stan wrote:So um first week was certainly a busy one for the new pres.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
People may not like it, but at least he's doing the stuff he said he would
by Jimmy_041 » Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:09 am
stan wrote:So um first week was certainly a busy one for the new pres.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
by Jimmy_041 » Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:10 am
woodublieve12 wrote:Martin Belam
As long as you live you'll never see a photograph of 7 women signing legislation about what men can do with their reproductive organs
by stan » Tue Jan 31, 2017 11:06 am
Jimmy_041 wrote:stan wrote:So um first week was certainly a busy one for the new pres.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
People may not like it, but at least he's doing the stuff he said he would
by Booney » Tue Jan 31, 2017 11:22 am
stan wrote:Jimmy_041 wrote:stan wrote:So um first week was certainly a busy one for the new pres.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
People may not like it, but at least he's doing the stuff he said he would
Exactly right. He has done what he said he would do. The entire world seems to be acting surprised and they can get all up in arms but he has so far done what he said he will during the lead up to the election.
by HH3 » Tue Jan 31, 2017 11:37 am
Booney wrote:stan wrote:Jimmy_041 wrote:stan wrote:So um first week was certainly a busy one for the new pres.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
People may not like it, but at least he's doing the stuff he said he would
Exactly right. He has done what he said he would do. The entire world seems to be acting surprised and they can get all up in arms but he has so far done what he said he will during the lead up to the election.
Which, now, is the scary part.
by mighty_tiger_79 » Tue Jan 31, 2017 11:43 am
by Jimmy_041 » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:12 pm
HH3 wrote:Welcome to democracy. Not sure how the popular vote and electoral college works, but Trump won the election.
I was reading a thing that said how people couldn't imagine Trump actually winning the election. They thought because the most vocal people were against him, that there was no chance.
Unfortunately for them, they had made a lot of regular people that supported Trump afraid to talk about it, for fear of ridicule and backlash.
Well, those people voted in the booths. And now he's doing what he said he'd do. I don't support either side of the argument, but to be honest, it's actually good to see a politician actually do what they said they would. Or at least try, before Congress stops him.
by bennymacca » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:26 pm
by stan » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:30 pm
bennymacca wrote:Strap yourselves in ladies and gentlemen, it's going to be a bumpy ride
Top Stories: You're fired: Trump axes Attorney-General over travel ban defiance
http://ab.co/2jPoJpj
by HH3 » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:33 pm
stan wrote:bennymacca wrote:Strap yourselves in ladies and gentlemen, it's going to be a bumpy ride
Top Stories: You're fired: Trump axes Attorney-General over travel ban defiance
http://ab.co/2jPoJpj
She's the acting attorney-general or was at the time. But really whilst I'm not suggesting that I agree with his decisions, he is entitled to sack a staff member that is not towing the line.
by HH3 » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:33 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:HH3 wrote:Welcome to democracy. Not sure how the popular vote and electoral college works, but Trump won the election.
I was reading a thing that said how people couldn't imagine Trump actually winning the election. They thought because the most vocal people were against him, that there was no chance.
Unfortunately for them, they had made a lot of regular people that supported Trump afraid to talk about it, for fear of ridicule and backlash.
Well, those people voted in the booths. And now he's doing what he said he'd do. I don't support either side of the argument, but to be honest, it's actually good to see a politician actually do what they said they would. Or at least try, before Congress stops him.
Here's a 5 minute explanation
There is a better one but i cant find it - its in this thread somewhere
Basically, it was put in place to stop the most populous States (like New York and California) dominating the election
by stan » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:40 pm
by bennymacca » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:56 pm
stan wrote:bennymacca wrote:Strap yourselves in ladies and gentlemen, it's going to be a bumpy ride
Top Stories: You're fired: Trump axes Attorney-General over travel ban defiance
http://ab.co/2jPoJpj
She's the acting attorney-general or was at the time. But really whilst I'm not suggesting that I agree with his decisions, he is entitled to sack a staff member that is not towing the line.
by HH3 » Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:59 pm
bennymacca wrote:stan wrote:bennymacca wrote:Strap yourselves in ladies and gentlemen, it's going to be a bumpy ride
Top Stories: You're fired: Trump axes Attorney-General over travel ban defiance
http://ab.co/2jPoJpj
She's the acting attorney-general or was at the time. But really whilst I'm not suggesting that I agree with his decisions, he is entitled to sack a staff member that is not towing the line.
So you are saying it's ok to sack anyone that doesn't agree with you, even though what you are doing is probably illegal?
by Jimmy_041 » Tue Jan 31, 2017 2:02 pm
by Magellan » Tue Jan 31, 2017 2:07 pm
by stan » Tue Jan 31, 2017 3:55 pm
bennymacca wrote:stan wrote:bennymacca wrote:Strap yourselves in ladies and gentlemen, it's going to be a bumpy ride
Top Stories: You're fired: Trump axes Attorney-General over travel ban defiance
http://ab.co/2jPoJpj
She's the acting attorney-general or was at the time. But really whilst I'm not suggesting that I agree with his decisions, he is entitled to sack a staff member that is not towing the line.
So you are saying it's ok to sack anyone that doesn't agree with you, even though what you are doing is probably illegal?
by Grenville » Tue Jan 31, 2017 4:55 pm
stan wrote:bennymacca wrote:stan wrote:bennymacca wrote:Strap yourselves in ladies and gentlemen, it's going to be a bumpy ride
Top Stories: You're fired: Trump axes Attorney-General over travel ban defiance
http://ab.co/2jPoJpj
She's the acting attorney-general or was at the time. But really whilst I'm not suggesting that I agree with his decisions, he is entitled to sack a staff member that is not towing the line.
So you are saying it's ok to sack anyone that doesn't agree with you, even though what you are doing is probably illegal?
Pretty sure I didnt make any of the laws that currently govern the US, so relax you lefty self for a second. Magellan has provided a pretty good answer to your question.
by bennymacca » Tue Jan 31, 2017 5:56 pm
by stan » Wed Feb 01, 2017 7:51 am
bennymacca wrote:Whoa there nelly
How is possibly me being a "lefty" just for suggesting it's interesting for someone to be sacked 3 hours after making what seems on the surface somewhat reasonable (although extraordinary) comments.
What exactly am I supposed to "get" there Grenville?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |