|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Steerpike
(Post 12018478)
Phew - things are heading in the right direction again (for those of us who view Trump as the lesser of two evils, to pre-empt JerseyGirl's question!).
Hillary 68% vs Trump 32%. NV, FL, NC, OH, IA and NH all back to blue; only AZ lingers in pink. What a fickle electorate :) http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...tion-forecast/ |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by SpoogleDrummer
(Post 12018505)
Trump is the lesser of two evils? :eek:
|
Re: 2016 Election
Trump as Bill Maher says is a "whiny little bitch" Now he's whining that the election will be rigged.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Jerseygirl
(Post 12018513)
IMO They are equal.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dc koop
(Post 12017684)
California could always secede. It's the eighth biggest economy in the world and on the Pacific rim An economic and commercial union with Canada could also occur. Screw Trump and his knuckle dragging mob. Bernie could be invited to run as our first President
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Steerpike
(Post 12018522)
As an aside, I'm reading an absolutely fascinating book about the history of water in the west - the history and development of dams, hydro-power, etc (and with wonderful insight into the Bureau of Reclamation and the Army Corps of Engineers). A large chunk of the book focuses on California. As much as I'd love to see CA secede, it would have to come to some very tricky arrangements regarding water, since a huge amount of the water needed to keep CA as productive as it is comes from the Colorado River, and other out-of-state sources, and those sources were extremely difficult to secure (supreme court battles, etc). If CA were no longer a part of the US, those contracts would be torn up (much to the glee of Colorado, AZ, NV, etc).
And Cali would go back to being the desert it was. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Steerpike
(Post 12018490)
I agree. And even though I'm an expat, I've been here 30+ years and I really don't have anywhere practical to go so I'm stuck with this ship too!
This post should be read by all those angry folks who think this thread is a liberal love-fest. It's not; it's about stopping a madman. Regarding McCain, his choice of Palin was probably his absolute downfall. What a batshit crazy thing that was! |
Re: 2016 Election
Seems Hillary will be coming up to the mountains to speak to her supporters.
Sadly I will not be able to attend. tickets start at $10,000 a seat. |
Re: 2016 Election
It seems that those who don't want to have a President Trump, are safe... Well done, chaps!
http://www.wired.com/2016/08/america...eady-election/ And more assurance from Jon Rappoport: US Election Shocker: Is This How The Vote Will Be Rigged? Democracy lives! |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Steerpike
(Post 12018522)
As an aside, I'm reading an absolutely fascinating book about the history of water in the west - the history and development of dams, hydro-power, etc (and with wonderful insight into the Bureau of Reclamation and the Army Corps of Engineers). A large chunk of the book focuses on California. As much as I'd love to see CA secede, it would have to come to some very tricky arrangements regarding water, since a huge amount of the water needed to keep CA as productive as it is comes from the Colorado River, and other out-of-state sources, and those sources were extremely difficult to secure (supreme court battles, etc). If CA were no longer a part of the US, those contracts would be torn up (much to the glee of Colorado, AZ, NV, etc).
If push came to shove California has the money and means to construct desalination plants up and down the coast. Expensive it might be but when you think that the new high speed rail service from San Diego to San Francisco is estimated to cost around 97 billion dollars by time of completion money is obviously not a primary concern. Anyway my original comment was a bit tongue in cheek. I would be very sad to see the US break up and it would take a lot more than four years of a Trump administration to bring that about although if that ignoramus was allowed free hand which of course he wouldn't be, there would still be some changes for the worse affecting us all by the time he was voted out. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by Gordon Barlow
(Post 12018534)
It seems that those who don't want to have a President Trump, are safe... Well done, chaps!
http://www.wired.com/2016/08/america...eady-election/ And more assurance from Jon Rappoport: US Election Shocker: Is This How The Vote Will Be Rigged? Democracy lives! This is just one of Trumps paranoid fantasies in play again, like that all Muslims are a potential threat to our safety and all Mexican immigrants are rapists and murderers not forgetting also that Obama wasn't born in the US and is a secret Muslim to boot. |
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dakota44
(Post 12018525)
And Cali would go back to being the desert it was.
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dc koop
(Post 12018546)
Not a chance. Lotsa water in the Pacific and there are such things as desalination plants. The whole middle east relies on fresh water from them
|
Re: 2016 Election
Originally Posted by dc koop
(Post 12018543)
I would hardly place any trust in news rags that on the same level as the National Enquirer and the Globe. Exactly who would do the rigging anyway?
This is just one of Trumps paranoid fantasies in play again, like that all Muslims are a potential threat to our safety and all Mexican immigrants are rapists and murderers not forgetting also that Obama wasn't born in the US and is a secret Muslim to boot. |
Re: 2016 Election
If you thought Trump was going to pivot after the convention and his campaign team would be able to control him...
So, How's Your Week Going, Trump Campaign Staff? |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 7:10 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.