Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
lol it's cute that :
1. You think he's going to be President,and
2. That he would even remotely have the power to do what you just suggested. Gotta love the gullible, Trump sure as hell does...

I want to see Trump as US president.
1. It will be the biggest joke the planet has seen
2. I want to see his face when he realises he is only the president, not god.

However, I can say with 100% certainty , the next president of the USA will be one of the worst ever.
 
All I'm saying is don't underestimate American people's stupidity. He's gotten way further than ANYONE ever thought. Yon can watch all sorts of news clips of them laughing at him for months and month and now he's the republican presidential candidate. Many democrats don't like Hillary and the news that the DNC was against Bernie isn't helping her now. No one ever thought Bush would get elected but there was something similar where the green party took democratic votes because people were not 100% behind the democratic candidate back then. It's time to take him as a threat seriously or wake up extremely unhappy when it's far too late...

No.

Trump is not winning a general election. Not today. Not no day. Get prepared to say Madam President.

The GOP fooled around and allowed Hillary Clinton to sneak back into that White House. Now she might want to write Trump a Thank You note.

He could win. I never thought someone who avoids reading could be president of the US but it can happen.

Hold on wait! LOOK AT THE NUMBERS. LOOK AT TRUMP's NEGATIVES. Trump needed to be fostering a coalition. But he's not adding to his numbers, he's subtracting!

P.S. Of course the DNC was against Bernie. Bernie knew he wasn't getting far in that race. He know that. Bernie was just another one of these white liberals preaching the doctrine of victimization.

When I saw him attending the mural of a dope selling drug dealer, I knew it was over.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: duffman9000
W.O.W.!
Why is this on my main feed? So much for being a Mac enthusiast site...
I'm all for freedom of speech and all, but those of us who have been in harms way defending it don't need or want to read this on Sunday morning..
I mean, it's Apple news, and not all news is pleasant.
 
China is destroying the coral reeves with their projects in South China Sea. These third world countries have no respect what so ever for the environment and living creatures.

However, I can say with 100% certainty , the next president of the USA will be one of the worst ever.

It's going to be difficult to top Hussein Obama, but I guess Hillary would do the trick.
 
No.

Trump is not winning a general election. Not today. Not no day. Get prepared to say Madam President.

The GOP fooled around and allowed Hillary Clinton to sneak back into that White House. Now she might want to write Trump a Thank You note.



Hold on wait! LOOK AT THE NUMBERS. LOOK AT TRUMP's NEGATIVES. Trump needed to be fostering a coalition. But he's not adding to his numbers, he's subtracting!

P.S. Of course the DNC was against Bernie. Bernie knew he wasn't getting far in that race. He know that. Bernie was just another one of these white liberals preaching the doctrine of victimization.

When I saw him attending the mural of a dope selling drug dealer, I knew it was over.

Don't ever underestimate the power of stupid people lol.
[doublepost=1469399101][/doublepost]
I want to see Trump as US president.
1. It will be the biggest joke the planet has seen
2. I want to see his face when he realises he is only the president, not god.

However, I can say with 100% certainty , the next president of the USA will be one of the worst ever.
Do you remember Bush's face when the planes hit the WTC? It was like oh, i have to actually work now. Well expect Trump to pass the work on to the VP. Actually I shouldn't be joking about this. We could cause WWIII.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
Sadly, there are a surprising number of heterosexual Americans who would protest against "gay marriage destroying the sanctity of marriage", while they attend their anti-gay rally with their fourth wife or husband. Who hurts the sanctity of marriage more, the gay person begging for the right to get married once, or the straight person who has already divorced and remarried numerous times? (Not to mention a presidential candidate from the party that wraps itself in patriotism, the church, and "family values", who rants about "foreigners" to rile up crowds, yet is on his third marriage, and two of his wives were not US citizens when he married them, thus making him an anchor husband.)
That man was also told by none other than the pope that he should pretend being a Christian and start acting like one. Didn't listen to him, quite the opposite.
[doublepost=1469400255][/doublepost]
I want to see Trump as US president.
1. It will be the biggest joke the planet has seen
2. I want to see his face when he realises he is only the president, not god.

However, I can say with 100% certainty , the next president of the USA will be one of the worst ever.
In the UK we have his mini me, aka Boris Johnsson. According to a newspaper that I saw someone reading, he saved all the Brits in Turkey from certain death during the coup attempt, on his first day at work as a foreign minister.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
China is so far out to lunch here. Has anyone looked at a map to see what China claims as their own? It would be like The Netherlands drawing a line from France to the UK past Germany and to Denmark and claiming all water in this area belongs to them.

Difference: China has the means to enforce their claims.
 
Is it really so bad over there, or is there only a handful of those nuts?

Just the nuts to be honest. Though as a percentage, when you have a billion+ people, that's still a lot of nuts and salacious stories to post online!

Honestly Shanghai is the safest place (in regards to crime or violence) that I've ever lived. That perception may be be skewed because I'm a foreigner though.

You have to understand that while a lot of people are highly educated, there's tons of migrant workers who come to cities to try and make cash for their families from another province. They have often received poor education (social and academic) and can't really integrate into the metropolis very well. It's a real generalisation and I don't mean to offend anyone, but there's a significant amount of truth to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sudo1996
Aside from his arguments being dead wrong, they just don't make any sense. Letting gay people get married (aside from being the right and humane thing to do) would, statistically, cause more of them to stay in long-term pair-bonded couples, cutting down on any contribution they might make to the spread of STDs.

Sadly, there are a surprising number of heterosexual Americans who would protest against "gay marriage destroying the sanctity of marriage", while they attend their anti-gay rally with their fourth wife or husband. Who hurts the sanctity of marriage more, the gay person begging for the right to get married once, or the straight person who has already divorced and remarried numerous times? (Not to mention a presidential candidate from the party that wraps itself in patriotism, the church, and "family values", who rants about "foreigners" to rile up crowds, yet is on his third marriage, and two of his wives were not US citizens when he married them, thus making him an anchor husband.)

And most chil
So because they're bigger they can ignore international laws regarding territories/borders?


Why not, the USA has been doing that for decades.
 
A secular government getting involved in marriage for tax returns was bound to cause conflict. I don't get why people worried about the sanctity of marriage ever wanted the government involved in it.

Yes, what you said, and those worried about the sanctity of marriage really should be advocating for the government to stop recognizing it altogether and recognize something like a "civil union." Then there wouldn't be all this fuss about marriage laws, Catholic (and some other sects) marriages would be heterosexual and would only involve the church, .

I'm going to disagree here. Marriage has always been a social and tribal contract, and by extension, a government institution. And, historically, the Catholic church was not very interested in marriage (church marriage was originally based on Roman Law). (References posted previously.) The Catholic Church started using the term holy matrimony ca. 14th-15th century as a way of distinguishing the church sacrament from mere civil marriage-- marriages were also, btw, beginning to get registered by governments about the same time.

So, IMHO, marriage has always been the term for social/civil marriage, and, some churches already use "holy matrimony" when they want to be formal about the sacrament. So, the problem was solved 400-500 years ago already.
 
USA and :apple: you are welcome in our country INDIA:D:)

India is still very closed to foreign investment in lots of areas of the economy. I don't think Apple will have an easier time dealing with India.

This is just what China does. Nothing will come of it.
 
We as the voters have to be very very careful about listening to the politicians and instead really learn to analyze the data out there as to how bad the trade imbalance actually is and where the problems actually lie.

Even with China engaging in protectionist policies, the US also retaliates plenty already and yet the two nations do manage to sell each other quite a bit of goods and services as well as engage in more joint ventures than our respective governments feel comfortable with. That kind of information isn't going to come from populist news sources but the less widely read business journals. Our respective infrastructures are already more closely entwined than the headlines and the politicians would have the average person believe. I should know, as an average person who looked a lot of this stuff up recently for posts I made elsewhere on the forum a few weeks back.

That's not to say we couldn't go to war, but if we did even without using nukes, the results would devastate both economies. I don't know what's behind all this saber rattling but it is certainly not in the best interests of the average American or Chinese to support it.


No no it's actually quite simple base and basic. In a nutshell it's us twisting our own nuts.
Larger companies found it harder to abuse American workers and pay them less, so they went to where the could exploit workers.

The CEO could then boast it has great margins and profits, thus deserving huge bonuses.

Wall St would applaud, and boast how your pension and 401k is in great shap and everyone shoul but buy buy.

Consumers would see how inexpensive these products are and further congratulate the CEOSand Wall St. By purchasing said products.

So we can't complain or point fingers because the problem is us.

It's so simple, base and just plain human nature that to get upset and blame anyone other than yourself is to be delusional .
 
  • Like
Reactions: lowendlinux
lol it's cute that :
1. You think he's going to be President.....
While another poster made that statement, I realize it's still early and a lot can happen in the next three months but if the Republicans get their act together and some of the stalwart hold-outs would, at least publicly, support their nominee*, and Trump does well in the tv debates, there is an excellent chance the Donald could move to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave come next January, and a lot of disbelievers will have a rude awakening on Nov 9.

*John Kasich's support would be very helpful, Ohio is after all a crucial State, but it is my belief he and others are looking at 2020 and beyond, and choose not to be associated with Trump.

Like him or not, this man has tapped into a chord of discontent, and has the advantage of not being part of the malaise that's come over Washington. Thinking human beings will realize that there's no way he can do many of the things he promises, but that doesn't seem to matter. He's saying the things people want to hear, is a doer with a mostly excellent track record of running businesses, and is not part of the current Washington establishment (Hillary's big disadvantage).

The fact both candidates' popularity ratings are lower than any that have come before, at least in recent memory, is a wild card that could go both ways, but while Trump is perceived as impulsive and a bit buffoonish, Clinton is seen as dishonest and part of all that people associate with their current dislike of government in general.

The Democrats have all the ammunition they need to paint their opponent in a negative light with all the controversial statements made by Trump, but that could also backfire if overdone. Then there are those latest Wikileaks involving Clinton and Sanders which couldn't have come at a worse time for the Democrats.

Trump has so far masterfully pulled off the near impossible (in spite of a press that is seemingly biased against him), has picked an excellent running mate, and promises change from the status quo. Collectively, all those things give him an advantage. Also the man, like him or not, is a winner, and people vote for winners.

Talk is cheap however; what we need is not just general statements about direction, but more details about the Republican candidate's proposed changes, and he will no doubt be pressured into reluctantly sharing these.

Even so, barring disruptive GOP disunity and/or a disastrous tv debate performance by Trump, I can see him winning the White House come November.
 
Last edited:
a "handful" of unofficial Apple stores were picketed and social media users encouraged each other to destroy their Apple products​

So 5 guys on the street picketing and a subreddit?

Or whatever alternative they use over there....

Add disproportionate media coverage and now you have stock manipulation.
 
Last edited:
screw China. Trump 2016.

Those islands are not yours.

Tired of American corporations fueling the enemy's of America.
 
While another poster made that statement, I realize it's still early and a lot can happen in the next three months but if the Republicans get their act together and some of the stalwart hold-outs would, at least publicly, support their nominee*, and Trump does well in the tv debates, there is an excellent chance the Donald could move to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave come next January, and a lot of disbelievers will have a rude awakening on Nov 9.
--
Even so, barring disruptive GOP disunity and/or a disastrous tv debate performance by Trump, I can see him winning the White House come November.

Unfortunately, so can I. fivethirtyeight puts the odds at roughly 60% Clinton - 40% Trump. I feel like I'm stuck on the beach with a 40% chance of a tsunami hitting.
 
Unfortunately, so can I. fivethirtyeight puts the odds at roughly 60% Clinton - 40% Trump. I feel like I'm stuck on the beach with a 40% chance of a tsunami hitting.

Five thirty eight as good as they are have been wayyyyy wrong all the way from the beginning so I would not put any clout on them this time around.
What I do know, is that Trump will lose by the great margin in recorded history.
 
It's too bad Liam's sister robot isn't quite ready. Instead of recycling old iPhones, she builds new ones. In the U.S. For half the cost. Or maybe even in each region to cut down on shipping costs and carbon footprint. That's gonna hurt…

Speculation aside, and in all seriousness, if you don think Liam is a precursor to something bigger then you're not paying attention. This is how Apple gains greater independence, lowers outside scrutiny of their labor partners, and raises their margins in the face of cheaper alternatives. The biggest obstacle is going to be doing it and not massively pissing off China and getting their products banned.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.