Trump's inauguration speech

Anyone can post and discuss breaking news that interest them (please respect posting guidelines and be sure to reference properly).
Forum rules
Please be sure to check our forum's Rules & Guidelines

Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Natural ChemE on January 20th, 2017, 4:09 pm 

Today, 2017-01-20, Donald Trump has become the 45th President of the United States.

To read Trump's inauguration speech, here's a transcript:To watch Trump's inauguration speech:
    .
Natural ChemE
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2754
Joined: 28 Dec 2009


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Braininvat on January 20th, 2017, 5:04 pm 

Curious why this needs a news thread, NCE. I imagine anyone who wants to see it has found it on web or broadcast sources. My guess is DT wrote it while taking a dump. Whatever came out of his anus was probably of more worth than what he wrote.

However, since you've posted it, perhaps this will add some perspective....


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/donald-trump-quote-batman-villain-9661898
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 4824
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby SciameriKen on January 20th, 2017, 5:38 pm 

Quite an isolationist tone...
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1097
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Braininvat on January 20th, 2017, 5:47 pm 

Image

Image

Guess which crowd was Obama's and which was Trump's.

Lowest approval rating (CNN and Fox polls) on Inauguration Day since....polling began.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 4824
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby zetreque on January 20th, 2017, 8:43 pm 

Is that seriously the turnout for Trump? Can we get confirmation? And probably half of Trump's crowd is protestors.
I haven't seen or watched any news except a headline saying "Trump calls for unity"
That has to be some sort of oxymoron to his campaign. Sounds like a dictatorship to me.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2608
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby zetreque on January 20th, 2017, 9:07 pm 

Trump’s 3 p.m. parade is expected to last just 90 minutes. Obama’s took more than four hours. Trump is expected to appear at three official balls. Obama attended 10. Just 450 bus permits had been sought for Friday. About seven times that many – more than 3,000 – registered eight years ago.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/loc ... 430b1c60a3

If that bus percentage holds through to the crowds, that would put Obama's turnout at 1.8 million and Trumps at 270,000

It's funny how many articles talk about how Trump said there would be record numbers turning out. Fits well with the rest of his delusional BS.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2608
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby someguy1 on January 20th, 2017, 9:38 pm 

Certainly the enthusiasm and excitement about Obama was historic. First, he was and is a tremendously charismatic individual. And he's cool. He's the Cool President. He's got a jump shot. He hangs with Jay Z. He even sneaks cigarettes! He's cool.

And of course just the symbolism of his election was transformative.

What I'm saying is that I wouldn't put too much stock in the factoid that he had twice the attendees as Trump's inauguration. It's true but I question why anyone thinks it's some kind of political debating point.

We know what Obama did over eight years. Some good, some bad. In the end he turned out to be human and not a god or a savior.

If you look at the actual numbers, many millions of Obama voters nationwide stayed home and didn't bother to vote for Hillary. Trump actually got fewer popular votes than either Romney or McCain. But Hillary got around eight or ten million fewer votes than Obama did in 2008. So she wasn't very popular either and if you want to know why she lost, it's because Obama's supporters simply didn't bother to vote.

Saying that "Obama got a better crowd than Trump" is not much of a debating point. Based on the actual numbers, a lot of those Obama fans in attendance on inauguration day in 2008 did not find it worth the trouble to vote for Hillary in 2016. The difference between the blue bar on the left and the blue bar on the right is the story of the election.

Image
someguy1
Member
 
Posts: 302
Joined: 08 Nov 2013


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby zetreque on January 20th, 2017, 10:03 pm 

someguy1,

Your opinion, not mine. I think it says a LOT.

and btw, 450 vs over 3000 is not half or "twice".
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2608
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby someguy1 on January 20th, 2017, 10:17 pm 

zetreque » January 20th, 2017, 8:03 pm wrote:someguy1,

Your opinion, not mine. I think it says a LOT.

and btw, 450 vs over 3000 is not half or "twice".


Ok. Just explain to me what it means so that I understand. Trump's pretty unpopular. We all know that. And Obama was historically popular. What did we learn from the attendance figures today that we didn't already know?

And since Obama's 2008 popularity faded to Hillary's 2016 loss, caused specifically by Obama voters no-showing for Hillary, what could be the significance of today's attendance going forward? Perhaps it means nothing. So I'm asking, what does it mean?
someguy1
Member
 
Posts: 302
Joined: 08 Nov 2013


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby wolfhnd on January 20th, 2017, 10:38 pm 

More fake news from the main stream media similar to the polls before the election.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-inaugurat ... ded-545467
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4067
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Forest_Dump on January 20th, 2017, 11:16 pm 

wolfhnd wrote:More fake news from the main stream media similar to the polls before the election.


Purely out of curiosity, what makes you think it is fake news?
User avatar
Forest_Dump
Resident Member
 
Posts: 8577
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Location: Great Lakes Region


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Braininvat on January 20th, 2017, 11:17 pm 

I don't actually give a flying **** what the crowd numbers were. I posted the pix, from the NYT, because it was amusing. Not a "debate point." As someone commented about the ceremonies in general, "...they were a Ferris wheel and a few funnel cakes short of a state fair." I think it can be said that Trump's unprecedented low approval rating, entering office, reflects the realization by most Americans that Trump is a lying, self-serving, spoiled, stunted adolescent bigot whose character and conduct make him unqualified for dogcatcher in Dogpatch, let alone POTUS. I am disgusted that 25% of my fellow citizens were taken in by this shameless con artist. Just yesterday he has to boast (and how insecure is this?) that his cabinet has the highest IQ in history. Think of leaders you have admired, who made the world a better place...did they ever sink to this kind of idiotic boasting? For those of you who make excuses for this racist narcissist misogynist pussygrabbing halfwit: SHAME ON YOU.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 4824
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby ronjanec on January 20th, 2017, 11:32 pm 

Probably would have been a much larger turnout if those poor Republicans didn't have to go to work everyday, unlike the many high school and college students and many stay at home "gimme dat" Dems, who both probably greatly increased the attendence at the other inaugurations.

And those always accurate polls conducted by the always trustworthy and unbiased main stream media showing Trump having the lowest approval rating of any incoming President? Why do the words "extremely gullible", and obviously have not learned anything from the most recent election keep entering my mind? :)
ronjanec
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4299
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Location: Chicago suburbs


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby zetreque on January 20th, 2017, 11:35 pm 

I'm more interested to see the turnout for the protests this weekend.

Airplanes full of women are flying into Washington, DC, to protest President Trump
http://www.vox.com/identities/2017/1/20/14341702/womens-march-airplanes-trump
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2608
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby ronjanec on January 20th, 2017, 11:45 pm 

zetreque » Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:35 pm wrote:I'm more interested to see the turnout for the protests this weekend.

Airplanes full of women are flying into Washington, DC, to protest President Trump
http://www.vox.com/identities/2017/1/20/14341702/womens-march-airplanes-trump


"I'm sure" those "airplanes full of women" who were formerly Hillary Clinton supporters, are going to "really impress" "the Donald", and make him reevaluate many of his current positions on women.
ronjanec
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4299
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Location: Chicago suburbs


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby wolfhnd on January 20th, 2017, 11:47 pm 

ronjanec » Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:32 am wrote:Probably would have been a much larger turnout if those poor Republicans didn't have to go to work everyday, unlike the many high school and college students and many stay at home "gimme dat" Dems, who both probably greatly increased the attendence at the other inaugurations.

And those always accurate polls conducted by the always trustworthy and unbiased main stream media showing Trump having the lowest approval rating of any incoming President? Why do the words "extremely gullible", and obviously have not learned anything from the most recent election keep entering my mind? :)


I think that I have never seen such divisiveness in American Politics.

My parents operated under the strange prohibition of never discussing politics or religion in a social settings. While it is true that politics can be emotion provoking I think if you can't talk to people close to you who can you talk to? No one should be moved to violent speech or action by this election cycle. No matter how you feel about the issues the peaceful transfer of power in a democracy is more important than any other issue other than nuclear war that we face. In four years the people who oppose Trump will get another chance and in the mean time they can use their political voice to influence the government.

What is important to remember is that it is through open discussion without unreasonable condemnation that we resolve our differences without bloodshed in the political arena.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4067
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby ronjanec on January 21st, 2017, 12:16 am 

Wolf,

It is much worse than you, and many others here realize. I usually come back here after reading BOTH the liberal and conservative websites every day, and also the comments on their respective articles from ordinary people like you and me. There are many/mostly really vicious and hateful comments from both sides towards the other political party and each other.

The women's march tomorrow is a good example of this anger, viciousness, bitterness, and unwillingness to try to move forward together with our newly elected President(the poor guy hasn't even had a chance to do anything yet, and their protesting the day after the inauguration!?)
ronjanec
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4299
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Location: Chicago suburbs


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby someguy1 on January 21st, 2017, 12:29 am 

Braininvat » January 20th, 2017, 9:17 pm wrote:... Trump is a lying, self-serving, spoiled, stunted adolescent bigot whose character and conduct make him unqualified for dogcatcher in Dogpatch, let alone POTUS.p/quote]

One could agree with the above

Braininvat » January 20th, 2017, 9:17 pm wrote: I am disgusted that 25% of my fellow citizens were taken in by this shameless con artist.


Yet disagree with this. Perhaps they were not taken in, but rather formed the judgment, based on watching Hillary since cookie-gate in 1992 and Travelgate in 1993 and following her career through her screwup of Hillarycare, her vote and speech on the Senate floor in favor of the Iraq war, through her disastrous handling of Libya, along with all the other scandals, major and minor (don't forget the cattle futures, the Rose law firm records found in her bedroom months after being subpoenaed, etc) that she was even worse than Trump.

Trump MIGHT blow up the world. Hillary has been ACTUALLY blowing up the world and would certainly continue to do so. Some of us, myself included, are simply sick to death of American foreign policy since 9/11 and want change at any cost. Even at the cost of Trump.

Not looking to re-argue the election, but just pointing out that there is in fact a rational argument to be made that we can stipulate to EVERY ONE of Trump's sins yet still judge them less bad than Hillary's. Truly there were no good choices this election.
Last edited by someguy1 on January 21st, 2017, 12:43 am, edited 6 times in total.
someguy1
Member
 
Posts: 302
Joined: 08 Nov 2013


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby ronjanec on January 21st, 2017, 12:31 am 

I should add, that if this was a bunch of Republican women doing this after Obama's first election, I would have been really embarrassed, and also really pissed off, by these stupid women.

Keep it up Dems...people are watching all of these shenanigans. Even the young people may finally wise up and also kick you to the curb in future elections.
ronjanec
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4299
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Location: Chicago suburbs


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby wolfhnd on January 21st, 2017, 12:43 am 

someguy1 » Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:29 am wrote:
Braininvat » January 20th, 2017, 9:17 pm wrote:... Trump is a lying, self-serving, spoiled, stunted adolescent bigot whose character and conduct make him unqualified for dogcatcher in Dogpatch, let alone POTUS.p/quote]

One could agree with the above

Braininvat » January 20th, 2017, 9:17 pm wrote: I am disgusted that 25% of my fellow citizens were taken in by this shameless con artist.


Yet disagree with this. Perhaps they were not taken in, but rather formed the judgment, based on watching Hillary since cookie-gate in 1992 and Travelgate in 1993 and following her career through her screwup of Hillarycare, her vote and speech on the Senate floor in favor of the Iraq war, through her disastrous handling of Libya, along with all the other scandals, major and minor (don't forget the cattle futures, the Rose law firm records found in her bedroom months after being subpoenaed, etc) that she was even worse than Trump.

Trump MIGHT blow up the world. Hillary has been ACTUALLY blowing up the world and would certainly continue to do so.

Not looking to re-argue the election, but just pointing out that there is in fact a rational argument to be made that we can stipulate EVERY ONE of Trump's sins yet still judge them less bad than Hillary's. Truly there were no good choices this election.


I have never seen an election where I felt there was a good choice in the sense of this is someone that I would follow without question. What is remarkable is not the critique of Trump but the lack of critique of Obama and Clinton. I would have said that the media bias was remarkable but anyone familiar with history would know that is not true. The only thing remarkable about the media bias today is that the internet destroys their narrative 10 minutes after they delivery it. Trump is a wakeup call not just to the incompetent media but the establishment in general, times have changed.

I see many classical liberals who are moving in the right direction away from dogma to more fundamental values such as freedom of speech, individual liberty not identity politics, a willingness to compromise on issues like abortion and gun control and in general have come to an understand that collectivism has always been the enemy of freedom.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4067
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Lomax on January 21st, 2017, 1:00 am 

ronjanec » January 21st, 2017, 4:32 am wrote:Probably would have been a much larger turnout if those poor Republicans didn't have to go to work everyday, unlike the many high school and college students and many stay at home "gimme dat" Dems, who both probably greatly increased the attendence at the other inaugurations.

Well they certainly know what's good for them.

Change in Unemployment Rate % (U.S. Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics)

-2.0 Clinton I Democrat
-1.9 Reagan II Republican
-1.7 JFK/Johnson Democrat
-1.5 Johnson Democrat
-1.4 Truman Democrat
-1.1 Clinton II Democrat
-0.2 Reagan I Republican
0.0 Carter Democrat
+0.9 Bush, GW II Republican
+1.0 Bush, GW I Republican
+1.3 Eisenhower I Republican
+1.5 Nixon Republican
+1.9 Bush, GHW Republican
+2.4 Eisenhower II Republican
+2.6 Nixon/Ford Republican

The results go quite strongly in favour of your theory here, Ronjanec. They quite clearly show that many fewer people tend to have jobs at the end of a Republican presidency, than at the end of a Democrat presidency.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3240
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby BadgerJelly on January 21st, 2017, 2:00 am 

Who is this Trump guy? Some twiiter celeb or something?

Never heard of him.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3768
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby vivian maxine on January 21st, 2017, 8:36 am 

Wolfhnd, your point is well-taken but there was more to that rule than just "not in social settings". The rule was not a general "isn't done" thing. It was expedient to avoid what the general outcome almost always seemed to be. Anyone who has seen a holiday family gathering turn into a ranting, screaming, sometimes fisticuff war knows the good reason for that rule. Families have split apart for years over such reactions.

What we "should be able to do" and what we generally "can do" are two very different things. So, the rule had an ending: "....unless you know the persons very well and know how they handle controversial topics." In a large social group, you cannot know that.

I have two friends, both of whom totally disagree with my notions. Both disagree with me on religion; one disagrees with me on politics. We all three can talk our points till the cows come home and nobody starts ranting. On the other hand, I have friends with whom I'd never dare attempt a discussion of politics or religion, not even if we agreed with each other. They simply cannot avoid going into spasmodic temper tantrums.

As I said, your point is well taken. Just pointing out a bit more of the reason we probably should not in a social setting. At least in my opinion.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2602
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Braininvat on January 21st, 2017, 11:12 am 

ronjanec » January 20th, 2017, 8:32 pm wrote:Probably would have been a much larger turnout if those poor Republicans didn't have to go to work everyday, unlike the many high school and college students and many stay at home "gimme dat" Dems, who both probably greatly increased the attendence at the other inaugurations.

And those always accurate polls conducted by the always trustworthy and unbiased main stream media showing Trump having the lowest approval rating of any incoming President? Why do the words "extremely gullible", and obviously have not learned anything from the most recent election keep entering my mind? :)


No idea, Ron. Since both Fox and CNN got those low poll figures, and you seem to have no problem accepting such poll agreement when they appear to favor your views, perhaps you can explain it to us. Is it possible you only find validity in poll results you like? Anyway, today brings news of how Trump reacts to disapproval....

http://gizmodo.com/national-park-servic ... o_facebook

Basically, his administration has just banned the National Park Service from using Twitter to update visitors, issue alerts, etc.

It's just starting folks. Also, if you can handle it, look up his first executive action.

http://time.com/4641511/trump-inauguration-mortgage-payments/

Increases mortgage payments by higher payment into FHA insurance fund. Hits lower income homeowners the hardest, with zero effect on the affluent. How do you like your golden boy, all you working class folks?
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 4824
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Braininvat on January 21st, 2017, 11:26 am 


Change in Unemployment Rate % (U.S. Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics)

-2.0 Clinton I Democrat
-1.9 Reagan II Republican
-1.7 JFK/Johnson Democrat
-1.5 Johnson Democrat
-1.4 Truman Democrat
-1.1 Clinton II Democrat
-0.2 Reagan I Republican
0.0 Carter Democrat
+0.9 Bush, GW II Republican
+1.0 Bush, GW I Republican
+1.3 Eisenhower I Republican
+1.5 Nixon Republican
+1.9 Bush, GHW Republican
+2.4 Eisenhower II Republican
+2.6 Nixon/Ford Republican

The results go quite strongly in favour of your theory here, Ronjanec. They quite clearly show that many fewer people tend to have jobs at the end of a Republican presidency, than at the end of a Democrat presidency.


...add to list that unemployment under Obama dropped from 10% to below 5%.

But, yes, thank goodness our long national nightmare is over!
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 4824
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby ronjanec on January 21st, 2017, 12:31 pm 

https://radio.foxnews.com/2017/01/17/ne ... s-are-low/ I tried to find the specific Fox News poll you were talking about Biv, but all I could find was one Fox News outlet reporting on the results of the polls from the fake news people?
ronjanec
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4299
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Location: Chicago suburbs


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Braininvat on January 21st, 2017, 1:55 pm 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/19/fox-news-poll-divided-yet-optimistic-country-awaits-trump.html

Fox News poll, details of the methodology and sampling are at the bottom of the article. Enjoy.

CNN had similar results. So did Gallup. Haven't checked 538 yet, but I plan to. If I see any big discrepancies or suspicious sampling methods, I will get back to you.



MOD NOTE: Folks, should we move this thread to Lounge and call it something more general like "Trump Administration, Pro and Con" or something like that?
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 4824
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby Braininvat on January 21st, 2017, 2:33 pm 

President Trump presented such a graceless and disturbingly ahistoric vision of America on Friday that his Inaugural Address cast more doubt than hope on his presidency.

Instead of summoning the best in America’s ideals, Mr. Trump offered a fantastical version of America losing its promise, military dominance and middle-class wealth to “the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies and destroying our jobs.”

With sweeping exaggeration, Mr. Trump spoke of “carnage” in the inner cities. He deplored all of this decline as a betrayal of America, implicitly trashing the four former presidents who sat listening behind him at the inaugural ceremony. Those presidents, Democratic and Republican, must have put Mexico first, or perhaps Sweden, or China. Offering himself as a kind of savior, the leader of a “historic movement, the likes of which the world has never seen before,” Mr. Trump proclaimed he would have a different priority: “America First! America First!”

Though expectations couldn’t have been terribly high, the opening moments of Mr. Trump’s presidency were beyond disappointing. He spoke to a nation in need of moving past the divisiveness that, not so incidentally, was his hallmark during the campaign. But what President Trump presented was more of candidate Trump, now more ominous in bearing the power of the White House, yet no less intent on inspiring only his base of aggrieved or anxious white Americans.

The new president offered a tortured rewrite of American history — ignoring the injustices of the past as well as the nation’s economic resilience and social achievements in recent decades.

One longed, as Mr. Trump spoke, for a special kind of simultaneous translation, one that would convert Trumpian myth into concrete fact. It might have noted, when Mr. Trump sounded like a politician from the 1980s in promising to “get our people off welfare and back to work,” that the number of people receiving federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families benefits fell by more than 70 percent, to 1.2 million, between 1996 and 2016. As Mr. Trump spoke about the disappearance of jobs, it would have noted that the unemployment rate has fallen from 10 percent in 2009, the height of the recession, to less than 5 percent.

Mr. Trump portrayed the nation’s closed factories as having needlessly hemorrhaged jobs to overseas companies. But even as production jobs fell by about five million since 1987, the country’s manufacturing output has increased by more than 86 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Trade is part of the complicated story, but so is automation.

Equally misleading was his characterization that Washington has “subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing for the very sad depletion of our military.” The United States leads the world in military spending, allocating more than the next seven nations combined, including China and Russia. Current spending, in fact, is far higher than it was before the 9/11 attacks.

Mr. Trump waxed apocalyptic in imagining the prevalence of crime in the nation’s cities. “This American carnage stops right here and stops right now,” he vowed. Crime statistics fluctuate, but they show that crime remains far lower now than in past decades. And one big factor in violent crime — easily available firearms — is not likely to be remedied by Mr. Trump, the candidate who was supported by the National Rifle Association.

There was little music in his speech, and no gentleness in his jackhammer delivery, but Mr. Trump did promise that “a new national pride will stir ourselves, lift our sights and heal our divisions.” Yet he said nothing about such practical needs as effective enforcement of civil rights and police reforms by the Justice Department he will oversee.

It was hard to make sense of Mr. Trump’s distorted vision of America’s past and present. But the passion was familiar in his promise to “make America great again,” as if the nation were in despair and yearning to retreat somewhere with him. The crowd cheered him repeatedly, particularly when he vowed to “unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate from the face of the earth.”

Vainglorious on a podium where other presidents have presented themselves as fellow citizens, preening where they have been humble, Mr. Trump declared that under him America will “bring back our jobs” and “bring back our borders,” “bring back our wealth” and “bring back our dreams.” This country has its challenges, and we fervently hope Mr. Trump will address them. But America had dreams before Friday. It was great before Mr. Trump became president, and with his help — or, if necessary, in spite of his folly — Americans will find ways to make it greater in years to come.
- NYT editorial board, 1-21-17
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 4824
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby ronjanec on January 21st, 2017, 2:35 pm 

I have to admit that is very interesting and also very surprising at the same time Biv. Everyone I know who supported Trump in the last election is very happy with his President Elect performance (or at least so far) including myself. I remain a skeptic.
ronjanec
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4299
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Location: Chicago suburbs


Re: Trump's inauguration speech

Postby zetreque on January 21st, 2017, 4:38 pm 

ronjanec » Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:16 pm wrote:The women's march tomorrow is a good example of this anger, viciousness, bitterness, and unwillingness to try to move forward together with our newly elected President(the poor guy hasn't even had a chance to do anything yet, and their protesting the day after the inauguration!?)


Short sighted as usual. You don't get elected through pissing off people then expect the masses of struggling to be treated fairly people in this world to forgive and forget that easy. Poor guy is BS! He dug his own grave and how he has to live in it. You can't be serious that someone of poor character that goes around pissing people off can be like. "Ok, I won, now you have to work with me and stop being viscous after my ignorant garbage."

If I don't respond to some posts on here it's because they are just... wow.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2608
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (6)


Next

Return to News Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests