|
Post by celawson on Aug 15, 2018 11:19:47 GMT -5
See, this is the thing. And while you guys are "boggled" by me, I'm boggled by the fact that you all have so much trouble accepting my position. He's the POTUS. Sorry, but really, he IS. He's not going to be impeached. Do you honestly think he's the only POTUS with poor character? Please. Whether or not he's unhinged (not all of the time), he's still got some good and smart people around him (not everyone), and his administration is doing things Hilary's would never have done (tearing up the Iran deal, staunchly supporting Israel, the tax breaks, nominating excellent judges who won't try to legislate from the bench, trying a new approach with North Korea, streamlining the EPA, funding the military generously, Space Force (no, it's not a joke), tougher sanctions on Russia, tougher on immigration (yes, they screwed up, but I do not want open borders) and more. So yes, I will support him or his admin when they do things that I think are good, and I will criticize or cringe when he's a jerk on Twitter. When I voted for him last election, I did so because the alternative was worse. And I did so hoping he would step up and act presidential. And because I was really intrigued how someone who is not a career politician would approach things. He has not acted presidential. But he is approoaching some things in a new way. I want our POTUS to have more class and dignity, of course. If I vote for him next election, it would only be if the alternative is worse. I just don't think that's so hard to comprehend. The Dems are sliding further and further left - and I laugh when some on here say it's the Republicans who've gone further right. www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/6/22/17490410/democratic-party-sanders-left-liberal-interparty-fights-sanders-socialism-clintonismIt's mainstream now for Dems to call for a single payer healthcare system (and you're kidding yourselves if you don't see how that's going to be a disaster not only in the cost, but in the quality of care and wait times for care. VA, anyone?), it's a badge of honor to be socialist, it's mainstream to call for open borders, free college for everyone, a higher minimum wage. That's the Democratic party of today, and that's not where I want my country to head. And if the only thing preventing it is a guy who had an affair with a porn star and Tweets like a junior high schooler, then so be it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2018 11:42:31 GMT -5
I wouldn't bet the family homestead on that, c.e.
Your "the Dems are sliding further and further left" -- did you watch the Reagan GHWB debate I posted in the migrant thread, where they both advocated open borders? Ever take a look at Republican health care proposals from that era? Take a good look at Reagan or GWHB and tell me you think Trump and his cohort are in the same party as they were. Hell, I'd fit into Reagan's and GWHB's party way better than Trump and a whole bunch of Republican congress critters. (I watched that debate video with the weirdest feeling -- I agreed with every word they were saying. The well-mannered crowd was applauding. Compare that to the current chants of "build that wall!" and rhetoric about Mexican rapists and gangs. Come on, and you think it's the DEMS that have changed?! I LIKE and respect a certain brand of old-school republicans. I could vote for some of them. Certainly I would do so if my choice on the Dem side were some unhinged jackhammer. I am essentially a moderate--while I lean liberal on social issues, I'm with the conservatives on economic ones. I'm voting solidly blue these days because I think it's the Republican who've gone off the rails. A lot of now former lifelong Republicans agree -- and some of them are quite prominent.
It's the Republicans who've gone way off the ranch. Sure, the Democrats have a couple of far lefties. But that's not who has had control of the party. Whereas the GOP has been utterly hijacked by Trumpism.
ETA:
And didn't the Republicans once upon a time trumpet the importance of character?
Characters come no worse than Trump, in a dozen different ways.
I genuinely would like to hear: can you name some things Trump could do/have done that would make you withdraw your support from him?
E.g.,
--if it turned out Trump had Roy Moore's issues involving 14 and 16 year old girls, with the same degree of evidence (and he might) would you withdraw your support? If, in that scenario, the Democrats ran the equivalent of Doug Jones in 2020 (a moderate Dem of good character), would you vote for him or for Trump the teen molester?
--What if Mueller proves that Trump, prior to the election, made a deal with Putin -- Putin's agents hack the emails, release a ton of propaganda on twitter, facebook, RT etc. to help Trump win, in return for the administration getting rid of the Magnitsky act and other anti-Russia policies?
--What if Trump laundered Russian money? What if the Russians have Kompromat on him and his actions with regard to Russia are the result of that?
Would there be something, anything that would cause you to say "I can't support this guy any longer and I won't vote for him in 2020, policies be damned"?
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 15, 2018 12:19:11 GMT -5
And while you guys are "boggled" by me, I'm boggled by the fact that you all have so much trouble accepting my position. He's the POTUS. Sorry, but really, he IS. Nobody is in denial about that (except maybe NT). Nobody here has ever suggested such a thing. "He's not unhinged all of the time" is perhaps one of the weakest defenses I've ever heard. Every President has had some good and smart people around him. Do you claim that Clinton had no good or smart people in his administration? Even if I agreed with all the things you think are positive accomplishments (or accomplishments), again, do you claim that Clinton didn't do a single praiseworthy thing in office? (And as an aside, I'd love to hear you explain the benefits of the Space Force to me.) As far as I can tell, there is no liberal you wouldn't consider worse. That is a boggling statement on both counts. I mean, what do you even consider "left" and "right" positions? You know that Reagan would be considered a squishy liberal who's too soft on everything from immigration to gun control by the modern GOP, right? And if you're going to point to Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders as examples of how far the DNC is sliding to the left (never mind that they still aren't really that leftist as leftists go), then you need to answer for all the white nationalists and neo-Confederates running for office in the GOP. Whether or not a single payer healthcare system can be made to work, you're kidding yourself if you think that support for a single payer system is a loony left position. You can thank the disaster that is the existing system for the fact that what was unthinkable a few years ago is now gaining in popularity. Only for socialists. The majority of Democrats are not socialists. How many Democratic Senators and Congressmen are actually calling for open borders? How many Democratic Senators and Congressmen are actually calling for free college for everyone? That one is gaining in popularity, but again, I think you can blame the GOP's handing of taxpayer dollars hand over fist to corporations and the rich for the inevitable counterresponse. You keep taking someone's lunch money, you don't get to be shocked and appalled at the unprovoked violence when he snaps and kicks you the shins. Do you really think that it's an affair with a porn star and juvenile tweets that are the problem? I mean, you don't want your country to be headed towards whatever socialist dystopia you imagine is represented by Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez. Okay, but some people have concerns about rampant corruption in the White House, Russian collusion, immigration controls turning into a clusterfuck of white nationalist fantasies, taxpayer money being pissed away on border walls and space forces, and trade wars and diplomatic ineptitude on a scale not seen in the history of the country, but I'm betting you poo-poo that as silly leftist hyperbole. (And I'm not even one of the people who thinks Trump is literally leading us into fascism... many people seriously do think that.) So your "OMG THE DEMOCRATS WILL TURN US INTO A DYSTOPIAN NIGHTMARE!" justification reads as very hollow and hypocritical.
|
|
|
Post by markesq on Aug 15, 2018 12:40:14 GMT -5
I agree with everything Amadan said, above.
So it seems there are two strong disconnects, I assume supporting each other in a way. One is how bad Trump's personality really is (only part-time unhinged?!) and how good/successful his policies are. Of course, c.e., I would take issue not just with his temperament but with the policies you like ( and the way you portray them:
-- good and smart people around him (not everyone): seems hard to take that position given the number of resignations, firings, indictments, and tell-all books that have come out of his hirings; -- tearing up the Iran deal : not sure that was a fine idea, but I get you do; -- the tax breaks : which pretty much every economist agrees benefit the wealthy and utterly fuck the national debt; -- nominating excellent judges who won't try to legislate from the bench : this line always makes me chuckle. If you agree with their decisions, they aren't legislating from the bench, if you don't they are. Not just you, c.e., anyone who uses that phrase, in my experience, takes that inconsistent position; -- trying a new approach with North Korea : which has resulted in Trump being laughed at by the rest of the world and has resulted in zero actual benefit to the US; -- streamlining the EPA : or screwing over the environment, maybe; -- funding the military generously : poor military, always scrabbling for dosh: -- Space Force (no, it's not a joke) : PLEASE explain why this is necessary or even a good idea; -- tougher sanctions on Russia : all I see is collusion and a refusal to stand up to Putin, so how you see tougher sanction I don't know; -- tougher on immigration (yes, they screwed up, but I do not want open borders) : literally no one is asking for open borders, and separating kids from their families is more than a "screw up."
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Aug 15, 2018 15:10:32 GMT -5
I have to get to work now, but I will leave you with a couple of things: On the judges thing that Mark chuckles about - Scalia (my favorite SCOTUS) did not hesitate to diverge from his own private policy preferences, and indeed thought that was crucial for a justice. I am confident Gorsuch is similar. www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/02/what-made-antonin-scalia-great/462837/And on the Space Force thing - you all do realize how much of our life in the U.S. is dependent on satellites, yes? Everything from military operations to banking to GPS etc. And I'm sure you realize how hard China and Russia are working to develop technology to counteract in-space technology? If not, here are a couple of articles that explain some: www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/united-states-needs-space-force-national-security-interest/www.defensenews.com/space/2018/08/09/think-space-force-is-a-joke-here-are-four-major-space-threats-to-take-seriously/Heck, Neil deGrasse Tyson sees the importance of this: www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=4NEcxhPh7jsAs far as Trump being tough on Russia, here is an NPR article, hardly a bastion of conservative rhetoric: www.npr.org/2018/07/20/630659379/is-trump-the-toughest-ever-on-russiaYes, Trump's rhetoric with Putin is soft. But perhaps that's his way of schmoozing. He's a businessman, after all. Perhaps he's playing the game the only way he knows how. What is more important is what our administration is doing. You know, the ol' "actions speak louder than words". On collusion - if collusion is ever proven, I will respond here. It's been a long time with Mueller now, and no collusion proven yet. Manafort is not in jail for collusion. And neither is anyone else. So I'm very doubtful it's ever going to come down to that. But we'll see. Sorry, gotta run.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 15, 2018 15:50:46 GMT -5
That's hilarious, celaw. You posted a bunch of articles about how... space is important.
Yes.
Yes it is.
Space is important.
That's why we have an Air Force. That's why we have NASA.
None of those articles explain why we need a massive new government agency to do the things existing agencies have been doing.
I mean, I thought conservatives were against expanding the federal government? Usually they have a long list of agencies they want to eliminate.
If the existing agencies that already have the infrastructure and expertise to do these tasks aren't sufficiently resourced, then maybe we should.... increase their budgets?
You know, for a long time quite a few people have quietly acknowledged that we don't really need an Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines. I mean, why do all four branches of the military have their own... air force? Why does the Army have.... a navy? Yeah, there are actually logistical reasons why we need Navy flyers and Army boats sometimes, but really, a more efficient and streamlined military would consolidate a lot of these roles into one or maybe two services. We keep all four because of history, tradition, and the vicious turf wars that would erupt if you suggested cutting any of them.
But rather than doing something hard and sensible like that, Trump is talking about creating a new "Space Force" and conservatives are cheering.
If a Democrat tried to do this, I GAY-RAN-TEE.... I would wager ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY... that you, celaw, would be the first person copypasting every single shrieking howl of indignation that would erupt across the right wing media at such a wasteful, fantastical pie-in-the-sky notion. You would be outraged at how much money the Democrats want to waste!
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Aug 15, 2018 19:46:39 GMT -5
I'm so glad I was able to make people laugh today on a couple different occasions. Maybe I should try stand up. Space technology seems like a huge and complex area to be served by a little offshoot of the Air Force. But if they can handle it, fine, handle it. Maybe Congress, which will have a big say on what happens with the Space Force idea, will decide that's the way to go. General Mattis has agreed, after much analysis, that having a Space Force is a good way to go. I'm not going to argue with him. Anyway, the actual implementation of this has not yet been determined, so we will see how it plays out. What's important, is that this area is going to get more attention, and that seems to be a very good thing. And Amadan, it was actually a year ago that Republican Mike Rogers AND a Democrat Jim Cooper, Tenessee partnered in the House Armed Services Sub Committee to get a proposal for Space Force spending authorized. It didn't work. But thank goodness some people are visionaries, and the idea has some traction. Here's an excerpt from an interview with the Republican Mike Rogers on why Space Force is necessary: www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/air-force-pays-only-lip-service-to-space-race-against-china
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2018 19:56:09 GMT -5
I genuinely would like to hear: can you name some things Trump could do/have done that would make you withdraw your support from him?
E.g., --if it turned out Trump had Roy Moore's issues involving 14 and 16 year old girls, with the same degree of evidence (and he might) would you withdraw your support? If, in that scenario, the Democrats ran the equivalent of Doug Jones in 2020 (a moderate Dem of good character), would you vote for him or for Trump the teen molester? --What if Mueller proves that Trump, prior to the election, made a deal with Putin -- Putin's agents hack the emails, release a ton of propaganda on twitter, facebook, RT etc. to help Trump win, in return for the administration getting rid of the Magnitsky act and other anti-Russia policies? --What if Trump laundered Russian money? What if the Russians have Kompromat on him and his actions with regard to Russia are the result of that? Would there be something, anything that would cause you to say "I can't support this guy any longer and I won't vote for him in 2020, policies be damned"? I can't make you answer, obviously. But I am curious. ETA: Back in November 2016, although I strongly disagreed with your optimism about Trump, I understood you to be coming from a belief that much of Trump's assholery was all for show and that he'd become more presidential. I never thought he'd grow more presidential -- I've been watching his shenanigans for years and i think he's thoroughly corrupt and a terrible human being. But I know you didn't think that -- you thought he might be more presidential. And given he'd won the election, I didn't have much choice but to cross my fingers that you weren't wrong. So if you'll recall, I didn't get on your case for voting for him in the first place. My issue is that since then, and why I've grown increasingly WTF about this, it's been amply shown that he'll NEVER grow more presidential, that he DOESN'T hire the best people, and he doesn't listen to the few decent people he has around him. He is, by your own admission, unhinged. It's really not so much your initial support (or Mikey's for that matter) as your continuing support that boggles me.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 15, 2018 20:19:53 GMT -5
I have never, ever heard a top bureaucrat say "I want the new federal organization we are creating to be slow, lumbering, and bureaucratic."
Of course they want it to be "agile" and quick and non-bureaucratic, and funding will flow like wine, and top people will flock to work there, and somehow the magic of "visionaries" will make it special and uniquely unlike every single other federal agency that has to follow federal regulations, Congressional oversight, and political dictates that change with every new administration.
Anyone who claims this is either naive to the point of mental incapacity, or trying to sell you highly profitable undeveloped real estate in the Florida Everglades. I'm not just being cynical here and I'd say exactly the same thing if it were JFK with Reagan as his Vice President rising from the grave to propose this. This just isn't how a federal agency works. No President can wave his magical POTUS wand and create a new agency that looks and acts like S.H.I.E.L.D., however much he might like a helicarrier.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Aug 16, 2018 0:30:23 GMT -5
Hi Cass. You said: and: I don't think it's meaningful for me to speculate at what behavior I'd withdraw all support, but I will try to answer your question since you've been nice to me lately. Certainly Trump is nowhere near the things you've listed. Not even close. I think these visions of Trump being so awful have been built up over the months by people agonizing over his win. He's just not what you anti-Trumpers want so desperately for him to be (a criminal that will be removed prematurely from office). I think if he were, there has been plenty of time and opportunity and resources expended to find something on him. But yeah, I would vote for a truly moderate Dem over Trump the teen molestor. (You do realize the chance of both of those things occuring are practically nil.) I just don't see Trump as the truly awful and evil man many of you on this board do. Yeah, he's a jerk sometimes. Yeah, he's unfaithful to Melania. Yeah, he gets butthurt pretty easily (which is where his unhinged episodes come into play.) Yeah, he demeans the office of POTUS on Twitter. But really, that's etiquette stuff and personal character stuff that we all struggle with, and it just doesn't bother me as much as it does you here. I just see him as a somewhat narcissitic businessman with some impulse control issues. Are there worse out there, in our own U.S. politics today? YES! I actually think he is trying to do well for our country, though his personality flaws cause him difficulty. But I truly do not think he is evil. Evil is a strong word and isn't a synonym for character flaws. (I'm not saying you called him evil, but that seems to be the level of hate for the guy) I don't think he's thoroughly corrupt as you say he is. And I do not think he colluded with Russia. And I truly do not think his private marriage and faithfulness or cheating (especially that which occured years ago) has bearing on his ability to be an effective POTUS. We don't even know if he and Melania have some sort of arrangement. It's their business, not mine. Yes, he's unorthodox as POTUS, but that's why many people voted for him. And strangely enough, he's gotten a fair amount done as POTUS. I don't think some of the things you list as awful (like putting his family in admistration positions) are really that horrible. So this stuff most anti-Trumpers wring their hands over, well, it's just not causing me to join in the hand wringing. (or pearl-clutching, as you like to call it) I shrug my shoulders for a lot of it, and then I look to see if our country has a strong defense, a strong economy, border security, is not regulating the life out of people and businesses, respects religious freedom, respects our Constitution, isn't walked on by other countries including those who support terror, is assertive against the truly evil (i.e. ISIS, NK, Russia), supports Democracy and freedom across the globe. It's late now, so I'm going to stop the list. But right now I'm saying "check". For all of those things. So, I'm good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2018 14:37:21 GMT -5
Well. I pretty much don't agree with anything you've said, with the exception of voting for a moderate Dem over a child molester. But you answered. I may or may not take on some of what you've asserted in this post over the weekend. I'm not sure it's worth the effort; I surely will not persuade you. But I gotta comment on this: No. No we do not all struggle with "etiquette" and character issues to anywhere the extent Trump does. The overwhelming majority of us are not paying hush money to porn stars, bragging about grabbing women by the pussy, calling women dogs, calling neo-Nazis fine people. We don't blast out unhinged rants on Twitter and in person. We don't tell an half a dozen (I think it's more, actually) blatant lies a day on average. We don't vindictively pursue petty grudges, we don't have decades-long histories of shady business dealings...I could go on and on. Do you know anyone who even approaches Trump's "etiquette" and character issues? I don't. And keep in mind I'm a lawyer and I've been around the block in NYC and the business world. I'm sure markesq has prosecuted some people who are worse, but they are outright criminals. This man is the POTUS. No. We all have character failings. But not like Trump. ETA: Perhaps most damning of all, Trump does not "struggle" with his character issues. He is proud of them. He doubles down on them every day and rages against any who would point them out.
|
|
|
Post by markesq on Aug 16, 2018 15:15:59 GMT -5
Cass makes a good point, an important one, and highlights the reason I'm "boggled" -- the way that his hideous behavior can be reduced to "etiquette stuff and personal character stuff." Cass points out some of the things he's said and done, and these go waaaay beyond just burping at the dinner table or eyeing up the secretary (or even banging her...). He says and does things that are damaging to the country, with his attacks on the media, the name-calling of foreign leaders. I literally do not know of one person in my life who has ever behaved as appallingly as he does. But his supporters just shrug and say, "Well, I do wish he was more presidential, but..." He's a horrible human being, by pretty much any measure.
And, as Cass also points out, he isn't even trying to be "more presidential," or behave any better. He just called a black woman a dog, ffs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2018 15:43:36 GMT -5
Every one of our presidents in the last 50 years or so has had failings, because we all do. I don't think there's one of them where you can't point to something that showed an imperfection of some kind in their character, because that is true for every human ever born. But most of them, taking policy disagreements, etc., aside, were overall decent men who, yes, were driven in part by ambition, but also by a genuine desire to do well by their country. Some had the kind of character flaws that alas, seem to go hand in hand with ambition and power -- Clinton, Kennedy, and to a much greater extent, Nixon. But they were within the realm of people I've known in my personal and professional life. Yes, even Nixon. Trump is right off the edge -- nowhere in the same room. If I knew someone in real life like him, I'd stay as far away as I could. I wouldn't represent him for any amount of money -- I literally mean that: if he offered me a billion dollars, I would not represent him, nor would I work for him. And I felt that way about him long before he ever ran for President or became a Republican. I think he's vile and morally reprehensible. Evil is in fact not too strong a word: Yes. Yes, I think he fits that definition. I feel that way more strongly since he became president, but that's because he's had more opportunity to display himself, and it's harder to get away from him. When he was just the jackass calling for the death sentence for 5 exonerated young black men or engaging in shady business dealings in NYC or ranting on reality TV, I shuddered, but his evil impact was limited. Now he is the most powerful man on earth. I cannot ignore him. When I said once before that I had felt this way about Trump for decades, including when he was a Democrat, you, c.e., accused me of bias. (It's in a thread here somewhere.) Um. That's not bias. That's the opposite of bias. I base my judgment of him not on his political party (ffs, I like and admire a good many conservatives and Republicans, and have praised and/or defended them on this forum), but on his behavior and actions over the very long term. As far as I can see, Trump has no principles whatsoever. He has no gentle, kindly, compassionate, or selfless impulses. He is wholly selfish. He is petty, vindictive, cruel, self-centered, and mendacious. I am serious -- he could implement every policy of my wildest dreams, and I would not put such a man in high office. His flaws are not the flaws that all too often go with power. His are the flaws of the charlatan, the grifter, the con man, the mob boss, the unhinged narcissist.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2018 17:57:49 GMT -5
In conclusion, I submit these tweets into evidence: That's just this week... ETA: To be clear, that's not even all the crazy tweets from this week. That's a handful of highlights. Every day, it's more unbelievable unhinged bullshit. People around the world are reading it. I sometimes have to pinch myself to believe it's really happening. C.e., I am presenting you with a challenge: to read Trump's twitter feed every day through the November midterms. Those tweets are official statements ( oh yes they are) by the POTUS you helped put into office and continue to support. As such, I think you should read them (and I am willing to bet that you don't, unless I or someone else shoves them in your face). The tweets are not the only thing I object to in Trump, not by a long shot. But I gotta say -- they alone are enough to make me believe him unfit for office.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Aug 16, 2018 18:54:57 GMT -5
Eating paper is more rational than those tweets.
|
|