The G7 Summit, which IMO is more important, was scheduled a good year in advance and so Trump (or at least his team) should have known that it would cut into his planning time. He also cancelled the Kim meeting, what, less than a month ago and could have planned a meeting much further down the road so no one would be scrambling at the last minute like what is happening now.
Pence may end up coming to Canada instead which would be an insult IMO. Pence isn't the one signing the executive orders regarding tariff's on "national security" reasons. (which he is allegedly planning on doing to German Automakers. Maybe he'll tell Merkle, "well you guys did start WW2 you know.")
~~
And anyone who likes following elections (jjstraka, I am looking at you) here is a site to follow the Ontario Election. Polls close at 9 p.m. so that is when the results will start to come in and two or three polls are staying open late due to technical difficulties. Here is a cheat sheet of what each main party said they'll do if elected but I wouldn't put too much weight in it as all three are know to promise and not deliver properly.
I voted today and I hope @TakisMegas and @elminster and any other Ontario dwelling residents did as well. I voted PC, but I am really, really hoping for a NDP minority government. Horwath is the most likable leader of the three main parties and I believe they the less likely to fall into corruption. However, they will overspend, increasing Ontario's debt more and dig a bigger whole for the next generation. A minority should keep them in check, but I doubt the Liberals (or Green or Other parties) will get enough seats to do so. The Liberals need 8 to hold onto official party status. Here is hoping they get 0.
I also do not like the new "voting machine" we had to insert our ballot into. It looked like a shredder. I also do not mind electronic counts as long as they are backed up by individual ones. I am deathly afraid some votes will not get counted if the X is in the wrong spot, or not big enough or too big.
I was looking for the Lenin/Marxist party, couldn't find it. Ah the wonderful 90's.
Yes I voted early as well. Majority for the Conservatives also. Liberals have 8 seats as of me posting.
It's not particularly accurate to pass politifacts writing off as an objective or fair analysis when it manifestly isn't, but they do a far better job of picking apart their methods then I can so i'll just repeat them. They don't investigate an equal number of claims among the different networks, nor do they investigate them evenly at all, it is all based on their personal "news judgement" to determine what they want to look at and based on this even they warn against drawing conclusions based on what they say.
Under those conditions, I could make virtually anything I want to be true appear to be true. It doesn't have the appearance of objectivity.
I mean, talk about cherry picking, cherry picking is literally their methodology here.
As for conservatives complaining of media bias more than liberals, with the overwhelming ratio of liberal to conservative journalists being what it is, bias against conservatives in favor of liberals is exactly what you would expect from that media climate. It simply makes sense.
I'll take some evidence rather than none in this case. If you have any better sourcing you'd like to use to support your position that CNN is equally as unlikely to tell the truth as Fox, then I'm all ears (eyes, whatever).
It does make some kind of sense, but @jjstraka34 makes a pretty good point that radio sindication of things like Rush Limbaugh and the like are enormous. Also, I believe Fox News has a much larger viewer footprint than any of the other networks when it comes to new reporting. Bias could be attributed in more ways than just "There are more liberal journalists that Conservative journalists"
I was looking for the Lenin/Marxist party, couldn't find it. Ah the wonderful 90's.
I had communist on my ballot.
And effing Ottawa went red. I knew my riding (Ottawa South) would probably go Red because people like John Fraser (and if ran as an Independent, I probably would have voted for him) and it is a cultural division of neighbourhoods that the NDP and PC were neck and neck for second place.
I am surprised at Vanier as I honestly thought they'd swing Orange. Orleans always just elects the most French sounding name on the ballot so that isn't a surprise to tell you the truth.
It is looking like the rest of the cities went Orange though, Windsor, Hamilton, Niagara, Downtown T.O. and London with the North and look at that, our first Green Party MMP from Guelph. This will make an interesting few years.
I'll take some evidence rather than none in this case. If you have any better sourcing you'd like to use to support your position that CNN is equally as unlikely to tell the truth as Fox, then I'm all ears (eyes, whatever). "
I don't feel like I need to provide further evidence for what was clearly expressed as opinion. My comment started with "I would say CNN is about as bad as FOX", which clearly signifies a subjective evaluation.
You don't say "I would say 2 + 2 = 4" or "I would say the sky is blue". It just is.
This doesn't mean there are no other examples of course, such as the three journalists fired from CNN last year for another fake story, but there are simply no objective studies or research to pull from so all we are left with are subjective judgements based on what scarce evidence is available.
FOX gets stuff wrong all the time - many people are saying intentionally so - no one gets fired. At most you get a retraction sometimes after days of running with fake information thru will say on one little snippet Oh yeah oops sorry we were wrong.
Fox just this week had to acknowledge that they were using fake pictures of Eagles praying to back up Trumps claim that they were kneeling to disrespect 'Murcia.
No one got fired for that likely intentional mistake. They only apologized because they hit caught.
There have been other examples I can dig up of Fox running with a clearly wrong story for days.
Here's one Fox made up a story about a mosque attack suspect was of Moroccan origin to ‘spread misinformation … and perpetuates fear and division’. He wasn't.
Most the world is liberal or more liberal than America. For example, the US is the only major nation without universal Healthcare. Maybe everyone else is on to something? Our traditional allies are all definitely to the left of us.
The G7 summit is going to be G6+1 with the other major powers being in agreement on major issues and Trump off on his own little ideological island of misinformation. He reportedly wants to get out if going because he's afraid he will be lectured and us prissy he can't control the narrative. Even as late as Thursday afternoon, Trump the snowflake was questioning why he would attend a G7 meeting where he's outnumbered on key issues like trade and climate change.
He wants to send Pence instead but advisors are like dude you can't stand up Americas closest allies at their most important meeting so he reluctantly is going. But he's going to skip the briefing about saving the world's oceans and probably won't sign the agreement at the end affirming the world's values including things like the Paris Climate Agreement.
Trump's way more excited to get a photo op with murderous dictator Kim Jong Un.
I assume he's talking of our regulations, like the ones on hormones in meat for example, by non monetary barriers. These affect Europeans as much as Americans so they're hardly put at disadvantage. On the contrary even, American producers can produce and sell products (hormone filled meat for example) in the USA, giving them a competitive advantage in their home market, whereas europeans can't at all.
While you are all concerning yourselves with the G7 (or G6+1, however you want to view it), I have something much more concerning on my radar which should alarm anyone reading it. S.J.Res.59 - Authorization for Use of Military Force of 2018, initially sponsored by Bob Corker (R - TN) but also co-sponsored by Tim Kaine (D - VA), Jeff Flake (R - AZ), Christopher Coons (D - DE), Todd Young (R - IN), and Bill Nelson (D - FL).
In effect, what this legislation proposes is to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 116 Stat. 1498; 50 U.S.C. 1541) and amend the original Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541) so that...wait for it...
it provides uninterrupted authority to use all necessary and appropriate force in the current and continuing armed conflict against the Taliban, al Qaeda, ISIS, and associated forces.
Okay, so what does that mean? It means the President of the United States, whomever that may be, would be given permanent authority to deploy military forces anywhere that he or she thinks terrorists may be found, without needing to receive Congressional approval after the current 60-day window; the new "report to Congress" requirement about use of the military would be once every 4 years.
If this passes, the job title "President of the United States" could be shortened to "Caesar" because that job would grant free reign to use the military as the POTUS sees fit, without needing to bother Congress about it (at least until the quadrennial report needs to be given).
I linked the text of the proposed bill; read it for yourself. This crap got started a long time ago when the War Powers Act was first passed and Congress began abdicating part of its responsibility over the to Executive.
@Mathsorcerer Would that also include domestic deployment?
Right now I am uncertain; I am re-reading the entire thing to look specifically for that. I certainly hope not because that would negate Posse Comitatus, which would be *dangerous*.
edit/add: It doesn't appear to apply to the United States, only to foreign countries, so no--military forces could not be deployed here. Now...that being said...if an active terror cell (or a handful of them) began operating here then I don't doubt that a lot of politicians would bend over backwards to "temporarily" suspend PC.
I assume he's talking of our regulations, like the ones on hormones in meat for example, by non monetary barriers. These affect Europeans as much as Americans so they're hardly put at disadvantage. On the contrary even, American producers can produce and sell products (hormone filled meat for example) in the USA, giving them a competitive advantage in their home market, whereas europeans can't at all.
He's also quoting the US figures for 2017 for just trade in goods. The US had a surplus with the EU of $51bn in services for that year.
While you are all concerning yourselves with the G7 (or G6+1, however you want to view it), I have something much more concerning on my radar which should alarm anyone reading it. S.J.Res.59 - Authorization for Use of Military Force of 2018, initially sponsored by Bob Corker (R - TN) but also co-sponsored by Tim Kaine (D - VA), Jeff Flake (R - AZ), Christopher Coons (D - DE), Todd Young (R - IN), and Bill Nelson (D - FL).
In effect, what this legislation proposes is to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 116 Stat. 1498; 50 U.S.C. 1541) and amend the original Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541) so that...wait for it...
it provides uninterrupted authority to use all necessary and appropriate force in the current and continuing armed conflict against the Taliban, al Qaeda, ISIS, and associated forces.
Okay, so what does that mean? It means the President of the United States, whomever that may be, would be given permanent authority to deploy military forces anywhere that he or she thinks terrorists may be found, without needing to receive Congressional approval after the current 60-day window; the new "report to Congress" requirement about use of the military would be once every 4 years.
If this passes, the job title "President of the United States" could be shortened to "Caesar" because that job would grant free reign to use the military as the POTUS sees fit, without needing to bother Congress about it (at least until the quadrennial report needs to be given).
I linked the text of the proposed bill; read it for yourself. This crap got started a long time ago when the War Powers Act was first passed and Congress began abdicating part of its responsibility over the to Executive.
It definitely needs some amending.
What is the point of a quadrennial review that happens exactly half-way through a presidential term? It's so long it might as well not even be there.
"Whereas Congress supports the ultimate goal of the Administration’s South Asia strategy, including a political settlement between the Government of Afghanistan and the Taliban that rejects terrorism, protects United States national interests, is in accordance with the Afghan constitution, and defends the rights of women and girls:"
Well, that's proof right there that no one read the thing. /sarcasm
Also, is it particularly commonplace that a bill will specify how it shall be amended in the future?
This one does. It gives the exact wording that future "qualified" amendments will have, and says that such future amendments cannot be amended themselves outside of the exact wording that they will have as provided by this bill.
Washington Capitals are Stanley Cup Champions. Ovechkin deserved it, the guys a beast.
Can't wait to see if they go to the White House. I think they will, hockey players usually keep their political views to themselves.
They’ll go (except Smith-Pelly). Hockey is more international than the other 3 major sports. Only 5 players are American. One (Smith-Pelly) is black. National politics hardly registers with hockey teams and when a player does buck the trend (looking at you Tim Thomas) it makes news and offers a distraction for the team.
I am also glad Ovie got the Cup and Conn Smythe. I think it makes up for not being able to go to the Olympics and winning Gold with his country men. It also shuts up the doubters about if he can lead a team to a championship and he does belong in the echelon of greatest talents of his generation.
"Whereas Congress supports the ultimate goal of the Administration’s South Asia strategy, including a political settlement between the Government of Afghanistan and the Taliban that rejects terrorism, protects United States national interests, is in accordance with the Afghan constitution, and defends the rights of women and girls:"
Well, that's proof right there that no one read the thing. /sarcasm
I read over it three times last night. The part you cite, in the "Joint Resolution" section at the top, is not the important part.
Big weekend ahead with G7 and E3 Which will be more interesting?
Seen a few people here in US talking about voting. It's interesting to see friends' attitude to voting across UK, USA, Caribbean and now Brazil. A lot of people are sceptical about why bother voting... But I think it's very important. Firstly there's voting for a party you actually believe in. Then there's voting against specific policies that will affect you, or voting the current leader out. If there are problems with corruption, then changing the leading party can help. At the very least, even if you think voting is pointless, it's important to know that politicians look at voter demographics, for example in England, the retired generation vote in very high percentage, therefore the government is always reluctant to bring new policies which negatively effect that demographic.
Trump, in the midst of flat-out insulting the other six countries of the G-7, has called for.....wait for it....Russia to be reinstated, after they were forced out after their annexation of Crimea. I don't see why Russia needs to be reinstated, since as long as Trump is in attendance they already have representation.
Beyond that, on the North Korea talks, Trump says (and I quote) "I don't think I have to prepare much, it's about attitude." What more needs to be said??
Trump's Celebrity Pardons game-show just reached new heights of absurdity, as he floated the idea of pardoning Muhammad Ali. Slight problem with that:
Trump, in the midst of flat-out insulting the other six countries of the G-7, has called for.....wait for it....Russia to be reinstated, after they were forced out after their annexation of Crimea. I don't see why Russia needs to be reinstated, since as long as Trump is in attendance they already have representation.
Beyond that, on the North Korea talks, Trump says (and I quote) "I don't think I have to prepare much, it's about attitude." What more needs to be said??
He’s attempting to change the conversation away from his negativity to someone else's. If he can dictate that conversation, there won’t be time to talk about his recent conduct before he skits away a day early.
That or he is a complete moron with no grasp of current political events and history.
I cannot name *any* President to whom I would give that sort of authority.
It's congresses responsibility to declare war. They've abdicated that enough. Do your job.
I'm not sure how different things would be since the US is currently killing people all over the place including Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia and more.
It's not easy to find accessible data but we've got troops all over the place currently killing people. This certainly didn't start with Trump, Obama did the same thing but at least wasn't advocating for killing targets and their families like Trump does. More reckless and sloppy now.
Yes definitely the war making powers without declaring war of the Presidency needs to be reigned in.
Instead of isolating ourselves in trade, how about we isolate ourselves from bombing other countries?
Washington Capitals are Stanley Cup Champions. Ovechkin deserved it, the guys a beast.
Can't wait to see if they go to the White House. I think they will, hockey players usually keep their political views to themselves.
They’ll go (except Smith-Pelly). Hockey is more international than the other 3 major sports. Only 5 players are American. One (Smith-Pelly) is black. National politics hardly registers with hockey teams and when a player does buck the trend (looking at you Tim Thomas) it makes news and offers a distraction for the team.
I am also glad Ovie got the Cup and Conn Smythe. I think it makes up for not being able to go to the Olympics and winning Gold with his country men. It also shuts up the doubters about if he can lead a team to a championship and he does belong in the echelon of greatest talents of his generation.
Being a Vegas person, I have not heard a single fan say the Caps did not deserve their victory and wish them the best. It’s refreshing compared to my experience with other sports fanatics.
I would like to say it was a terrific achievement for the Golden Knights to make it to the Final in their first year as a team. Hopefully they can keep it up next season- it’s been great for the local economy.
Federal PRISON?? How can anyone be sent to a federal prison rather than a jail without a trial?? Isn't this a fundamental violation of habeas corpus?? Prisons are designed for long-term incarceration, not people awaiting hearings.
Federal PRISON?? How can anyone be sent to a federal prison rather than a jail without a trial?? Isn't this a fundamental violation of habeas corpus?? Prisons are designed for long-term incarceration, not people awaiting hearings.
Federal prisons are designed to maximize profits for the companies running them. But I'm sure that never even crossed the mind of the officials who made this decision.
Federal PRISON?? How can anyone be sent to a federal prison rather than a jail without a trial?? Isn't this a fundamental violation of habeas corpus?? Prisons are designed for long-term incarceration, not people awaiting hearings.
Federal prisons are designed to maximize profits for the companies running them. But I'm sure that never even crossed the mind of the officials who made this decision.
For all the fiscal conservatives out there, that sound you hear is millions upon millions of dollars being flushed down a toilet directly into the mouth of the prison industrial complex. Then again, I'm as likely to see a Stegasaurous run down my street as run into a fiscal conservative anytime soon.
Federal PRISON?? How can anyone be sent to a federal prison rather than a jail without a trial?? Isn't this a fundamental violation of habeas corpus?? Prisons are designed for long-term incarceration, not people awaiting hearings.
Federal prisons are designed to maximize profits for the companies running them. But I'm sure that never even crossed the mind of the officials who made this decision.
For all the fiscal conservatives out there, that sound you hear is millions upon millions of dollars being flushed down a toilet directly into the mouth of the prison industrial complex. Then again, I'm as likely to see a Stegasaurous run down my street as run into a fiscal conservative anytime soon.
Federal PRISON?? How can anyone be sent to a federal prison rather than a jail without a trial?? Isn't this a fundamental violation of habeas corpus?? Prisons are designed for long-term incarceration, not people awaiting hearings.
Federal prisons are designed to maximize profits for the companies running them. But I'm sure that never even crossed the mind of the officials who made this decision.
For all the fiscal conservatives out there, that sound you hear is millions upon millions of dollars being flushed down a toilet directly into the mouth of the prison industrial complex. Then again, I'm as likely to see a Stegasaurous run down my street as run into a fiscal conservative anytime soon.
I'm a fiscal conservative but it's like pissing into the wind these days...
Federal PRISON?? How can anyone be sent to a federal prison rather than a jail without a trial?? Isn't this a fundamental violation of habeas corpus?? Prisons are designed for long-term incarceration, not people awaiting hearings.
Federal prisons are designed to maximize profits for the companies running them. But I'm sure that never even crossed the mind of the officials who made this decision.
Federal prisons run by companies? I believe that's common for state prison but not for federal prisons. Either way yes it is a waste of money directly to the prison industrial complex. Socialism seems to be A-OK with Republicans when it's for the rich.
Additionally, the Trump administration has decided it won't defend in court challenges given by a group of regressive states about people with pre-existing conditions. They are hoping to raise the cost of insurance for the estimated 151 million people with pre-existing conditions in order to benefit Big Pharma, Insurance Companies, and billion dollar corporations.
Kiss your health insurance, if you have it, goodbye.
Republican administrations will drive more people in medical bankruptcy, increase insurance premiums for people who have Healthcare, and increase costs as taxpayers are forced to pay for people to go the the Emergency room without insurance for care.
Federal PRISON?? How can anyone be sent to a federal prison rather than a jail without a trial?? Isn't this a fundamental violation of habeas corpus?? Prisons are designed for long-term incarceration, not people awaiting hearings.
We do need to ask "which Federal prison"? I can't see any reason why they need to be sent to Florence ADX, a supermax facility where they will spend 23 out of 24 hours in their cell; meanwhile, being sent to one of the Federal Prison Camps is like living in the college dorm only technically you are a prisoner--minimal security and often the inmates are on some sort of work-release program. Before you ask--no, I do not have direct personal knowledge of being in a prison.
Comments
Yes I voted early as well. Majority for the Conservatives also. Liberals have 8 seats as of me posting.
***Check that, they just dropped to 7
I'll take some evidence rather than none in this case. If you have any better sourcing you'd like to use to support your position that CNN is equally as unlikely to tell the truth as Fox, then I'm all ears (eyes, whatever).
It does make some kind of sense, but @jjstraka34 makes a pretty good point that radio sindication of things like Rush Limbaugh and the like are enormous. Also, I believe Fox News has a much larger viewer footprint than any of the other networks when it comes to new reporting. Bias could be attributed in more ways than just "There are more liberal journalists that Conservative journalists"
And effing Ottawa went red. I knew my riding (Ottawa South) would probably go Red because people like John Fraser (and if ran as an Independent, I probably would have voted for him) and it is a cultural division of neighbourhoods that the NDP and PC were neck and neck for second place.
I am surprised at Vanier as I honestly thought they'd swing Orange. Orleans always just elects the most French sounding name on the ballot so that isn't a surprise to tell you the truth.
It is looking like the rest of the cities went Orange though, Windsor, Hamilton, Niagara, Downtown T.O. and London with the North and look at that, our first Green Party MMP from Guelph. This will make an interesting few years.
Washington Capitals are Stanley Cup Champions. Ovechkin deserved it, the guys a beast.
Can't wait to see if they go to the White House. I think they will, hockey players usually keep their political views to themselves.
You don't say "I would say 2 + 2 = 4" or "I would say the sky is blue". It just is.
This doesn't mean there are no other examples of course, such as the three journalists fired from CNN last year for another fake story, but there are simply no objective studies or research to pull from so all we are left with are subjective judgements based on what scarce evidence is available.
http://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-cnn-resignation-20170626-story.html
FOX gets stuff wrong all the time - many people are saying intentionally so - no one gets fired. At most you get a retraction sometimes after days of running with fake information thru will say on one little snippet Oh yeah oops sorry we were wrong.
Fox just this week had to acknowledge that they were using fake pictures of Eagles praying to back up Trumps claim that they were kneeling to disrespect 'Murcia.
No one got fired for that likely intentional mistake. They only apologized because they hit caught.
https://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2018/6/5/17428902/eagles-fox-news-prayer-protest-national-anthem-trump
There have been other examples I can dig up of Fox running with a clearly wrong story for days.
Here's one Fox made up a story about a mosque attack suspect was of Moroccan origin to ‘spread misinformation … and perpetuates fear and division’. He wasn't.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/01/fox-news-deletes-false-quebec-shooting-tweet-justin-trudeau-mosque
The G7 summit is going to be G6+1 with the other major powers being in agreement on major issues and Trump off on his own little ideological island of misinformation. He reportedly wants to get out if going because he's afraid he will be lectured and us prissy he can't control the narrative. Even as late as Thursday afternoon, Trump the snowflake was questioning why he would attend a G7 meeting where he's outnumbered on key issues like trade and climate change.
He wants to send Pence instead but advisors are like dude you can't stand up Americas closest allies at their most important meeting so he reluctantly is going. But he's going to skip the briefing about saving the world's oceans and probably won't sign the agreement at the end affirming the world's values including things like the Paris Climate Agreement.
Trump's way more excited to get a photo op with murderous dictator Kim Jong Un.
I assume he's talking of our regulations, like the ones on hormones in meat for example, by non monetary barriers. These affect Europeans as much as Americans so they're hardly put at disadvantage. On the contrary even, American producers can produce and sell products (hormone filled meat for example) in the USA, giving them a competitive advantage in their home market, whereas europeans can't at all.
In effect, what this legislation proposes is to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 116 Stat. 1498; 50 U.S.C. 1541) and amend the original Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541) so that...wait for it...
it provides uninterrupted authority to use all necessary and appropriate force in the current and continuing armed conflict against the Taliban, al Qaeda, ISIS, and associated forces.
Okay, so what does that mean? It means the President of the United States, whomever that may be, would be given permanent authority to deploy military forces anywhere that he or she thinks terrorists may be found, without needing to receive Congressional approval after the current 60-day window; the new "report to Congress" requirement about use of the military would be once every 4 years.
If this passes, the job title "President of the United States" could be shortened to "Caesar" because that job would grant free reign to use the military as the POTUS sees fit, without needing to bother Congress about it (at least until the quadrennial report needs to be given).
I linked the text of the proposed bill; read it for yourself. This crap got started a long time ago when the War Powers Act was first passed and Congress began abdicating part of its responsibility over the to Executive.
edit/add: It doesn't appear to apply to the United States, only to foreign countries, so no--military forces could not be deployed here. Now...that being said...if an active terror cell (or a handful of them) began operating here then I don't doubt that a lot of politicians would bend over backwards to "temporarily" suspend PC.
What is the point of a quadrennial review that happens exactly half-way through a presidential term? It's so long it might as well not even be there.
"Whereas Congress supports the ultimate goal of the Administration’s South Asia strategy, including a political settlement between the Government of Afghanistan and the Taliban that rejects terrorism, protects United States national interests, is in accordance with the Afghan constitution, and defends the rights of women and girls:"
Well, that's proof right there that no one read the thing. /sarcasm
Also, is it particularly commonplace that a bill will specify how it shall be amended in the future?
This one does. It gives the exact wording that future "qualified" amendments will have, and says that such future amendments cannot be amended themselves outside of the exact wording that they will have as provided by this bill.
I am also glad Ovie got the Cup and Conn Smythe. I think it makes up for not being able to go to the Olympics and winning Gold with his country men. It also shuts up the doubters about if he can lead a team to a championship and he does belong in the echelon of greatest talents of his generation.
Seen a few people here in US talking about voting. It's interesting to see friends' attitude to voting across UK, USA, Caribbean and now Brazil. A lot of people are sceptical about why bother voting... But I think it's very important. Firstly there's voting for a party you actually believe in. Then there's voting against specific policies that will affect you, or voting the current leader out. If there are problems with corruption, then changing the leading party can help. At the very least, even if you think voting is pointless, it's important to know that politicians look at voter demographics, for example in England, the retired generation vote in very high percentage, therefore the government is always reluctant to bring new policies which negatively effect that demographic.
Beyond that, on the North Korea talks, Trump says (and I quote) "I don't think I have to prepare much, it's about attitude." What more needs to be said??
Trump's Celebrity Pardons game-show just reached new heights of absurdity, as he floated the idea of pardoning Muhammad Ali. Slight problem with that:
That or he is a complete moron with no grasp of current political events and history.
It's certainly not because of Trump even temper and sound judgement.
This is a massive give away to the military industrial complex and defense contractors.
I'm not sure how different things would be since the US is currently killing people all over the place including Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia and more.
It's not easy to find accessible data but we've got troops all over the place currently killing people. This certainly didn't start with Trump, Obama did the same thing but at least wasn't advocating for killing targets and their families like Trump does. More reckless and sloppy now.
Yes definitely the war making powers without declaring war of the Presidency needs to be reigned in.
Instead of isolating ourselves in trade, how about we isolate ourselves from bombing other countries?
I would like to say it was a terrific achievement for the Golden Knights to make it to the Final in their first year as a team. Hopefully they can keep it up next season- it’s been great for the local economy.
Federal PRISON?? How can anyone be sent to a federal prison rather than a jail without a trial?? Isn't this a fundamental violation of habeas corpus?? Prisons are designed for long-term incarceration, not people awaiting hearings.
Additionally, the Trump administration has decided it won't defend in court challenges given by a group of regressive states about people with pre-existing conditions. They are hoping to raise the cost of insurance for the estimated 151 million people with pre-existing conditions in order to benefit Big Pharma, Insurance Companies, and billion dollar corporations.
Kiss your health insurance, if you have it, goodbye.
Republican administrations will drive more people in medical bankruptcy, increase insurance premiums for people who have Healthcare, and increase costs as taxpayers are forced to pay for people to go the the Emergency room without insurance for care.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/trump-administration-wont-defend-aca-in-cases-brought-by-gop-states/2018/06/07/92f56e86-6a9c-11e8-9e38-24e693b38637_story.html