts of the Goldman Sach speaches. So anyone in the Trump's WH (since they are public officials) I assume will have to release all the transcipts of the speaches they made prior to become appointed/elected. If not that is hypocrisy. I assume everyone will release their college transcripts also since people on the right where screaming for Obamas - right?

Would you release your companies reserve factors?

We ain't ever seeing his taxes.

"We heard it constantly here that she (a private citizen) should release the transcripts of the Goldman Sach speaches. "

So what? Is that an unreasonable thing to request?

"So anyone in the Trump's WH (since they are public officials) I assume will have to release all the transcipts of the speaches they made prior to become appointed/elected. "

Fair enough.

"I assume everyone will release their college transcripts also since people on the right where screaming for Obamas - right?"

Did Trump and Hillary release transcripts? Most candidates do. Obama, as you say, did not. I wonder why?

"Would you release your companies reserve factors?"

Not remotely the same thing. Though you always impress me with how much you know about insurance. But if I gave a speech saying that companies shouldn't have to hold adequate reserves, that would be fair game to make public.

"We ain't ever seeing his taxes."

Maybe not, you may well be right.

I wanted to see the transcript of her speeches, only after she was whining about a rigged system, and whining about how evil business is. Because those stances seem totally at odds with taking 250k for a 30 minute speech from Goldman Sachs.

I do think it is unreasonable for a private citizen to have to release work they were paid to do. Just as you shouldn't be expected to release the work you do for your employer, Hillary (or anyone in any admin) should have to release that same work (unless it was illegal in some way, etc.).

I can't remember past Pres. releasing transcripts and don't believe that was common like releasing your taxes is.