Home | About | Donate

Trump’s Wall Crumbles, Government Stays Open


#1

Trump’s Wall Crumbles, Government Stays Open

Ruth Conniff

Build that Wall!” was the theme of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. Along with his supporters’ chants of “Lock Her Up!,” his promise to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border defined his candidacy in 2016.


#2

You lie? Goodbye! Vote 'em out!


#3

Loser.


#4

Why should those statements by Trump bring panic. He has no credibility left, and besides Americans have been fucking and screwing the world and each other for so long that we have become one of the main vectors for the "epidemics of drugs, crime, and contagious diseases across (and within) the border.

Donald Trump,

Please continue to annoy and threaten and backstab your own party.

Thank you sincerely,
A lot of Americans wanting change


#5

Note to the 95% who continue to vote for Duopoly politicians every single election: Don’t.


#6

Quite the cause you are promoting PonyBoy. You still have to convince me and others that a vote dropped for a democrat is not a vote for the republican. Stones forever.


#7

Punk!


#8

We will never regain our Democracy through the support of either corporate controlled political parties.

Neither will ever give up their dirty money that turns the wheels in Washington DC.

You know this Gandolf.

This Reality TV show President may be gone soon, but whoever replaces him will also be in the pockets of the Business World.

Our nation can only be saved by a political party that rejects everything that the Duopoly parties hold dear.

And I know of only one party like that.


#9

Don’t mind me, I’m just Rambling On.


#10

After 30 years of voting for them we are here, that’s called empirical evidence, and all the while we heard that mantra, almost like it was a religion, “dropping a vote for a democrat was a vote for republicans”. Now we are in the longest an most costly war in US history, and Al Quaida is 50X stronger now than when we started, the climate is about 10 minutes away from global extinction, and The United states has fallen under a bloodless Coup. “Keep it up Dems” is the message you send, and it is an insane response, - obviously - repeating the same act with the expectation of a different result is a failed strategy. If we had ignored that foolish superstition long ago, The Schumer’s and pelosi’s would be long gone, or more likely serving as republicans somewhere else, Trump would be in office, but there would be real progressives stepping up to build an opposition party, something that can never happen as long as corruption and subterfuge is rewarded with loyalty. This would have been a strong step in the right direction, Progressives cant prove it, but what has already been proven is that the status quo is going to get us all killed. Keep it up! Just Keep it up!


#11

It’s pretty not so obvious that this has a another consequence which legitimizes Israel’s Wall.
It is a racist, ideological, work minimizing cult compound barrier just like theirs and may very well be their Trumped up agenda, just like those numerous people in his cabinet and Netanyahu who are NeoCon/Goldman type so called American citizen war profiteers.

Watch out for the after hours, secret session like capitulation when you are all at home having a nice Christmas holiday (reminiscent of the second vote for Bailouts), by the so called Dem’s who are actually a bunch of Israelis themselves and fit more into the NeoCon-Liberal category.

Trump wants to use the suffering and fear of out of work federal employee Americans over the heads of voters, so that his quiet allies in the Dem’s have enough excuse to give him the Wall and Americans a bamboozle, as if our country is in a state of failure and peril because of the immigration policy that it has had for decades now which not only employs, but it works. Say no to propaganda and coercion.
Say no to the Isra-Wall fanatics.


#12

I have voted other than the duopoly more than once, and almost did in 2016. Yup I voted for the lesser of two evils because Trump was so unacceptable. Many others did as well. Maybe it will be different when the orange man is gone.


#13

gandolf, you missed part of the problem, which is to convince the other half of the others that a vote dropped for a republican is not a vote for the horrible democrat.

However, the main part of the problem is to convince ourselves that we do have a choice beyond choosing one of the corporate war parties. For years we have observed and believed that the Green Party and the Libertarian Party are perpetually unable to gain any significant support even though people are getting fed up with the corporate war parties. That the 3rd parties are not picking up support in these difficult times does assume that the vote counts are accurate. But have the vote counts remained accurate? How much more corruption do we need to see before people begin to question whether the vote tabulations for the 3rd parties are being watered down?

And what could we do if the 3rd party votes are being tampered with so as to show that 3rd parties have no support? How helpless do you think we are if we are being played in this way?

We could vote semi-publicly, by wearing something, say something yellow, to indicate that we voted either Green, Libertarian, some other 3rd party, none of the above, or spoiled the ballot. And then we could have volunteers watching outside the polling booth, counting how many people wore yellow to publically indicate that they were not voting for the duopoly, giving us a number to compare to the ones that come up on the corporate counting machines. In wearing yellow we are not telling who we voted for, we would still have our voting by secret ballot, but collectively we could rather visibly say that we are voting against the Duopoly. We would give discouraged non-voters a reason to vote. We would be organizing to take back our elections, we very much need some organizing. And we would have a visible cause to rally around. And if the machine tally should be very much different than our counts we will demand some serious explaining.


#14

How much more would you have preferred Mitt Romney?

Given these two corporate parties your attempt to choose the lessor of two evils is akin to a choice between jumping off the 144th floor or the 7th floor of a tall building. The result is the same either way but from the 144th floor you get to enjoy a bit longer ride. Better to take the stairs and vote for 3rd party and have some potential for a much better outcome.


#15

I would like to add that voting democrat because the republican candidate is too terrible to contemplate effectively rewards the republicans for having extremist candidates. If their candidate was moderate, then the argument for lesser evils doesn’t stand, the progressive gets elected instead of the democrat, and a serious threat to the right wing movement gains a foothold. The lesser of evils argument is the single strongest weapon the right wing extremists have wielded in their game of global domination, only by progressives boldly breaking that chain can humanity even survive their excesses. And by the way all their candidates have been too terrible to contemplate, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump - all too terrible to contemplate republicans.


#16

We have some similar views RandB.

We trust that our votes are counted properly but looking at the level of corruption that exists in the corporate parties, the voting machines they control, are no way to reassure anyone that there is any integrity at all in our elections.

Only through the use of hand counted paper ballots can we be somewhat confident of any semblance of real honest results.

Thanks for your comments.


#17

Agreed, at least mostly.

If we are to get “hand counted paper ballots” we will need to make an issue of it. Neither of the Duopoly parties can be expected to do this for us, so we need to find some effective way to make it an issue.

There are several other things that we should make an issue of. For example laws that make it difficult for anyone other than duopoly candidates to be on the ballot. Or corporate money in our elections. Gerrymandering. Voter registration. Election advertising ( we have the internet, why not have a central server which could be used to find out who is running in your area. This could, by law, have a copy of all advertising used by those candidates, and digital copies of debates and interviews by these candidates. Such a site if effectively available to everyone could give us an effective vector of information with which to bypass some of the corporate control over our access to information).

I suggest that a “vote against the duopoly and wear yellow while doing it” campaign has some serious potential to make how our elections are run an issue with the public, as well as the potential to convince Americans that we have other options beyond the duopoly, as well as the potential to improve the performance of 3rd party candidates. Would such a campaign, if reasonably successful, suddenly convince some duopoly representatives and candidates that they want to listen to us more and possibly better represent our interests?


#18

We actually have some time, maybe a lot of time to think things over. That would be because third party candidates have to struggle to get on many of the states ballots. Additionally, once on the ballot there is no guarantee that they can join the televised debates, something that would be a yuuuuge negative for a candidate.


#19

I think that it is well past time that we had a central server dedicated to providing complete and extensive information on all of the candidates in all of the elections: national, state, and civic. As I see it all candidates would by law be required to post a copy of all their advertisements, speeches, and debates on this site in a standardized format that the average voter can easily find and follow. Even the paid speeches to bankers. Done properly there would be places for other candidates to give feedback on a candidates claims, and space for discussion by voters of the programs, speeches and debates of all of the candidates.

I would go so far as to make this site available to everyone on any wifi signal or ethernet signal everywhere in the voting district, that is the internet providers could protect all of the internet from access without a password and an account, but must without any restriction allow everyone simple and easy and equal access to this information site from any internet source whatsoever without needing an account or password. After all, in a Democracy all voters have a right and responsibility to free access to all the information needed to decide who and what they will vote for.

This is not beyond the capability of the network providers to implement. This is not unreasonable to demand of them. Free, complete and easy access to complete information on all the candidates is a right to be expected in any democracy that has an internet service.

With the needed information made accessible to all then all voters would be able to responsibly decide who to vote for. Candidates would have a reasonable ability to educate the voters on the issues. Much of the monopoly control of the media over the flow of this information would be broken. The mega dollars needed to pay the media for advertising time would be partially bypassed and their monopoly over much of the information broken. Anyone with a laptop or tablet or phone, irregardless of economic and social standing should have easy and unrestricted access to this information from any wifi signal that they are walking through. I expect nothing less in a Democracy that has our current level of technology.


#20

That would work perfectly in my area, and there is more than one potential platform. We have a local cable channel that broadcasts local city and county board meetings, certain school activities, and some local politics.
Our public television stations, three available, and then you have c-span for the state and national critters to jaw on.
I know it’s a great idea cause I have thought about it too.
Next would be to tackle public campaign financing. The more the better to wash away some of the special interest money.