That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
Yep.Holman wrote:Apparently (too lazy to hunt up a link) Trump has now agreed to support the eventual GOP nominee and not launch a 3rd-party bid if he isn't it. This avoids potential problems with getting onto the ballot in some states.
It's unknown what penalty, if any, he would face for changing his mind later.
You don't think promising to support him if he wins was enough? I think that is going to be an interesting one to pull off if he does win.tgb wrote:I wonder what they promised him to get him to sign.
State GOPs can make rules keeping a candidate off the ballot unless they sign such a pledge. Trump wants to be on all the ballots.tgb wrote:I wonder what they promised him to get him to sign.
A CEO can do homework. I don't like Fiorina but I don't doubt she's a quick study and much more intelligent than Trump.GreenGoo wrote:Carly Fiorina seemed to be rocking the foreign policy questions. Not something I would have expected from a former CEO. That surprises me.
Good for her. In fact I have low expectations for pretty much everyone running for president as far as foreign policy is concerned. Except for the previous Secretaries of State of course.
She did her homework, that's what surprises me. It seems like she's at least taking the run seriously, despite her lack of popularity and seemingly little chance of getting the nomination. It speaks to her character imo, even if I'm not a fan of her political positions either.LawBeefaroni wrote:A CEO can do homework. I don't like Fiorina but I don't doubt she's a quick study and much more intelligent than Trump.GreenGoo wrote:Carly Fiorina seemed to be rocking the foreign policy questions. Not something I would have expected from a former CEO. That surprises me.
Good for her. In fact I have low expectations for pretty much everyone running for president as far as foreign policy is concerned. Except for the previous Secretaries of State of course.
But he knew the Kurds are being mistreated.hepcat wrote:If you're going to run for president, I don't think it's too much to ask to do some research on foreign policy. Even if you don't have an opinion yet on policy, it doesn't hurt to know the big players in the game.
Agreed.hepcat wrote:If you're going to run for president, I don't think it's too much to ask to do some research on foreign policy. Even if you don't have an opinion yet on policy, it doesn't hurt to know the big players in the game.
Maybe he can explain cheese on apple pie.Isgrimnur wrote:Are we sure he wasn't bemoaning the mistreatment of cheese products through the application of gravy by our Canuckistan brethren?
Moliere wrote:Maybe he can explain cheese on apple pie.Isgrimnur wrote:Are we sure he wasn't bemoaning the mistreatment of cheese products through the application of gravy by our Canuckistan brethren?
GreenGoo wrote:Cheddar on apple pie is totally a thing. Why it's a thing, I don't know, but it's been a thing for decades and probably centuries.
An apple pie without the cheese is like a kiss without the squeeze.
...
Dig around historical texts, as dictionarian Barry Popick has, and you'll find versions of this phrase dating back to the late 19th century. The gastronome Brillat-Savarin even remarked, back in 1825, that "a dessert without cheese is like a beautiful woman who has lost an eye."
Brillat-Savarin probably didn't mean pie per se, but rather the common European practice of including cheese as part of a dessert course. Though as apple pie dates back to as early as the 16th century,* it's not unlikely that Europeans were eating said pie with cheese well before the pilgrims strapped belt buckles to their hats.
...
Here in the U.S., the cheese can vary, but it's usually cheddar. And for that pairing we likely have the Brits to thank. England is the birthplace of cheddar, after all, and Popick points out that Yorkshire claims apple pie with cheese as a traditional dessert. Some Brits even say the "apple pie without the cheese" expression originated there, though multiple printed documents point to 19th century Americans "graphically" introducing the phrase to British writers.
It looks better on a 55 inch 4k television, I've been told.naednek wrote:
wtf gross!
No doubt, but why would anyone in their right mind want to eat their TV?hepcat wrote:It looks better on a 55 inch 4k television, I've been told.naednek wrote:
wtf gross!
Is that Jeb! behind him?Zarathud wrote:Immortan Trump
LordMortis wrote:One day I need to try cheese on pie. I mean cheese and pie are two of my favorite things and I put cheese on nearly everything else.
Today will not be that day though.
TheMix wrote:While I don't think that I would put cheese on a slice of pie (I much prefer ice cream), I do love a nice sharp cheddar with a tart apple. My favorite is MacIntosh, but I only like those fresh from the orchard. So out here (where they don't appear to grow them), I go with Granny Smith. I do find the flavors very complimentary.
And here’s what’s interesting: all indications are that Mr. Bush’s attacks on Mr. Trump are falling flat, because the Republican base doesn’t actually share the Republican establishment’s economic delusions.
The thing is, we didn’t really know that until Mr. Trump came along. The influence of big-money donors meant that nobody could make a serious play for the G.O.P. nomination without pledging allegiance to supply-side doctrine, and this allowed the establishment to imagine that ordinary voters shared its antipopulist creed. Indeed, Mr. Bush’s hapless attempt at a takedown suggests that his political team still doesn’t get it, and thinks that pointing out The Donald’s heresies will be enough to doom his campaign.
But Mr. Trump, who is self-financing, didn’t need to genuflect to the big money, and it turns out that the base doesn’t mind his heresies. This is a real revelation, which may have a lasting impact on our politics.
I'm more inclined to think that the masses care more for attitude than any particular economic policy. They might even overlook his support of the assault gun ban.Smoove_B wrote:Trump is right on economics...
And here’s what’s interesting: all indications are that Mr. Bush’s attacks on Mr. Trump are falling flat, because the Republican base doesn’t actually share the Republican establishment’s economic delusions.
The thing is, we didn’t really know that until Mr. Trump came along. The influence of big-money donors meant that nobody could make a serious play for the G.O.P. nomination without pledging allegiance to supply-side doctrine, and this allowed the establishment to imagine that ordinary voters shared its antipopulist creed. Indeed, Mr. Bush’s hapless attempt at a takedown suggests that his political team still doesn’t get it, and thinks that pointing out The Donald’s heresies will be enough to doom his campaign.
But Mr. Trump, who is self-financing, didn’t need to genuflect to the big money, and it turns out that the base doesn’t mind his heresies. This is a real revelation, which may have a lasting impact on our politics.
Mr. Trump said that his experience at the New York Military Academy, an expensive prep school where his parents had sent him to correct poor behavior, gave him “more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military.”
I believe that Vineyard is run by his son, for what it's worth. Soon to be the next VP in the Trump / Trump administration, of course.Carpet_pissr wrote:Just visited "his" vineyard in Charlottesville....not too shabby. Didn't seem to have his ego stinking up the place, so that was welcome (no gold and diamond bars, instance). Decent wines as well.
He should try that line with actual soldiers.Mr. Trump said that his experience at the New York Military Academy, an expensive prep school where his parents had sent him to correct poor behavior, gave him “more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military.”
Exactly. I read that and did the 'blink-blink' equivalent of a double-take. That was a pretty... ambitious... statement. I'm sure that it will play fine with our armed forces.Holman wrote:He should try that line with actual soldiers.Mr. Trump said that his experience at the New York Military Academy, an expensive prep school where his parents had sent him to correct poor behavior, gave him “more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military.”
When was the last President who had active duty service in a combat zone? The real question is whether he can surround himself with reliable advisers and follow their advice.TheMix wrote:Exactly. I read that and did the 'blink-blink' equivalent of a double-take. That was a pretty... ambitious... statement. I'm sure that it will play fine with our armed forces.Holman wrote:He should try that line with actual soldiers.Mr. Trump said that his experience at the New York Military Academy, an expensive prep school where his parents had sent him to correct poor behavior, gave him “more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military.”
