@hotmuscletwi Show them this photo and tell them that not only was Trump was the first president elected supporting gay marriage, he was the first president to name an openly gay person to a Cabinet-level position.
If you're really worried about them being Trump supporters who won't accept you (as you seem to be since you mentioned it), tell them that if he has no problem with it, neither should they.
@bi4smooth Hey there, thanks for that info. I clicked on 'completed torrents' but that list only seems to included torrents from 2021 even though I have been seeding ones going back to around 2016. I guess I'll have to go through the torrents in my old client one at time and look up each one on the site, download it, and add it to the new client.
Would you happen to know if running two clients at the same time will screw anything up?
I have to switch torrent clients since I'm having problems. I'm using a very old crappy program called FDM. The problem is I have like 1,500 torrents seeding in it so I have to download all of the .torrent files again to add them to the new client. The FDM program doesn't keep a backup of each torrent like most torrent clients.
I've read online that some torrent sites allow you to download all of the little torrent files from your history on the site at once in a zip file. Is this available here or do I need to search and locate each video and click download manually?
@gsrtorr Yup, I've been getting those 404 errors a few times these last few days as well.
I switched back to the old design last week after seeing all of the problems with the new design. I posted my complaints and changed back today to see the progress. Some of the problems have been addressed, which is good. :clap2:
But it seems like the new design has become far less efficient.
I can only fit 4 or 5 torrents on the screen at once now, whereas with the old design I could fit 11. That means double the amount of scrolling, so I don't see how this larger design is an improvement. Toggling the descriptions is a nice addition, but the torrents don't get smaller when the descriptions are off. It just cleans up some of the clutter.
Can you make the fonts and the spacing smaller so it's actually using all of the space available?
I switched back to the old design. The new design seems darker and less colorful than the old design. I liked the blue banner and buttons, but that's a personal choice. These were the issues I had:
The "Added" and "Size/Infos" columns are too close together.
The page skip "1 - 50Â | 51 - 100" is missing some ranges.
The "Search" button at the top is now a two click (Click Torrents then click Search) process, but that's the button I click on most often.
No message counter displayed on header, requires two clicks also.
I'm sure the new design will come along eventually. :clap2:
If things keep going the way they are, we'll certainly get to enjoy his leadership for two terms.
The Democratic party is in such disarray they've got no one on the national scene that can challenge Trump in 2020. Bernie and Biden will both be 78 years old in 2020 and even the left is done with Hillary after her campaign last year. Who does that leave? Warren? Schumer? Ellison??
Maybe they'll have someone to challenge Pence in 2024.
In order to be charged with Purgery one has to willingly be misleading and intend to do so. If Jeff Sessions understood the question as being asked about discussions with Russian officials in the context of the campaign he did nothing wrong. He has recused himself from any investigation that may involve the presidential campaign, and he is submitting a letter of clarification to the Senate to clarify his meetings with the Russian Ambassador. There is no legal standing to remove him as Attorney General.
Intent is important. If there is no proof Sessions intended to lie, then he cannot be charged.
Exactly. All of the nonsense about his "involvement" with the Russians is just a conveniently timed attack by the media to halt the good press Trump was receiving from the Tuesday night speech.
Sessions had already testified that he would recuse himself from any investigations that involved the campaigns. So far there hasn't been any need to recuse himself because no there's nothing to investigate. A couple of Washington Post articles claiming that supposedly leaked information obtained illegally and attributed to "anonymous" sources is not probable cause to convene an investigation.
Sessions simply reiterated his recusal policy yesterday, which is exactly what he should do if that situation should arise.
You're right, normal voters go to CPAC. I'm wrong. No idea what I'm talking about. This isn't a clear case of sample bias.
No bias involved since they clearly were surveying a specific subset of the population. It's not hard to understand…they polled conservatives at CPAC to get a feel for the level of support Trump has among conservatives.
The poll results indicate there is a high level of support for Trump among conservatives. That's all, nothing more, nothing less.
No, it doesn't. It certainly indicates how attendees of CPAC feel towards Trump. Get over it. Facts are facts.
And as you just stated above, we know what kind of person attends CPAC, so we know what kind of support Trump has among that subset of the population. See, that wasn't so hard to follow.
Voter turnout was low, this is a fact… How do you come to that conclusion? Democrats voted for Trump? Doubt it. Maybe if you consider not showing up, a vote for Trump. Moderates who are not on a side, voted for Trump. You truly believe Obama voters, went for Trump this time? Come on dude... Your analysis of what occurred is overwhelmingly narrow minded. What stops citizens who don't normally vote from deciding to vote? What stops the youth who have low participation rates from realizing that voting is important? You're not making any sense man... You're describing a world where there are two groups of voters and there are only voters and non voters... That isn't reality.
Voter turnout was about 58-59% in 2016, which was a little higher than in 2012 and a little lower than in 2008. Trump won in counties that Romney and McCain had both lost in. An analysis of the election results demonstrate where those counties are, and just how large the swings were from 2012 to 2016:
_President-elect Donald Trump’s surprising victory on Nov. 8 stemmed from massive surge in Republican voters throughout the Rust Belt.
A TIME analysis of county-level results show stunning shifts in Trump’s favor through the upper Midwest and Northeast, demonstrating the success of his trade and economic message in the nation’s heartland. Meanwhile former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took advantage of Trump’s weakness with traditional Republicans to make gains largely in urban coastal centers.
The one exception: the mountain states, where growing Hispanic populations and Mormon distaste for Trump provided some of the sharpest swings for the Democrats.
Of the 3,112 counties for which there is county-level data, 2,728 shifted toward the GOP, 383 shifted Democratic, and 1—Barrow County, Georgia—stayed exactly the same.
The counties where Clinton gained on Obama occurred in much larger counties, where a median of 75,554 people showed up to vote in 2016. The median for the 2,728 Republican-gaining counties is 9,905._
http://time.com/4587866/donald-trump-election-map/
LMAO… The ACA repeal isn't going to happen... He just vomited out Ryan's plan during his speech last night which is unpopular among Republicans, not to mention Trump's supporters. Under that law, the health insurance plan for many Americans will effectively be "You Pay For It" with no actual insurance.
Ryan's plan? Trump gave his outline for replacing Obamacare, and that included:
-Ensuring people with pre-existing health conditions are guaranteed "access" to health insurance, "and that we have a stable transition for Americans currently enrolled in the health-care exchanges.
-Giving people who buy their own health coverage tax credits and expanded health savings accounts to help pay for their coverage, as well as flexibility about the design of their plans.
-Give states "the resources and flexibility" in their Medicaid programs "to make sure no one is left out." Medicaid covers primarily poor people.
-Legal reforms to protect doctors and patients "from unnecessary costs" that drive up insurance costs, and to bring down the price of high-cost drugs.
-Creating a national insurance marketplace that allows insurers to sell health plans across state lines.
You have to remember, there may be 20 million vocal people who were given insurance due to the ACA, but there are over 100 million insured people who didn't want or need this huge government program that are the silent majority. Congress isn't catering to the 20 million, it knows where its bread is buttered.
Oh my god dude /eyeroll … "Fictional Trash with No Merit." Be honest: you didn't actually do any research what so ever and you just hear him say "Fake News" and assume it is. What fictional trash with no merit are you referring to? Also, propaganda is a pretty strong word, what are you talking about? What propaganda are you referring to? I think you mean the word "Agenda" and you're going to have to have specific details here or I'm just going to roll my eyes at you.
Propaganda is the word I intended to use, it's not too strong at all. When a left-leaning news outlet publishes allegations that the Trump campaign was in collusion with Russian intelligence officials, gives nothing but the comments of an "anonymous source" claiming to have obtained leaked intelligence data as evidence, that's propaganda. When they try and use that propaganda as the basis for a CRIMINAL investigation into the president, that's the beginnings of a treasonous coup attempt.
We're fortunate the Congress isn't falling for any of these unfounded and salacious allegations, but can you imagine what kind of subversion could be taking place if the media's bedfellows, the Democrats, were in control of Congress?
The media has been waging a war against Trump since he won the nomination. They are shameless in their behavior. We all saw their reaction to Trump's win on election night, so we know they're upset about their girl losing. But they should at least try and APPEAR to be objective, even if they have no plans of actually being objective. They risk making themselves irrelevant as people seek alternative sources of information.
So my advice to you of "Don't believe the hype" in regards to their reporting on Trump, still stands.
Trump knocked it out of the park last night with his speech. Wall Street gave their approval today as the Dow was up more than 300 points today to close at another record level.
Even CNN's own Van "This was a Blacklash" Jones complimented Trump's address to Congress last night. Less than an hour after Trump honored the widow of a slain NAVY Seal, the Democratic commentator suggested that the commander in chief had officially begun to look the part. Jones said, "He became President of the United States in that moment, period. That was one of the most extraordinary moments you have ever seen in American politics."
_(CNN)President Donald Trump's first address to Congress received largely positive reviews from viewers, with 57% who tuned in saying they had a very positive reaction to the speech, according to a new CNN/ORC poll of speech-watchers.
Nearly 7-in-10 who watched said the President's proposed policies would move the country in the right direction and almost two-thirds said the president has the right priorities for the country. Overall, about 7-in-10 said the speech made them feel more optimistic about the direction of the country._
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/28/politics/donald-trump-joint-address-poll/
No, it doesn't. It indicates how attendees of CPAC feel about him.
Maybe you're not aware, but CPAC is a conference of conservative Americans.
That poll, proves jack shit.
Again, it seems like you're not aware of what CPAC is and who it attracts.
The poll certainly indicates how conservatives feel towards Trump. Whether the 86% is accurate or not isn't the point since the poll has a margin of error that can go a few points in either direction. It definitely indicates that he has overwhelming support.
You're new to politics aren't you man? Be honest … In America only about half the eligible voters actually vote, but it's not the exact same people each election. Some people become disenfranchised and stop voting, while others, who didn't previously vote, engage. People don't actually switch sides, excluding moderate voters who don't have a party affiliation. Suggesting that his popularity among all Americans, is irrelevant, is quite possible the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Yeah, he beat the democrats, great, and when enough Republicans get sick of him, he'll destroy that party as well. While he simultaneously infuriates 55%+ of America.
I have to ask you if you're new to politics, because you seem to think that the "feelings" of the non-voters matters. They don't. Why? Because they don't vote. Everyone has an opinion in politics, but unless they vote, that opinion doesn't mean jack.
And it's fairly obvious that people DID switch sides to vote for Trump, but if you're new to politics, I can see how you might not have picked up on it. He won in states that have been blue for years. Pennsylvania had been fools gold for Republicans for years, but they couldn't win there. Trump won those blue states and he won them because some voters on the left were unhappy with their candidate and some voters on the left supporter Trump. None of the other Republican candidates could have pulled that off because they were all stuck on the party's failed ideology of the past.
Donald doesn't seem to understand that his words and his actions (or more importantly, in-actions) have consequences and in about 2 years, I'm wondering who I'll be supporting, because it's completely obvious to me, that I was lied to. Elected officials don't have life time positions, the rest of the Republicans understand this, but I don't think Donald does, or understands the relationship between his approval rating, and other officials in the party. This creates a situation where the Republican controlled congress can't make controversial decisions, since they risk going down with the captain as the ship sinks. So, ACA repeal = lies, they can't touch it with out committing political suicide.
Trump knows quite well that his actions are why his supporters are so loyal. He's annoying the Beltway crowd by actually sticking to his campaign promises. I'm not sure what you thought you were getting so I don't know what you think you've been lied to about. Since he's only been in office for six weeks, I don't know how you can even determine that you've been lied to yet. The negotiations with the Republicans in the congress will be just fine. His approval rating will increase as people see he has been keeping his campaign promises. Congress needs to get to work on the repeal and replace of Obamacare, and I'm sure they'll have that done before the early summer break. Then they'll tackle tax reform through the fall.
It sounds like you're letting the media's propaganda get to you. Don't believe their hype. They have been throwing everything that can dream up at Trump for almost a year now, and it all winds up being fictional trash with no merit. Don't let his tweets bother you either…he takes two minutes to blast out a tweet, and he gets the media running around in circles all day to disparage it. Then he repeats it all again the next day. It's pure genius, so enjoy it!
They're never going to … Trump completely broke the political system in the US. Granted, it was broken before, but now it's just going to seesaw every election cycle. I firmly believe that there's going to be a very bad day ahead for conservatives in 2018. I hate to say this, but if the democrats ever gain control of the house and senate, they're going to employ every tactic the republicans used and it's going to be a decade before it gets sorted out. Trump is very bad for the future political situation in this country... If he can't turn his presidency around, then he might as well give the government to the democrats. The voter suppression tactics will not work twice. The democrats thought they had the election won easily, (I thought they did too), but they're seriously pissed off now... And nothing Donald is doing is helping...
Not sure what you mean as far as Trump breaking the political system. He's the first one in a long time that's brought any change to politics. He's the first non-military guy to become president that wasn't a career politician before winning the White House. In that manner, you're correct, Trump has completely broken the political system…and deservedly so. He's a breath of fresh air to a system that had become far too set in its ways.
Trump's got the Beltway crowd going nuts with every one of his tweets, and he's got the media twisting and spinning every syllable that comes out his mouth. I'm loving everything he's doing so far. He distracts the media and his political enemies with a few bad words on twitter, and while they're busy chasing their tails with Nordstrom's and Russians, he's signing executive orders that are freezing federal hiring and cracking down on illegals. He's playing them like a master.
As for the Democrats employing tactics...what tactics are the Republicans using? The Republicans have been putting up with the Democrat's obstruction in the senate with regards to cabinet confirmations. They haven't eliminated the filibuster rule to ram the confirmations through with 51 votes. We'll see what kind of tactics they use with Gorsuch during his hearings.
The way things look right now, 2018 will only solidify the Republicans control because there are so many Democrat senate seats up for reelection that year, with a few in states that Trump carried in November. The voter suppression won't work again?? What does that even mean? The Democrats love to crow that Hillary won the popular vote, so what votes were suppressed?
To top it all off, Trump hit it out of the park tonight with his speech, so that should have the media cranking up production of hit pieces for the rest of the week. Should be fun  
Either way, Trump might be the best thing for the Democrats, since at least they have something to rally against, even though they have no one to get behind. You have to remember, for the Democrats to start taking seats, they don't need to convert moderates or conservatives, they just need to get people motivated, less than half of America actually turned out to vote.
This is why I'm confident that ACA will not get repealed. It's a great way for the Republicans to give the Democrats something else to rally against.
The Democrats are going to realize that their constant attempts to demonize and disparage Trump are destroying their chances of being able to participate in any legislation with him. They've been using the angle that he's a racist xenophobe and playing their usual game of identity politics, but the people that supported Trump have heard those lies for over a year and know its not true. The Democrats don't seem to grasp how powerless they've become in this country, and that's due to voters rejecting things like identity politics.
Yet they seem to be doubling down on the same tactics that put them in the impotent position they're currently in. So even if they wanted to prevent the ACA from being gutted, they couldn't. The Republicans will need to come up with some type of Medicaid plan that will wean the Obamacare customers off of the government dole, but they know they'll be finished if they don't repeal it. Congress actually has this weight on their shoulders, because if nothing can be agreed upon in the party, Trump will just tell the voters that Ryan and McConnell never sent him a bill to sign.
If there's one thing that this previous election definitely proved, is that polls are bullshit.
Something curious happens though if you do this: Trump got 45.9 of the popular vote, 86 percent of the Republicans polled at CPAC approve of the job he is doing, (.459 * .86) * 100 = 39.474% Net approval rating, which is right about where he sits in the Gallup polls (actually those polls have him higher.) Look, I just manipulated numbers to make him look less popular then he's polling. I wouldn't recommend playing the numbers game if you desire intelligent discussion. The big take away here is that: the majority of Americans disapprove. That's still 7 out of 50 Republicans who don't approve. Generally speaking, a newly elected president has the approval from the majority. You're trying to marginalize his lack of popularity because he still has strong support with his base. I'm not surprised at this point. I'm sure Nazi's still support Hitler, so this isn't the best point to argue.
I wasn't making any point about Trump's popularity among ALL Americans. I was referring to the CPAC poll which most Americans would not have been aware of. The poll in no way indicates how ALL Americans feel about him, it just indicates how conservatives in America feel about him.
The narrative had been that Trump wasn't "conservative" enough to win the support of the extremists on the right. That narrative was obviously disproved by Trump's success at CPAC and the poll supports that.
As for his popularity among ALL Americans, that's really not relevant. The election was a culmination of the eight years of divisiveness that Obama reigned over. He oversaw the thorough destruction of the Democratic party, and now it's in such bad shape that the demonizing Trump is their ONLY strategy to get their foot back in the door of American politics.
The people that voted for Trump and that agree with the Republican party's ideology are quite happy with Trump's performance so far, as polling has shown. The silly notion that ALL Americans need to approve of his performance fails to recognize that his party controls the government.
That's what you're not getting here. Trump divided conservatives and it's pretty clear were not on the same side. It's very apparent that your version of conservatism is inconsistent with reality.
Trump was a huge hit at CPAC, and the straw poll showed that he's got huge support on the right.
The poll found that 86 percent of those polled approve of the job Trump is doing as president.
And to the question of "President Trump is realigning the Conservative Movement," 80 percent agreed, while only 15 percent disagreed.
So "conservatives" aren't nearly as divided as you may think.
Since the administration has been deporting illegals that have committed crimes, the families of military members won't be affected unless they've committed a crime while they've been in the US illegally.
If they have committed a crime while they're here, then having a US military member as a relative should have no effect on their deportation. They are in the country as guests, they'd better be on their best behavior.
Bob Woodward said it best yesterday. The mainstream media get their hair on fire about every fake story that comes along no matter how trivial it is. If and when they actually come up with a real story, no one will listen or care. As he said, the media have done this to themselves.
The only people that attend this event are the media and lobbyists. Both are enemies of Trump and his agenda, so why bother?
But… But... I thought Trump was Pro LGBTQ?
What has Trump done to hurt gay people?
If anything, he's improved his party's relationship to the gay community.
It still has far more to go, but he's not nearly as influenced by religion as other Republicans.
Well, Perez himself has acknowledged that the DNC may have rigged the process against Bernie, and during the DNC Chair debate on CNN a few days ago, Chris Cuomo pressed Perez three times to clarify whether or not he believes the DNC rigged the primary against Sanders. All three times, Perez refused to provide an answer.
_Democrats have been decimated in rural areas across the country, a phenomenon that has meant a slow-moving death sentence for the party in an electoral system where controlling broad geographic territory is just as important as winning votes.
"We frankly have a crisis of confidence and crisis of relevance in the party right now," Perez told the group, which gathered around tables arranged a u-shape. "We've lost touch with a lot of voters."
Perez called for a "culture change" inside the party, noting that the party has to be physically present in rural areas and that it can often come across as condescending.
"We ignored people," Perez continued. "And it's not just that people felt ignored, it's that people felt affirmatively disrespected and looked down on."
Perez, a career civil rights lawyer from a wealthy Washington suburb who spent years working in the federal government, is not an obvious ambassador to rural America. But then again, neither are most of Democrats' prominent national leaders.
At a time when Democrats are emphasizing the need to win back white working class men, none of the party's leading candidates for chairman is a straight white male.
Perez, who is seen as representing the party's establishment in his bid against Ellison, said it is the party's responsibility to make those people feel welcome.
"We heard loudly and clearly yesterday from Bernie supporters that the process was rigged and it was. And you've got to be honest about it. That's why we need a chair who is transparent," Perez said.
Sanders supporters alleged that the DNC scheduled presidential primary debates at inopportune times to prevent candidates other than Clinton from getting a chance to be seen by the widest possible audience.
Perez, who touted hiring both former Clinton and Sanders staffers, said that next time, the party should plan its debates before the candidates are in the race, "so there's no question whatsoever."_
