Bitcoin Forum

They fear him because he actually does what he says.

Quite interesting, actually.

Whatever your personal feelings about Trump, you have got to admit that he's caused a number of aspects of the reality of media and politics to become starkly clear, that were not at all previously clear. And which would have remained obscure with any other candidate.

Presidential ratings will always go down. Why? Because the people expect things from a President that the Oval Office was not designed for him to do. It's difficult to remain free, and require a President to "enslave" you according to the ways that you want to be enslaved. If you want to remain free, you need to simply stand up and live, and forget the President. In the USA, the way to do it is built right into the Constitution and Amendments. Further, take a look at Maxims of Law (https://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/bouvier/maxims.shtml), and DuckDuckGo (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=maxims+of+law&t=canonical&ia=web) search on the topic.

The way it works with presidents is:
1. People aren't happy with some aspect of their lives;
2. The presidential candidates talk a good talk, one that they know they aren't going to be able to fulfill, or one that uses words that deceive the people;
3. The people buy into what they think is best, and elect a President;
4. Since the Office of President wasn't designed to run people's lives, the people NEVER get what they expect;
5. As people realize that they aren't getting what they had hoped for - even if it is only a feeling of security that they wanted - presidential ratings drop.
6. If there are hate groups that hate the particular President in office, OR if the President isn't very wise and capable, the ratings may drop further and faster, especially if the media is against him;
7. A President is a wise President if he can buck the media and other hate groups, and STILL maintain his ratings.

8)

presidents are doomed just like anyone else, the capitalists, enterpreneuers, trump creates winners and losers, with every his decision, be it the wall, the military budget, you will have constantly media group lobbying against for for trump, it will be a neverending nasty story for everyone outside.

He would crush it today, and he's gonna crush it in 2020.  There isn't a single Democrat on the scene that has the American people's interests listed as a priority.  Not one.  All they care about is stopping Trump.  Their policies aren't even well thought out, the only prerequisite to their policies is that they oppose Trump's.  Democrats care more about damaging the image of Republican's than they do about solving problems that plague Americans. 

I didn't vote for Trump in '16, I thought he was just another bag of hot air.  I will most certainly vote for him 2020, and his successor in 2024!

But what if he isn't building the wall to keep illegals out? What if he is building it to keep citizens in?

8)

you have no choice but to vote for his successor.

Does he mean campaign or platform successor?      8)

both would be broken.

or do you mean "whoever trump will recommend"

Well that's a great vote of confidence. But we don't know who will come next. It may be someone you despise. Trump cannot nominate his successor in the same way that he can go to the Federalist Society and get a list of judges to nominate.

There's maybe one reason for optimism. There is a saying that "first rate men hire first rate men, and second rate men hire third rate men." Trump has a lifetime of experience selecting people for high level positions. I would go with his selection, all things considered.

Please elaborate how that could even possibly be Trump's goal? 

Now if Obummer were this motivated to build the wall, and take my guns, and run my healthcare, and suck up to China...  See where I'm going with this?

Even if I do agree with President Trump, this is just a r blog-spam post. Not something that I want to set a precedent as 'real news' on this forum or something like that.

Plus wasn't this just one poll, instead of the average of all of the polls like RCP uses and such?

Yeah - check here for the polls https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html

I see complete irony in what the so called "Liberal Media" is trying to achieve. They are taking potshots and try to find faults at everything that Trump does. This has massively backfired and triggered a massive consolidation among the other group who now approve of anything that Trump does. What the "Liberal Media" should understand is that the more they trying to dethrone Trump, the more supporters he will get.

The media should let Trump perform his sworn duties. They should criticise him for his policies and question if those policies do any good to America. The elections will be held once again and the public of America will choose their leader once again. We all should let Trump function and perform his duties without getting hassled and interrupted all the time with useless propaganda.

In the same way that the prisons have loads of people in them who never hurt anybody. How did those people get there? By not knowing the simple law that all they had to do was properly ask the court to bring forth someone that they injured. Rather, since they didn't understand how to ask this, they were talked into agreeing that they understood the legal code, and that they were guilty of breaking a legal code - which they didn't really understand - and many of them even signed on the line on some court paperwork thereby helping to incarcerate themselves.

If a person simply hires attorney, or if he accepts the attorney appointed by the courts, he is dooming himself to the mercy of the court, whatever they decide... just by accepting an attorney - https://www.youarelaw.org/Download/CorpusJurisSecundum-AttorneyClient.pdf.

What does this have to do with Trump and the wall? The wall might be totally justified to keep people out who shouldn't be here. But since almost nobody knows how to fight properly in court without an attorney, the courts can do anything to any accused, no matter what they are accused of. And the wall can wind up being an excuse to say that people are traveling to Mexico to avoid legal requirements on them in the USA, like medical requirements.

Certainly this won't happen right away. But it is a setting up of what will happen down the road in a decade or two, unless people wake up to their options regarding the courts.

8)

trumps wall will be useless, as soon it is build the americans will decentralise their financial system and become a socialist society with financial mess.

and will constantly need help from mexikans foreigners etc.

regards

Honestly I'm about 90 percent sure you don't even think about what you write before you write them, you seem to just blurb out random shit that comes to mind.

Can you please get your sig spam out of this section.

no you lack the intelligence and the wide perspective of thoughts that i have processed befor writing that

so ok i explain you:

once usa is sealed of off mexica, americans will find themselves being ruled by a printing press off a banking cartel, they then try to decentralise that financial system with then realising they dont have the labour force for their "cryptos" so they run around looking for labourers again, making the wall a big question.

You must be a troll, please tell me you're a troll so I don't have to think you're a human being that is on this earth with these ideas.

Does not make sense to me but here's a thought

BEFORE weed was legalized in various US states, there might have been an undercurrent resistance to "A Wall." People wanted to get high.

NOW WITH weed fairly well legitimized, nobody really cares about the illegal weed coming across the border. Various US weed business interests would like it stopped.

Therefore we can lean toward building the wall.

Then I guess [GASP] the wages will have to go up to attract more laborers won't they? I am sure you would prefer a mandatory minimum wage instead.

Then a lot of people will be trapped inside.

Here is the reality of what will happen. The Gulf of Mexico will have a lot more boat traffic.
So when people want to sneak in they will have to pay the boatman to get in.

This means boatmen smuggling people in will make good money.
The next prez will need more coast  guard

There's no issue at all with the Coast Guard protecting those areas and monitoring every single boat.

wages go up? central banks arent the only ones that can print money now.

If there is a shortage of labor (or anything) the price goes up. This is supply and demand. Inflation doesn't magically create more labor. Not sure what you think your point is.

jes but the priority who gets the short becoming labor isnt changing, its still focused on the central banks, and the billionaires. thats the issue.be

the central bank is the master of the usa.

Okay do you mean you don’t mind the coast guard checking each and every boat in the gulf of New Mexico.
Once it is not in international waters?

We would need a shit ton of coast guard boats.

Way more costly then a wall.

The wall would bring up huge costs for the coast guard.

Hey my position is fuck people that sneak in to my house or my state or my country.
But reality is have do you detect them? Once they get in do we all walk around with a micro chip that gets scanned?

I was born here in 1957. Ny mom and dad were born here in the 1920s two grandparents were born here and two came via legal immigration one in 1906 one in 1890.

I rather keep sneaks to a minimum but not sure how well wall works with all the sea around the states.
The Chip idea works but I do not think all the USA will get chipped very soon.

I'm not concerned about that. Put it this way. The Border Patrol says they need a wall. The Coast Guard isn't saying they need more boats and they're not saying a wall will hurt them. For the Coast Guard, you are basically looking at the Texas coast. One or two hundred miles of that lead into the King Ranch, which is bad or worse as trying to go through the New Mexico desert.

Granted, other areas a boat could be beached and illegals could start walking inland.

But FYI, there's free and simple access across the border for all the Mexicans, they just can't pass the checkpoints that are 50 miles inland. That's where they get turned around. So Mexicans just come across and then try to figure how to sneak past those checkpoints, or they just live on our side.

I think the issue is folks from Central and South America.

weather the wall gets build or not there wont be a big fundamental difference,
i am afraid that:
all the enterpreneuers that become rich because of cheap mexican labour, will get pissed off by the wall for the gain of pleasing mexicofearing americans, and exchausted policemen.

Been forty years since I lived in San Diego went to TJ countless times.
I also would go to some town about 60 miles south of TJ in the Baha

And sometimes would camp out in a border town called Jacumba you could simply walk back and forth across the border with zero issues.

But so much has changed from 1978 to now. So much of what was true back in 1978-1981 when I lived there is not true anymore.

the capitalists will keep their privileged access to consumption capacities and services. doesnt matter what happens.

Furthermore it is not even a reply to the premise presented.

we are talking here about trump and his wall,

i said, if the wall is build the monopolistic rule of the central bank (fed) in the usa might shatter and the usa might fragment into countless "coin" shiller groups.

all those "coiner" empires then will have a neverending need for "intelligent" labourers to work value into their "quickly" made "coins"

regards

Cool story bro. Work on putting together a cohesive sentence structure first then move on to following a premise, then macro-economic theory.

well good luck then finding idiots for your 320 million "icos"

No relation between the wall and the central bank.