Trump predictions

[wdmso]

Billionaire US President-elect Donald Trump has said he is not obliged to cut ties to his business empire when he takes office on 20 January.

His son-in-law Jared Kushner - a real estate heir who has no experience of diplomacy - could help forge peace between Israel and Palestinians (really and you all complained about the commuinty orignizer )


The US should not be a "nation-builder" in the world this I agree with.. but not sure his Cabinet are on the same page

And the right took a fit with Bill on a plane with the Attorney General . the Clinton foundation and donations from other Governments quid pro quo

But they remain silent with the suggestion he is unwilling to cutting ties with business with tie's or loans from other government..

And his administration will be going after Unions so much for working class America

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Billionaire US President-elect Donald Trump has said he is not obliged to cut ties to his business empire when he takes office on 20 January.

His son-in-law Jared Kushner - a real estate heir who has no experience of diplomacy - could help forge peace between Israel and Palestinians (really and you all complained about the commuinty orignizer )


The US should not be a "nation-builder" in the world this I agree with.. but not sure his Cabinet are on the same page

And the right took a fit with Bill on a plane with the Attorney General . the Clinton foundation and donations from other Governments quid pro quo

But they remain silent with the suggestion he is unwilling to cutting ties with business with tie's or loans from other government..

And his administration will be going after Unions so much for working class America

so you are saying you have a problem with people on the right holding(or not) Trump to the same standards(or lack of) that people have held the Clinton's(and others) to in the past?..........and before any of the things you listed have actually occurred...this is like "fake news"...

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

so you are saying you have a problem with people on the right holding(or not) Trump to the same standards(or lack of) that people have held the Clinton's(and others) to in the past?..........and before any of the things you listed have actually occurred...this is like "fake news"...

Do you need it to happen 1st for it to be an Issue by then its to late

With the Clinton foundation you knew who donated what and when the rest of the rights narrative was just that fake news

As of today know one knows who he he owes or who own's him

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Do you need it to happen 1st for it to be an Issue by then its to late ??

With the Clinton foundation you knew who donated what and when the rest of the rights narrative was just that fake news

As of today know one knows who he he owes or who own's him

I admit that it's quite a change having an incoming president who actually had job and career outside government.... I don't think the Foundation disclosure agreement came about or into affect till she actually became SOS...and was nothing more than something they were excited to undermine and work around in typical Clinton fashion

you should prepare now for the fact that everything Trump says and does for the next 4-8 years is going to make you crazy

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Billionaire US President-elect Donald Trump has said he is not obliged to cut ties to his business empire when he takes office on 20 January.

His son-in-law Jared Kushner - a real estate heir who has no experience of diplomacy - could help forge peace between Israel and Palestinians (really and you all complained about the commuinty orignizer )


The US should not be a "nation-builder" in the world this I agree with.. but not sure his Cabinet are on the same page

And the right took a fit with Bill on a plane with the Attorney General . the Clinton foundation and donations from other Governments quid pro quo

But they remain silent with the suggestion he is unwilling to cutting ties with business with tie's or loans from other government..

And his administration will be going after Unions so much for working class America

You are suggesting that what Trump MIGHT do in the future, is the moral equivalent of what the Clintons actually DID in the past?

I also think they should sell their share in that business, it doesn't look good. But he hasn't even had the chance to do anything improper yet.

Unions, especially public unions, need to go. Why is it, that when workers are given the right to choose whether or not they wish to join a union, they overwhelmingly vote "no"? And why are liberals opposed to letting workers choose whether or not they want to support an organization like a labor union? I thought liberals were pro-choice, I am pretty sure I heard that somewhere???

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You are suggesting that what Trump MIGHT do in the future, is the moral equivalent of what the Clintons actually DID in the past?

I also think they should sell their share in that business, it doesn't look good. But he hasn't even had the chance to do anything improper yet.

Unions, especially public unions, need to go. Why is it, that when workers are given the right to choose whether or not they wish to join a union, they overwhelmingly vote "no"? And why are liberals opposed to letting workers choose whether or not they want to support an organization like a labor union? I thought liberals were pro-choice, I am pretty sure I heard that somewhere???

As I said to Scott why wait until theres an issue where the push from the right for him to do the right thing their just remaining quite..

Sadly your wrong about people having a choice they vote overwhelmingly no ...

Yet only 11.3% of our total work force is Union in the United States and Republicans want to bring that number to ZERO Why is that?? thats a lot of effort to destroy the livelihood's of 11%

I see because you cant get what they have thru your Work place they (union workers) shouldn't have it in theirs

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

As I said to Scott why wait until theres an issue where the push from the right for him to do the right thing their just remaining quite..

Sadly your wrong about people having a choice they vote overwhelmingly no ...

Yet only 11.3% of our total work force is Union in the United States and Republicans want to bring that number to ZERO Why is that?? thats a lot of effort to destroy the livelihood's of 11%

I see because you cant get what they have thru your Work place they (union workers) shouldn't have it in theirs

"Sadly your wrong about people having a choice they vote overwhelmingly no "

Umm, no I'm not. That's why unions, and the democrats they own, are so adamantly opposed to 'right to work'.

"why wait until theres an issue "

So you're OK criticizing people in anticipation of them doing something wrong. Should we jail people ahead of time too, before the actually do anything?

"Yet only 11.3% of our total work force is Union in the United States and Republicans want to bring that number to ZERO Why is that?? thats a lot of effort to destroy the livelihood's of 11%"

If you ever bothered to listen to anyone, you'd know the answers. In the public sector, labor unions are bankrupting towns and states.

WTF is your evidence that getting rid of the union, will "destroy the livelihood" of the 11%? How do the other 89% manage to survive? If unions really added value to their members, people wouldn't overwhelmingly opt out when given the choice. But that's what they do in 'right to work' situations.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Sadly your wrong about people having a choice they vote overwhelmingly no "

Umm, no I'm not. That's why unions, and the democrats they own, are so adamantly opposed to 'right to work'.

"why wait until theres an issue "

So you're OK criticizing people in anticipation of them doing something wrong. Should we jail people ahead of time too, before the actually do anything?

"Yet only 11.3% of our total work force is Union in the United States and Republicans want to bring that number to ZERO Why is that?? thats a lot of effort to destroy the livelihood's of 11%"

If you ever bothered to listen to anyone, you'd know the answers. In the public sector, labor unions are bankrupting towns and states.

WTF is your evidence that getting rid of the union, will "destroy the livelihood" of the 11%? How do the other 89% manage to survive? If unions really added value to their members, people wouldn't overwhelmingly opt out when given the choice. But that's what they do in 'right to work' situations.

work to rule states they want the benefits collective bargaining brings but dont want to pay for it (free stuffers ) public sector, labor unions are bankrupting towns and states. False again but again another example of residents want services yet dont want to pay for them ..

What should a police office make in your town or state ? or firefighter or teacher ?? correctional officer... I bet you would only be happy if it was less than what you make .. Big business just went after overtime over 40 hrs for employees making less than 50k a year I get it make America great again but over time over time 40hrs we dont want America to be that great

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

work to rule states they want the benefits collective bargaining brings but dont want to pay for it (free stuffers ) public sector, labor unions are bankrupting towns and states. False again but again another example of residents want services yet dont want to pay for them ..

What should a police office make in your town or state ? or firefighter or teacher ?? correctional officer... I bet you would only be happy if it was less than what you make .. Big business just went after overtime over 40 hrs for employees making less than 50k a year I get it make America great again but over time over time 40hrs we dont want America to be that great

What a police officer SHOULD make, in a perfect world, would be a lot. Enough to be very comfortable. Same with teachers and firefighters. But this is the real world, and in this world, they should make what we can reasonably afford to pay them. But they are currently making more than most places can afford, especially when you include benefits. Cops retiring at age 45 with 60,000 a year pensions? Teachers who make 100k, and can retire at age 59 with 75j a year pensions? That is insane, and it's why CT is going bankrupt. Other states pay their public servants more modestly, yet they get people to fill those jobs.

As to the labor unions. They give big money to democrats, who then are the ones who decide how much money to give to the unisons they are beholden to. It's a ridiculous conflict of interest, no one is representing the taxpayer in those discussions. And the results speak for themselves.

May I ask what state you live in? Do you live somewhere where union benefit debt isn't a major issue?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device