How Would We Better Off With President Clinton After A Year?

[OldWiseGuy]

--- said every generation of Christians.

But they were wrong.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

But the law was crafted by Congress to give the sitting President the power to waive it for six months so that it could be enacted when it wasn't a burden on foreign policy. Trump decided not to waive it and that's what it is, but it isn't like this is some kind of bold stand and the previous Presidents were overruling Congress. They gave the power of waiver to the President and the past Presidents used what they were given.

But that is just it, and no one seems to notice. Trump did sign the six month waver right after he made the announcement. He did exactly what Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump did previously.


Here is the story from the Times of Israel.

After Jerusalem recognition, Trump signs waiver delaying embassy move


Here is a copy of the press release.

 

[mark46]

Can you name say...3 laws where he actively "helped" that got passed? Not one where he just signed his name to a folder for a photo op, but manged to get through both Houses and it then became a law?
tulc(is actually curious about this)

You are correct that Trump's "accomplishments" have little to with legislation that has been passed, other than the tax cut.

 

[mark46]

This is true.

However, this time the General Assembly saw fit to pass a resolution condemning the statements of the US with regard to its long standing positions on Jerusalem and the embassy. The General Assembly does NOT often pass resolutions condemning the positions of an individual country, other than Israel (83% of such resolutions are condemnations of Israel).

It may be reasonable to IGNORE the General Assembly when they make such attacks. President Trump has decided not to so.

Obviously, none of this is new. The EU countries have supported the Arab states for 100 years.

But that is just it, and no one seems to notice. Trump did sign the six month waver right after he made the announcement. He did exactly what Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump did previously.


Here is the story from the Times of Israel.

After Jerusalem recognition, Trump signs waiver delaying embassy move


Here is a copy of the press release.

 

[Desk trauma]

Where does one acquire the sight glass that shows alternative timelines that so many people seem to have?

 

[Belk]

It is said that Clinton could have won if she hadn't taken the trip to Arizona in the last few days. A campaign trip to MN, WI, MI and PA (especially non-city areas) might have won her the election, but no more senate seats.
========================
I've been a Democrat for over 50 years. I don't think that we would be better off now had Clinton been elected.

So, I'll listen. How would we be better off? Surely, no legislation would have been passed. I suppose that we'd still have the youth paying the Obamacare penalty.

We would not have lost a lot of international standing. No one would be questioning American leadership. We would not of passed debt busting legislation.

 

[cow451]

Ya gotta admit it's been an interesting year.

Despite determined efforts of the old Democrats, the dying mainstream media, hostile Republican leadership, the entrenched bureaucratic state and anti-Trump bots rampaging through social media ... Trump has managed to thrive ... and fulfill campaign promises nobody believed possible.

Gotta give credit where credit is due.

Like congrats to the car that rear ended you on purpose and got away.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

This is true.

However, this time the General Assembly saw fit to pass a resolution condemning the statements of the US with regard to its long standing positions on Jerusalem and the embassy. The General Assembly does NOT often pass resolutions condemning the positions of an individual country, other than Israel (83% of such resolutions are condemnations of Israel).

It may be reasonable to IGNORE the General Assembly when they make such attacks. President Trump has decided not to so.

Obviously, none of this is new. The EU countries have supported the Arab states for 100 years.

Well, the UN also didn’t like the invasion of Iraq but that didn’t stop us. The UN was a good idea at the time but has been a paper tiger for quite some time.

 

[pat34lee]

She could probably get through a speech to the boy scouts with out talking about partying on yachts in the 90's. Or calling anyone Pocahontas at any point in her administration.
tulc(suspects Disney could have come up with a better robot for her in the "Hall of Presidents")

The OP specified 'better', not more boring. Anyway, why
bring up speeches when you're talking about a woman
who can't string a single sentence together without lying?

 

[pat34lee]

More like Putin would be crying himself to sleep every night instead of getting together his latest set of orders to be sent to President Trump.
tulc(that would have been sweet)

Sorry, Tulc.
Trump and the Republicans aren't the ones
who sold out the country to Russia and Iran
and China, not to mention North Korea.

 

[LoAmmi]

But they were wrong.

-- said every successive generation of Christians

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

vs the possible wars with NK and Palestine that Trump seems intent on stirring up?

1) As much as I don't want a war with North Korea, I'd take one any day and twice on Sunday of over one with Russia. Second Korean War vs. WWIII... which would be worse? That's not a hard one.

2) Trump isn't the one firing long range missles over Japan. If Trump had really wanted a war with North Korea, he's already got a pretext, a much stronger one than Bush had for going into war with Iraq. If anyone seems intent on stirring up a war, it's Kim Jong Un. Telling that we have so many people that hate Trump so much that they'll side with Kim Jung Un over him.

3) What would a war with Palestine even be? It's not even an internationally recognized state. What would there be to go to war with?

No one would be questioning American leadership.

Not even the Russians and the Chinese? American leadership was already in question long before last years election. I know I was questioning it.

 

[Terminal_Marxicity]

I'm not a fan of either and yet what we have now is so much worse that it really cannot be described adequately. We will be paying for this for a long, long time - and that's the best-case scenario.

I've worked for someone like this, and I know that "outsiders" cannot understand the destruction they wreak. We all are outsiders. Whatever we expect, the reality will be worse.

So we'd have the absence of that with HC.

According the testimony of many former bodyguards and employees, HRC is many times more unhinged than Trump, and certainly in much worse physical and mental health.

 

[Rion]

We wouldn't. /thread

 

[Terminal_Marxicity]

Yes, she would have led investigations into Russian interference into the elections. Weird that the current administration doesn't seem to care.

Because it's a Deep State and DNC lie that they gave no credence to before the election and only started crying about it afterwards in a treasonous attempt to subvert the newly elected president.

All showing a lack of any substance. Weird the right would be excited about spending money to continue showing that she's done nothing wrong.

If you think they had no substance, you obviously haven't look at any of the scandals yourself, instead relying on what the media tells you instead.

vs the possible wars with NK and Palestine that Trump seems intent on stirring up?

Definitely not the smartest move on her part, but subsequent actions on the part of some of his supporters have since convinced me that the statement was more accurate than I perceived it to be at the time she said it.

War with Palestine? Maybe when they become a real country we can worry about that. NK, I don't think we'll be getting into war with them.

However, enforcing a No Fly Zone in Syria so Hillary could help ISIS overthrow Assad, that would have been a war. And furthermore, it would have been one where millions of Americans like myself would side with Russia over Hillary and the traitors in the Deep State.

I"ll agree. He fulfilled the promises. Now, I hate the promises and I think the people who want them don't really know what they're doing but, yes, he fulfilled the horrible promises that ensured I voted against him.

We think the same of you.

 

[Terminal_Marxicity]

But that is just it, and no one seems to notice. Trump did sign the six month waver right after he made the announcement. He did exactly what Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump did previously.


Here is the story from the Times of Israel.

After Jerusalem recognition, Trump signs waiver delaying embassy move


Here is a copy of the press release.

SO what?

We would not have lost a lot of international standing. No one would be questioning American leadership. We would not of passed debt busting legislation.

We lost international standing under Obama. Look how China treated him vs Trump. Putin treated Obama like a joke. Because he was. What, Merkel doesn't like us anymore? She's just angry we won't destroy our country like she is hers. May doesn't like us? That simpering fool who just botched the Brexit? Good. I don't want to be liked by cowards and sellouts.

 

[iluvatar5150]

1) As much as I don't want a war with North Korea, I'd take one any day and twice on Sunday of over one with Russia. Second Korean War vs. WWIII... which would be worse? That's not a hard one.

What makes you think Russia would actually go to war with us?

2) Trump isn't the one firing long range missles over Japan. If Trump had really wanted a war with North Korea, he's already got a pretext, a much stronger one than Bush had for going into war with Iraq. If anyone seems intent on stirring up a war, it's Kim Jong Un. Telling that we have so many people that hate Trump so much that they'll side with Kim Jung Un over him.

Nobody's siding with Kim Jong Un. But antagonizing him is stupid and unnecessary and would warrant Trump shouldering at least some of the blame for a conflict.

 

[LoAmmi]

We think the same of you.

I'm aware. Just one of us is right and the other one is you.

 

[iluvatar5150]

We lost international standing under Obama.

This is only true in the mind of people living in a right-wing fantasy who don't actually talk to folks or read material from outside the US.

Look how China treated him vs Trump.

How did they treat Obama?

Putin treated Obama like a joke.

Do you really think Putin isn't treating Trump like a joke? Putin was a Lt Col in the KGB and ultimately ran the agency which was a successor to it. Trump, OTOH, is easily manipulated by morning news shows and Twitter propaganda. Sure, Putin may smile at and talk nice to Trump but it takes a pretty shallow imagination to think that that's all that's going on.

Because he was. What, Merkel doesn't like us anymore? She's just angry we won't destroy our country like she is hers. May doesn't like us? That simpering fool who just botched the Brexit? Good. I don't want to be liked by cowards and sellouts.

Ah, so western Europe doesn't count when factoring our "international standing".

Do you realize how ridiculous that position is?

 

[Terminal_Marxicity]

I'm aware. Just one of us is right and the other one is you.

If your side is so correct, then why the need for constant adhom attacks calling everyone racists, sexist, islamophobes, bigots, deplorables, haters, transphobes, homophobes and so on?