Trump nominated for Nobel Peace Prize by Norwegian official, citing Israel-UAE peace deal

[laylalex 7,247]

4 hours ago, Neonred said:

Heads are exploding in the MDL.

I honestly wouldn't have known unless it was mentioned here. I watched the news much of the morning on the Evil Evil MSNBC and it wasn't mentioned once. It's kind of not a big deal, as has been stated repeatedly, but then undermined a little repeatedly? 🤷‍♀️

6 hours ago, Dashinka said:

So facilitating or at the very least helping out the peace process in the Middle East is not an achievement?

Absolutely! Even Joe Biden agrees.

2 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

I'm proud of you.  You spoke your mind about what you don't like about an elected leader, regardless what any of us might say about your opinion.  Good on you.  I tend to agree with your assessment, except I am unsure what the bold part refers to?

What it refers to is based on my own experience living in the UK during 2005-6, and then visiting many times in the period between then and the 2008 election. I was in the UK on Election Day and voted absentee. It was still a time when anti-Bush sentiment was running high, and I had more than one person say something rude to me about how being American meant I was somehow complicit in the deaths of British people serving abroad. America under Bush was seen as being the Big Bad, and it seemed like nothing could salvage that image.

 

And then along comes Obama. Because he wasn't Bush and seemed to cleave to some European centerish type of ideology, he was seen as AMAZING and somehow above reproach. I was told I should be proud to live in a country that might be led by such a man. And I would ask, why exactly? What do any of us know of him? I wasn't against him per se, but I knew little about him, even when I read about him in the UK and US press. What it looked like to me was people projecting onto Obama what they wanted to see -- as somehow ending the wars, and bringing this amorphous "hope" thing. Honestly, anyone might have slotted into that role who was as much of a blank slate as he seemed to be. Hillary, well, everyone knew who she was, and she didn''t represent change, or hope, or whatever. 

 

I will be honest: I did not vote for Obama in 2008 in the primary. I was super turned off by his supporters, who I saw a sort of unthinking and slavish devotion in that turned me off. (See also: Bernie, Trump. And yes, #notallberniesupporters #notalltrumpsupporters.) I also didn't think McCain was the right person for the job at that time. I thought carefully about whether or not to vote for anyone at the top of the ticket and voted my heart. (And it is a secret ballot so there. ) Eventually I changed my mind about Obama and I think he was an overly cautious, well-intentioned executive who had some successes and some failures after I got more exposure to his governing style. I know you will disagree, and that is okay.

 

Wow that's a lot more than I've written here in a while, but I've been writing a lot today, must be the hot tubbing relaxing me.  

[Boiler 43,434]

You said Europe but then only mentioned UK, what about Europeans?

[TBoneTX 43,058]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

what about Europeans?

They're all the same to us mere Colonists.

[laylalex 7,247]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

You said Europe but then only mentioned UK, what about Europeans?

Fair enough. I did consume some European media as well, primarily Le Monde but I did read Der Spiegel's English language output which I hate-read as overly fawning. If anything, I think they were worse than the UK in thinking Obama was the second coming.

 

Okay, I also read Hello! which is pan-European when it comes to royalty coverage but I do not recall any deep thought pieces about Obama in there.  

[Steeleballz 7,550]

16 hours ago, Boiler said:

You said Europe but then only mentioned UK, what about Europeans?

 

   They collectively won the nobel peace price in 2012.

[laylalex 7,247]

1 minute ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   They collectively won the nobel peace price in 2012.

So that begs the question: if a person is not allowed to nominate himself or herself, and the Nobel nominating committee is primarily European, isn't that a violation of the nomination process?

 

 

Also I discovered I was wrong about Obama and Hello! Magazine. https://www.hellomagazine.com/brides/2020090796696/michelle-barack-obama-wedding-photos-marriage/

[Steeleballz 7,550]

3 minutes ago, laylalex said:

So that begs the question: if a person is not allowed to nominate himself or herself, and the Nobel nominating committee is primarily European, isn't that a violation of the nomination process?

 

 

Also I discovered I was wrong about Obama and Hello! Magazine. https://www.hellomagazine.com/brides/2020090796696/michelle-barack-obama-wedding-photos-marriage/

 

    Looks like they were all in on the joke.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

17 hours ago, laylalex said:

What it refers to is based on my own experience living in the UK during 2005-6, and then visiting many times in the period between then and the 2008 election. I was in the UK on Election Day and voted absentee. It was still a time when anti-Bush sentiment was running high, and I had more than one person say something rude to me about how being American meant I was somehow complicit in the deaths of British people serving abroad. America under Bush was seen as being the Big Bad, and it seemed like nothing could salvage that image.

 

And then along comes Obama. Because he wasn't Bush and seemed to cleave to some European centerish type of ideology, he was seen as AMAZING and somehow above reproach. I was told I should be proud to live in a country that might be led by such a man. And I would ask, why exactly? What do any of us know of him? I wasn't against him per se, but I knew little about him, even when I read about him in the UK and US press. What it looked like to me was people projecting onto Obama what they wanted to see -- as somehow ending the wars, and bringing this amorphous "hope" thing. Honestly, anyone might have slotted into that role who was as much of a blank slate as he seemed to be. Hillary, well, everyone knew who she was, and she didn''t represent change, or hope, or whatever. 

 

I will be honest: I did not vote for Obama in 2008 in the primary. I was super turned off by his supporters, who I saw a sort of unthinking and slavish devotion in that turned me off. (See also: Bernie, Trump. And yes, #notallberniesupporters #notalltrumpsupporters.) I also didn't think McCain was the right person for the job at that time. I thought carefully about whether or not to vote for anyone at the top of the ticket and voted my heart. (And it is a secret ballot so there. ) Eventually I changed my mind about Obama and I think he was an overly cautious, well-intentioned executive who had some successes and some failures after I got more exposure to his governing style. I know you will disagree, and that is okay.

 

Wow that's a lot more than I've written here in a while, but I've been writing a lot today, must be the hot tubbing relaxing me.  

Thanks for clearing it up.  I have never paid any attention to what is going on in the UK, never really cared what their opinion of the US is.

 

The thing about not voting for one of the "winnable" candidates is that your vote, while honest and thoughtful, is essentially wasted.  At least it will be until we reach a point in our collective frustration where an independent or libertarian candidate actually has a chance of winning.  Not that I did any better; I simply did not vote, so essentially mine was wasted as well.  Didn't vote in 2016, either.  I happen to think Trump is a bully, and a narcissist, and a few other frustrating things that aren't worth typing about.  

 

And just as McCain wasn't the right person to lead the country, I feel the same way about Biden today.  He had 40 plus years to make changes, and did little to nothing.  And as much as I don't like Trump as a person, it can clearly be shown that he HAS done quite a few things that are good for our country.  He might be a rough-and-tumble NYC contractor become president, even though I thought his run was at first a joke, then a publicity stunt, I have been impressed with the results.  And THAT is why I bugged you to share why you thought differently about his results (not him, the person), because I am sure that in spite of the grief we give each other at times, we probably want many of the same things for our country.  I find that even with die-hard leftists that would sell their own mother to be rid of Trump, when we get past the politics and start talking about what is good for we the people, we actually agree on many things.  Never all, but many.  

 

Putting the "party lines" aside and talking about what we want, what is good for us is where it's at.  I'm not a republican and there is no way in hell I would ever claim to be a democrat with the last 100 years of history of their leadership.  

 

One of these days, before I die, I hope to see a candidate that I can actually vote for with all my heart, who embraces at least 55% of what I feel is right for America.  And I think only an independent or a libertarian can accomplish that feat.  Our two main parties are terrible.

 

 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Trump nominated for a second Nobel Peace Prize. 

 

Quote

Trump Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize for Kosovo-Serbia Agreement

 

Quote

 

President Donald Trump was nominated Friday for the Nobel Peace Prize, the second such nomination this week.

Magnus Jacobsson, a member of Sweden’s national legislature, said he submitted the nomination for the Trump administration and the governments of Kosovo and Serbia “for their joint work for peace and economic development, through the cooperation agreement signed in the White House.”

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize-for-kosovo-serbia-agreement_3496285.html

 

Couldn't care less about the useless prize, but I'm all in on watching the triggering. Trump has done far more for peace in a mere 3 and a half+ years than the last several presidents combined.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,315]

2 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

Trump nominated for a second Nobel Peace Prize. 

 

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize-for-kosovo-serbia-agreement_3496285.html

 

Couldn't care less about the useless prize, but I'm all in on watching the triggering. Trump has done far more for peace in a mere 3 and a half+ years than the last several presidents combined.

Trump could cure cancer, convince all Palestinians to convert to Judaism and erase all nuclear weapons from the world and they would never give him that worthless prize

[Steeleballz 7,550]

4 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Trump could cure cancer, convince all Palestinians to convert to Judaism and erase all nuclear weapons from the world and they would never give him that worthless prize

 

   I know what you're getting at, but why would convincing Palestinians to change their religion be worthy of a peace prize?  

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,315]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   I know what you're getting at, but why would convincing Palestinians to change their religion be worthy of a peace prize?  

Or convert all Israeli to Islam. Either would settle a lot of problems.  They could all meet in the middle all become atheist 

[Divided States 33]

Working so hard to achieve a peace deal while committing a century crime on the Americans which costs tons of lives, Nobel Peace Prize? Sounds about right.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

56 minutes ago, Divided States said:

Working so hard to achieve a peace deal while committing a century crime on the Americans which costs tons of lives, Nobel Peace Prize? Sounds about right.

How could Trump commit a century crime?  Doesn't that take about 100 years to accomplish?

Edited September 11, 2020 by Voice of Reason

[Boiler 43,434]

20 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

How could Trump commit a century crime?  Doesn't that take about 100 years to accomplish?

i think it was a reference to Obama. He was awarded the prize.