"American men" did it by cooperating in teams with one another toward a common goal, unlike the current president who has shown no ability to lead, only bully and threaten.

I'm saying on the 9th he agreed to something and on the 11th he reneged.

Pardon me. I thought you were addressing my point about the 1.8 million path to citizenship that Trump offered and was rejected. It seems like a sneaky change of subject.

American men and women have been doing this since the founding of this nation and are continuing to do so. And they do it more freely and abundantly when they are not regulated by government beyond the bounds that the Constitution allows.

The past 75 years you mention are almost the exact period of time that Progressives have been creating and expanding a regulatory system that threatens to eliminate those constitutional bounds. Trump's roll back of regulations is a starting point toward retrenching the regulatory administrative state which has been progressively limiting the ability of American men and women to achieve their diverse goals rather than being herded into a unitary system of centralized corporatism joined in bed with large centralized government. A system, btw, which slowly strangles the middle class which you bemoan the disappearance of.


Trump has been leading this deregulation and leading the Republican party out of it's timid fear of media condemnation.

I have seen little in what he has done to reduce the power and economic advantage of corporations, other than hating Bezos.
Are you saying that he agrees with Senator Warren on reform of corporate controls? Or are corporations just going to act better because they have more money?

We'll likely see how Don the Cons leadership has worked in a few weeks.
After all he has said the election is all about him, unless they lose, then it's all on them.

So then, you "see" that Don the Con is showing leadership,

Being a bully is not good leadership.

We have supported many authoritarian regimes in the past and paid the price with lives in Vietnam and the Middle east, the current refugee crisis from central america is the result of our support of failed dictators that we approved of because of what they were not.

We now have one of our own, who thinks that he is what makes America great.

In his words:
"I tell you what, if I ever got impeached, I think the market would crash, I think everybody would be very poor."

Pointing to his head, he said: "Because without this thinking, you would see numbers that you wouldn't believe in reverse."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYNttLz4Mag

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1V2Wenfo6k

US President Donald Trump has threatened to use military force to completely close the US-Mexico border.

It's "thinking" that he has learned from experience and economic advisers, maybe even from a study of American history. He didn't magically or from dictatorial impulse come up with novel ideas that never were tried. The "thinking" in his head are the store of knowledge he has learned/not created.

It's very easy to turn Trump speak into whatever you want it to mean. Picking low hanging fruit is easy but not impressive. Certainly not convincing to more than simple-minded "thinking."

That was a waste of 45 minutes. Can't bring myself to say "thanks."

You post a video in response to my post regarding the 1.8 million path. But the video which is not about the 1.8, which he proposed a couple of weeks later. And the video shows Trump being "presidential" and being respectful and willing to deal rather than being your characterization of him being a bully.

Is your point that he said, in the video that he would sign a bill they came up with. He also had the caveat that the bill must include the cost of building a wall and that border security had to be addressed (in a meaningful way, no doubt).

There was Feinstein chirping in that they should pass a clean bill which dealt with the DACA issue first and then take more time on the security issue later in a comprehensive immigration reform. That's the same old trick the Dems pulled before. Get what they want up front, renege on the rest later.

Trump said that his version of a clean bill was security and DACA, then the immigration reform later. He said that he trusted the Congress to create such a bill and that he would sign it. Was such a bill that immediately funded the wall in full and seriously addressed border security, as he stipulated, proposed?

How much will a wall cost? What will the extent of the wall be? How high will it be? Whose land will the wall go on? What will the land cost?
Nobody knows, but you think Congress should give Trump a blank check. Is this based on Trump's business record?
I do not trust Trump.
I think we could find more productive ways to spend 50 billion dollars or more.
The GAO issued an opinion with concerns in August
https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/693488.pdf

Here is a piece by a noted "liberal" institution
https://www.cato.org/publications/co...wall-wont-work

I didn't ask for your opinion on how much the wall would cost, nor about how you think the money would be better spent. Or about whether you Trust Trump or not. You claimed that Trump promised something and then he reneged on it. Which, I guess, is supposed to prove what a crappy person he is. Even though that has been a pattern in political policy negotiations forever. Certainly by the Democrats re border security.

How did Trump renege on his promise here?

Read his tweets
They are self explanatory
After listening to him justify the murder of Khashoggi by saying Saudi Arabia will pay us 110 billion, I wonder how much the world would raise for Trumps head
What value would be acceptable?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Earlier in this thread you asked me a series of 4 questions which I answered.

Then, in response to your assertion that "Every time a bipartisan solution was proposed he [Trump] changed the goal", I noted how Trump actually offered to double the number of immigrants to get path to citizenship if his demands for border security and a wall were met. But his offer was not accepted

To which you replied that he made an offer and the Dems said yes, and then that T reneged.

I didn't recall the yes. To which you replied "Try January 11 of this year for when Trump reneged." I suggested that date was two weeks before T made the offer and questioned how could he have reneged on something he had not yet proposed.

So you later posted a video of Trump negotiating the immigration issue with a bipartisan committee which was not about his more than generous offer to grant twice the number that Dems were asking for if they would agree to his wall and border security. So, by this, you dodged my point that it was not he that reneged on the deal which we were discussing, and you moved (the goal posts) to a new supposed example of his reneging.

So then I asked how he reneged on something in that video. And, again, you dodged that with a non-answer and bringing up Khashoggi and what would the world pay for Trump's head.

So I answer directly to your questions as asked, but you can't directly answer two simple questions by me. Instead, you dodge and weave like Barry Sanders avoiding contact.

Earlier in the thread, you implied that I didn't answer your questions because each was a "Pretty difficult question I guess."

I guess my questions were too difficult for you. Or you are as untrustworthy and prone to reneging as you accuse Trump of being.

How much is his head worth?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm not seeing how that is relevant to the subject of this thread. Nor even related to anything I've said on it. Seems like yet another deke.

But, for what it's worth, probably a lot more than yours. The subject of Kathy Grffith's infamous severed head was recognized by many millions more than would recognize yours.