To which promises do you hold president Trump.

[Belsnickel]

(11-10-2016, 04:38 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Depends on the interpretation of the 14th.

I don't know of any jurists that would interpret the 14th a way other than that. The 8 justices on the SCOTUS would all shoot it down.

[JustWinBaby]

(11-10-2016, 02:11 PM)GMDino Wrote: If past history holds true the debt will rise considerably and no one on the right will say anything.

No worries....Harry Reid will remind everyone how unpatriotic huge deficits are.

[masterpanthera_t]

(11-10-2016, 04:38 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Depends on the interpretation of the 14th.


Children already born would remain Citizens, but born after the effective date they will not be citizens. This would filter them out of the system in 18 years.

Ok, that's what I thought and I said that.  It would only affect immigration consideration of future immigrants.

[masterpanthera_t]

(11-10-2016, 05:19 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't know of any jurists that would interpret the 14th a way other than that. The 8 justices on the SCOTUS would all shoot it down.

Yup, it could pretty much open all kinds of cans of worms if that interpretation was possible.  Citizenship cannot be revoked retroactively simply based on new laws.

[Benton]

(11-10-2016, 04:06 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Ya, gas prices are going to skyrocket these next four years.  Especially if he gets his Big Oil friends in his Cabinet.  The price of a gallon of gasoline was $2.05 the morning of Nov. 9th 2016.  I wonder what they will be in 2020?

I think by the end of next summer we'll be near $3. Way too much likely to change over four years to know what the economy will look like globally.

(11-10-2016, 04:34 PM)Millhouse Wrote: Doubtful. If the keystone pipeline gets approved which it probably will, and if OPEC keeps the supply as abundant as it has been in recent years, prices should be as low as they are if not lower due to basic supply/demand out there. OPEC basically flooded the world with oil, which in turn crushed the newly formed fracking industry over here. If they start to limit the supply though, prices will go up, since that is where most of oil is bought from.

Just tryin to give hope is all lol.

I like the optimism, but prices will likely go up. To the bold, Keystone is expected to have a negligible effect on gas prices for the U.S. It's about exporting more oil, which generates more money for TransCanada. GOP lawmakers (and Clinton for that matter) have been courted hard by Canadian investors who stand to make a lot of money exporting. At the end of the day, it won't mean much to the U.S. outside of having more competition for OPEC. That level of competition is like saying we need to spend millions to help out a Canadian lemonade stand so it can play more profitably in the same market as McDonald's.

Also, OPEC likely won't for a few reasons. OPEC tends to push prices higher when Republicans are in office. Why, I don't know, someone with more knowledge might have an idea. I just always assumed it was because Republicans tend to prefer domestic oil production, so OPEC squeezes the profits. Relations with Iraq and Iran — and an interest to make more profit for all 14 members — will most likely have them jacking up prices soon.

[SunsetBengal]

I fully expect Trump to fulfill his contract with the American People, to the best that Congress will allow him. This would happen much more easily, if Mitch McConnell were no longer the Senate majority leader...

[Millhouse]

(11-10-2016, 05:32 PM)Benton Wrote: I like the optimism, but prices will likely go up. To the bold, Keystone is expected to have a negligible effect on gas prices for the U.S. It's about exporting more oil, which generates more money for TransCanada. GOP lawmakers (and Clinton for that matter) have been courted hard by Canadian investors who stand to make a lot of money exporting. At the end of the day, it won't mean much to the U.S. outside of having more competition for OPEC. That level of competition is like saying we need to spend millions to help out a Canadian lemonade stand so it can play more profitably in the same market as McDonald's.

Also, OPEC likely won't for a few reasons. OPEC tends to push prices higher when Republicans are in office. Why, I don't know, someone with more knowledge might have an idea. I just always assumed it was because Republicans tend to prefer domestic oil production, so OPEC squeezes the profits. Relations with Iraq and Iran — and an interest to make more profit for all 14 members — will most likely have them jacking up prices soon.

I guess my point was whoever is in office doesnt have much say on what the prices will be, unless something drastic happens. The only reason they dropped like they did in the last 2 to 3 years, was because the world demand for oil lightened up while OPEC didnt cutback on production giving more supply. The side effect of this was the fracking industry that boomed before prices plummeted got crushed, because they couldnt compete with the Arab's prices. The big oil over here (BP, Marathon) could buy it much cheaper from OPEC and basically thousands of people in the fracking jobs lost their jobs.

I obviously will agree prices will go up, its just a matter of time. Demand for oil will surely be on the rise again at some point, and OPEC's production will have to taper off and decline at some point. It could be 3 years, 5 years who knows. But Trump or if Hillary was elected will have little bearing on it as oil is a world commodity  mainly controlled by OPEC. If it was just a national commodity, then completely different. 

I say this as not an expert, but I do work in the oil industry dealing with buying & pricing, so I do have some background here, plus I talk often with those that have been in the industry for decades about this very thing, for what it worth.

[Belsnickel]

(11-10-2016, 05:27 PM)masterpanthera_t Wrote: Yup, it could pretty much open all kinds of cans of worms if that interpretation was possible.  Citizenship cannot be revoked retroactively simply based on new laws.

Well, that's not what we are talking about. We are talking more about whether or not the 14th defines citizenship based on where you are born or not.

This is section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The 14th Amendment is the most important and paradigm shifting amendment of our Constitution after the Bill of Rights. Some may argue even more so than some of those original 10. It has been interpreted since its ratification as Jus Soli, and I've never heard of a judge, let alone enough of them to change the interpretation, seeing it another way. It won't happen, not even going forward. An amendment would have to be passed to change the law, and given the importance of the 14th and how it changed our Constitution it would be something very difficult to get sorted.

[masterpanthera_t]

(11-10-2016, 06:09 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, that's not what we are talking about. We are talking more about whether or not the 14th defines citizenship based on where you are born or not.

This is section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The 14th Amendment is the most important and paradigm shifting amendment of our Constitution after the Bill of Rights. Some may argue even more so than some of those original 10. It has been interpreted since its ratification as Jus Soli, and I've never heard of a judge, let alone enough of them to change the interpretation, seeing it another way. It won't happen, not even going forward. An amendment would have to be passed to change the law, and given the importance of the 14th and how it changed our Constitution it would be something very difficult to get sorted.

We may have been speaking about two different aspects regarding the "interpretation", I'm not sure, considering that the topic surrounding your and my responses were both connected to the same general set of posts.  However, in the main conclusion drawn, you and I are saying the same thing.  My point is even if the interpretation became Jus Soli vs. Jus Sanguinis, it still couldn't retroactively affect anyone granted citizenship based on the previous Jus Soli interpretation.  This point was in reference to state that a changed interpretation still doesn't affect the eviction of children of illegal immigrants who were born here.  

You've provided quite a bit of extra details which I found enlightening, so it's appreciated.  However, I believe you and I are stating the same when it came to the interpretation of the amendment as it relates to its effects on previously granted citizenship.  There were a few posts after my earlier post which I haven't kept up on, so it's possible you were making a commentary on a different scope and I could have responded to your post under a differently assumed scope erroneously.  If that is the case, please excuse my laziness.  

[BmorePat87]

Considering it was his first and most major promise: the wall.

[NATI BENGALS]

Race wars
War on lower and middle class
Loss of reproductive rights for women
Legalized religious discrimination

He will get a new war started with someone. Probably Iran.

[Benton]

(11-10-2016, 06:08 PM)Millhouse Wrote: I guess my point was whoever is in office doesnt have much say on what the prices will be, unless something drastic happens. 

Not entirely disagreeing, but part of it depends on stability in member countries. If OPEC members have concerns, it's going to reflect (positively or negatively) in OPEC production. If Trump follows through on statements about indiscriminate bombings, it could make for instability and lead to increased prices again.

Quote:The only reason they dropped like they did in the last 2 to 3 years, was because the world demand for oil lightened up while OPEC didnt cutback on production giving more supply. The side effect of this was the fracking industry that boomed before prices plummeted got crushed, because they couldnt compete with the Arab's prices. The big oil over here (BP, Marathon) could buy it much cheaper from OPEC and basically thousands of people in the fracking jobs lost their jobs.


I obviously will agree prices will go up, its just a matter of time. Demand for oil will surely be on the rise again at some point, and OPEC's production will have to taper off and decline at some point. It could be 3 years, 5 years who knows. But Trump or if Hillary was elected will have little bearing on it as oil is a world commodity  mainly controlled by OPEC. If it was just a national commodity, then completely different. 

I say this as not an expert, but I do work in the oil industry dealing with buying & pricing, so I do have some background here, plus I talk often with those that have been in the industry for decades about this very thing, for what it worth.

It's all your fault!



(just kidding)

[Dill]

(11-10-2016, 01:59 PM)hollodero Wrote: Now that I do not really believe. I never expected people saying "all of them" or even "most of them". They are grown-ups and know better, I agree. But I really believe and hope that "none of them" is not an acceptable outcome even for the most dedicated Trump voter. It shouldn't be. At least there have to be some core principles that need to turn into something real.

Any answers on the national debt question? Where does it need to be in 4 years? That one really makes me curious.

The point of voting for Trump was to poke a stick in the eye of minorities, uppity women, liberal elite intellectuals, and the Republican "establishment" (most of whom now stand to benefit from the Trump win, at least in the short term). If any of Trump's policies get enacted, that will just be gravy.

Trump wiped that smug smile off Hillary's face, the one we saw after the three policy debates she won. Mission accomplished!  And a lesson for all those wonks who think mastery of policy and debate prep are important to governing--not if you don't win, LOL!

As far as the debt goes-- cut taxes on the rich, raise military spending considerably . . . project more American power into the Middle east . . . oh, hard to say what will happen. Why do you ask questions like that anyway, Hollodero.  For now, let Americans feel good about beating that lying snob crooked Hillary.

Get the taxes cut and money flowing to the military for a few years; we will think about the debt later.

[hollodero]

(11-10-2016, 05:18 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Why would he? He won, no need to look bitter about winning.

Well, he said he would do it. Whatever that means.

(11-10-2016, 08:17 PM)Dill Wrote: As far as the debt goes-- cut taxes on the rich, raise military spending considerably . . . project more American power into the Middle east . . . oh, hard to say what will happen. Why do you ask questions like that anyway, Hollodero.  For now, let Americans feel good about beating that lying snob crooked Hillary.

Oh sure, you should feel so very proud about that.
And I know you're ironic, but the debt question is seriously hard to grasp. They swallowed all the "economy is a disaster" rhetorics, and all this was mainly just based on the huge national debt (for the other numbers were quite fine). Nevertheless, Trump supporters don't seem to care the tiniest bit about the debt after a Trump presidency. It's not even a topic. Can't get the Trump people there at all.

But I even fear all these questions will indeed not be important at the end of the day, for there might be much more severe constitutional and other crisises going on. I just wonder what happens the first time the Supreme Court says no to one of Trump's plans or ideas (which is very likely to happen at some point). That will be a major test for a president Trump, and I'm somehow afraid of the outcome.

[SunsetBengal]

(11-10-2016, 10:17 PM)hollodero Wrote: Well, he said he would do it. Whatever that means.


Oh sure, you should feel so very proud about that.
And I know you're ironic, but the debt question is seriously hard to grasp. They swallowed all the "economy is a disaster" rhetorics, and all this was mainly just based on the huge national debt (for the other numbers were quite fine). Nevertheless, Trump supporters don't seem to care the tiniest bit about the debt after a Trump presidency. It's not even a topic. Can't get the Trump people there at all.

But I even fear all these questions will indeed not be important at the end of the day, for there might be much more severe constitutional and other crisises going on. I just wonder what happens the first time the Supreme Court says no to one of Trump's plans or ideas (which is very likely to happen at some point). That will be a major test for a president Trump, and I'm somehow afraid of the outcome.

Hollodero, why are you so consumed with American affairs?  Heck, for that matter why are you even a member of this football message board?  I never see you post in anything football related.  As for the debt, you can believe that Trump will address that.  First measures may start with charging weaker Nations for our Military protection, seeing as how so many European Nations are too cheap to fund an actual military.  As far as the Supreme Court goes, that is really no affair of yours, either.  However, you can bet your ass that Trump will nominate and get approved a genuine Conservative Justice to replace the late Antonin Scalia.

[hollodero]

(11-10-2016, 10:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Hollodero, why are you so consumed with American affairs?  Heck, for that matter why are you even a member of this football message board?  I never see you post in anything football related. 

Why not?
I read in Jungle noise quite a bit, but people often are just more knowledgeable and I do not feel like contributing too much there.

Why I am consumed is mainly because all that affects our politics in multiple ways. And some political trends tend to swash over, and I am wondering what our little Trumps will do now. It's an interesting thing and topic, and more often than not I'm just curious.
So what is your damn problem with that.

(11-10-2016, 10:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: As for the debt, you can believe that Trump will address that.  First measures may start with charging weaker Nations for our Military protection, seeing as how so many European Nations are too cheap to fund an actual military. 

I agree there, many are too cheap and that is indeed a fair point.
But we won't pay for American protection for too long, that idea is not really sustainable. Won't happen, we'd rather build our own protection forces, as we very well should do. Was basically the first reaction from the EU.

(11-10-2016, 10:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: As far as the Supreme Court goes, that is really no affair of yours, either.  However, you can bet your ass that Trump will nominate and get approved a genuine Conservative Justice to replace the late Antonin Scalia.

I won't bet anyone's ass. And you might be right, it's not my business, but then again this is the internet. You seem to take some personal issue with me, for whatever reason.
Guess you could post a poll if foreigners - or Austrians, if you want to make it more personal - should be thrown out of here. If you get over 50% for that, I will leave you alone - promise. If you don't do that, get off my back.

[Yojimbo]

I expect him to pursue whatever policies lead towards increasing his stock portfolio and personal wealth, just like 95% of D.C. politicians have done over the last 40 years.

[SunsetBengal]

(11-10-2016, 11:03 PM)hollodero Wrote: Why not?
I read in Jungle noise quite a bit, but people often are just more knowledgeable and I do not feel like contributing too much there.

Why I am consumed is mainly because all that affects our politics in multiple ways. And some political trends tend to swash over, and I am wondering what our little Trumps will do now. It's an interesting thing and topic, and more often than not I'm just curious.
So what is your damn problem with that.


I agree there, many are too cheap and that is indeed a fair point.
But we won't pay for American protection for too long, that idea is not really sustainable. Won't happen, we'd rather build our own protection forces, as we very well should do. Was basically the first reaction from the EU.


I won't bet anyone's ass. And you might be right, it's not my business, but then again this is the internet. You seem to take some personal issue with me, for whatever reason.
Guess you could post a poll if foreigners - or Austrians, if you want to make it more personal - should be thrown out of here. If you get over 50% for that, I will leave you alone - promise. If you don't do that, get off my back.

Look, it's nothing personal toward you.  You just seem to word your posts in a way to come off condescending, and like your intent is to rile some opposition.  If you have no other occupation than to monitor US politics, then great, you will learn much in this forum.

Inre: to your response about European Nations not paying for protection for long?  Lol.  They may raise their own bodies, but you can be sure they will be buying their weapons from one of two sources.  I'm betting it will be from the US.  Just a hunch.

Finally, I don't wish you to leave.  I get amusement at your banter.  I do wish that if you are truly a football fan, that you partake in the football forum.  You can learn so much, just by reading.  If you have no genuine interest in American Football, then you really just are a troll, with no business on this site.

[hollodero]

(11-10-2016, 11:16 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Look, it's nothing personal toward you. 

Well, allright then.

(11-10-2016, 11:16 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: You just seem to word your posts in a way to come off condescending, and like your intent is to rile some opposition.  If you have no other occupation than to monitor US politics, then great, you will learn much in this forum.

I don't want to be condescending and I intended to treat every person with respect. Not every point made, though. Sure I am opinionated and not just a mere observer too, I have my own views - although being curious is the driving force, hearing myself talk is nothing I need this forum for.
Somethimes, I also lack some nuances in the language, which leads to me saying stuff or use words that I imagine can be seen as condescending. It isn't meant that way. Being overly self-confident is really not my thing.

This whole Trump topic sure captivates me especially, for I compare Trump to right-wing populism and my country is always on the forefront of electing those people, and I feel I recognize some mechanisms and really want to study them first-hand - and the US has gotten a first-hand source now. The Trump presidency also can prove me right or wrong on a topic I am just highly invested in (I hope I'm wrong). And people might broaden my perspective and I actually try to listen to (and argue with) Trump voters, not condescending them. I take quite an emphasis on seeing condescending reactions as both pointless and unjustified.

(11-10-2016, 11:16 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Inre: to your response about European Nations not paying for protection for long?  Lol.  They may raise their own bodies, but you can be sure they will be buying their weapons from one of two sources.  I'm betting it will be from the US.  Just a hunch.

Well, I don't know what we'll do. It depends on how Trump handles himself in the first few months. But if he alienates European countries - which I suppose will happen - there will be strong tendencies to reach more factual independency from the US. And believe it or not, European countries are very much capable of building weaponry themselves. Don't underestimate us, we're quite developed too.
There might be money to be made from some especially fancy stuff we want from you, granted, I can see that. I can't see that reaching extents that your economy will flourish from that.

(11-10-2016, 11:16 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Finally, I don't wish you to leave.  I get amusement at your banter.  I do wish that if you are truly a football fan, that you partake in the football forum.  You can learn so much, just by reading.  If you have no genuine interest in American Football, then you really just are a troll, with no business on this site.

I went to London for the Skins game, I watched EVERY Bengals game this year and also did so last year. To give you an idea, that often means staying up until 5.30 a.m. when next day is a normal workday. Please do not question my football enthusiasm. What you could question is my football knowledge - there I know most of you guys are just more educated. I read, that's what I do, and I also used to pose tons of questions (until people were understandably tired educating me). Plus I am in three fantasy leagues every year.
But enough personal history here now.

Glad I can amuse you - that also is important.

[BoomerFan]

I have no idea, but I doubt the right really cares. I think they wanted the win and from there everything is negotiable. Or rather I should say, they'll be happy if they get some of this or even a token nod towards it. They have congress too but you almost wonder if that is going to be a check against Trump in some ways?

For instance, I have trouble imagining a GOP congress is going to want to spend billions on a wall. OTOH, doing things to make immigration tougher and safer in their eyes would be very much on the table, especially if you can get it done with bang for your buck. Like I wonder if they'll consider privatizing southern border security? Maybe start paying those Minute Men groups and giving them some latitude in their actions (like being able to use deadly force in some situations)?

This is all pure speculation of course and recently my predictions have been 100% wrong so don't take this as what will actual happen, just a guess at a possible way things could go.