The Trump Presidency

zitothebrave said:
BTW we should consider the worst aspect of Trump's presidency is the **** reign of FCC chair and Verizon shill Ajit Pai.

Just want to leave that here. That's all.
Click to expand...

I recall thethe trying to argue that ending net neutrality was a good thing....
 
Some people still believe it. They don't even understand where we could be if we had internet equal to what the American Consumer pays for it. Wish we had internet more like South Korea, or evne Canada.
 
A meaningful conversation:

Cenk Uygur and 26 others follow
Bernie Sanders
@SenSanders
·
9h
Tonight the House acted to:

✓ Protect workers from being illegally fired for union activities
✓ Strengthen collective bargaining
✓ Undo “Right to Work for Less" laws
✓ Defend the right to strike

This is an important step to leveling the playing field for working people.

I think it important to recognize that in spite of (R) PR -- the House is doing business other than focusing on Trump

Many point to the demise of American economy to 1981 Reagan war on the Air Traffic Controllers union. Thereby setting the stage for eradicating the engine that moved people before not granted access to the middle class - to the middle class.
Witness, something as taken for granted as the apprentice programs put in place by labor unions.
Unions were not all about wages.
 
zitothebrave said:
Some people still believe it. They don't even understand where we could be if we had internet equal to what the American Consumer pays for it. Wish we had internet more like South Korea, or evne Canada.
Click to expand...



I **** you not lobbyists for big internet providers claims there is no market for that high speed internet.
 
Runnin said:
Pelosi tearing up the speech during the actual speech would have been the horrible behavior she's being accused of. She waited until the liar stopped lying.

What law did she break?
Click to expand...

This is a legalistic argument. It's based on the idea that if it's legal it must not be bad behavior. By that logic, Trump's attempt to get the Ukraine to launch an investigation against a political opponent by threatening to withhold aid isn't bad behavior because it wasn't a crime. Of course it was bad behavior. A politician can act absolutely horribly and it not be illegal.

Pelosi's tearing up the speech was absolute nonsense. Was it on the level of other things that have happened over the last several years? No. However, it was a highly visible and absolutely ridiculous act. Same thing with Trump refusing to shake hands. It's so petty and ridiculous and serves absolutely no point.
 
In our daily dose of ridiculous and utterly silly stunts, Rep. Matt Gaetz filed an ethics complaint against Pelosi for tearing up the speech. Just when I think levels of pettiness have reached their maximum, new worlds of pettiness are discovered.
 
Gaetz is a pompous grandstanding ass. He plays well with Trumpettes. If you think Pelosi is improper for tearing up a paper, this prick is borderline criminal in his arrogance.
 
zitothebrave said:
Gaetz is a pompous grandstanding ass. He plays well with Trumpettes. If you think Pelosi is improper for tearing up a paper, this prick is borderline criminal in his arrogance.
Click to expand...

This crap wont stop until supporters of political parties turn on people for engaging in this behavior. Sadly right now it's cheered on. It's hyper tribal. The actions of anyone in my tribe are a priori correct while the actions of those not of my tribe are a priori wrong.
 
striker42 said:
It's hyper tribal. The actions of anyone in my tribe are a priori correct while the actions of those not of my tribe are a priori wrong.
Click to expand...

The idea that the Democratic Party is always in lockstep around its leaders, much less "anyone in my tribe," shows such a fundamental misapprehension of reality that it is hard to take seriously. You sound like someone disillusioned by the ****show that is the GOP and is assuming the Dems operate the same way. "Loyalty" is a core conservative value; it is not a core liberal value.
 
Metaphysicist said:
The idea that the Democratic Party is always in lockstep around its leaders, much less "anyone in my tribe," shows such a fundamental misapprehension of reality that it is hard to take seriously. You sound like someone disillusioned by the ****show that is the GOP and is assuming the Dems operate the same way. "Loyalty" is a core conservative value; it is not a core liberal value.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about loyalty to individuals (though I do think your assessment of loyalty doesn't take into account the effect a sitting president has on their party). I'm talking about the basic human instinct of tribalism. People tend to identify themselves as members of different groups and will treat people different based on whether or not they're a member of that group.

Within the group itself, it's not about loyalty. In the context of the tribe, you can disagree with other members, even punish members for conduct you view detrimental to the tribe. However, when you place members of your tribe up against members of another tribe, people will virtually always side with their own tribe. They'll go to extreme lengths to justify what their tribe member does while condemning the member of the other tribe.

One of the reasons I like this example of the State of the Union is you have two people each behaving childishly on the same stage. It's a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Trump refuses to shake Pelosi's hand and Republicans love it. They think the disrespect was completely justified. These same people are then outraged when Pelosi disrespects Trump by tearing up the speech. Dems see it in reverse. They think Trump was acting childish by refusing Pelosi's professional act of offering to shake Trump's hand. They see Trump's rejection as unwarranted disrespect. They then see Pelosi's tearing up of the speech as a completely justified act of disrespect.

It's not about whether or not Dems are loyal to Pelosi. Every one of them will side with Pelosi when it's her vs. Trump. And every Rep will side with Trump when it's him vs. Pelosi.

My point is I wish people would take a step back, recognize when their people are behaving badly, and hold them accountable.
 
I dont give two ****s that Trump didnt shake her hand. Just offering by Pelosi was more than he deserved. The weird thing is how often Trump violates the law by ripping up his own papers.
 
cajunrevenge said:
I think he meant Democrat. Next years SOTU is going to be something regardless of who wins the Presidency.
Click to expand...

He MAY have meant that but what if he didn't? I have not been on the Chicken Little Brigade on his T's true long term plans but can we as Americans afford to take the chance that this wasn't just a Freudian slip? If not at what point do we have to actually pay attention to these people?
 
striker42 said:
I'm not talking about loyalty to individuals (though I do think your assessment of loyalty doesn't take into account the effect a sitting president has on their party). I'm talking about the basic human instinct of tribalism. People tend to identify themselves as members of different groups and will treat people different based on whether or not they're a member of that group.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the same kind of loyalty I'm describing. "Group loyalty" and "Respect for authority" are conservative values. They are not liberal values. This is not meant as a criticism, but just an observation of reality. That you think this is just how everyone normally thinks is part of why you are a conservative, albeit apparently a disillusioned one at the moment. Not that liberals and conservatives don't partake in the other side's values to some extent (they do), but it just isn't true that everyone thinks the same and values the same things to the same degree.

Here's a good article that goes more into this: (link)

striker42 said:
It's not about whether or not Dems are loyal to Pelosi. Every one of them will side with Pelosi when it's her vs. Trump. And every Rep will side with Trump when it's him vs. Pelosi.
Click to expand...

But these are not the same thing. You are just assuming "tribalism" as a premise and then logic'ing out the consequences, rather than actually looking at the reality of the situation. Republicans who don't support Trump have been exiled from the party. On the other hand, there are no consequences for the Dems who didn't vote to impeach. Dems were free to vote their conscience. Joe Manchin votes with Trump all the time. If Dems had the kind of party discipline you imagine, we'd be 10 years into having a public option already.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
He MAY have meant that but what if he didn't? I have not been on the Chicken Little Brigade on his T's true long term plans but can we as Americans afford to take the chance that this wasn't just a Freudian slip? If not at what point do we have to actually pay attention to these people?
Click to expand...


I totally believe they intend to cheat their way to stay in power longer than 4 more years but they started a coordinated talking point about retaking the House at this time. Most obvious sign is Trump having a hissy fit about Pence planning for a 2024 run.
 
cajunrevenge said:
I think he meant Democrat. Next years SOTU is going to be something regardless of who wins the Presidency.
Click to expand...

Can we have the president give it from the Oval Office or somewhere private so we don’t have to endure a room full of jackasses standing up and down clapping over and over, turning what should be a 25 minute speech into an hour and 40 minute tooth pulling? I gave up on the thing around 9:25 pm...
 
striker42 said:
This is a legalistic argument. It's based on the idea that if it's legal it must not be bad behavior. By that logic, Trump's attempt to get the Ukraine to launch an investigation against a political opponent by threatening to withhold aid isn't bad behavior because it wasn't a crime. Of course it was bad behavior. A politician can act absolutely horribly and it not be illegal.

Pelosi's tearing up the speech was absolute nonsense. Was it on the level of other things that have happened over the last several years? No. However, it was a highly visible and absolutely ridiculous act. Same thing with Trump refusing to shake hands. It's so petty and ridiculous and serves absolutely no point.
Click to expand...
That was my point. Trump does unruly and inappropriate things all the time. This act was certainly no worse than the BS he spouts on a daily basis in the guise of Presidential communication.

She had every right to show her disgust for his speech full of lies by tearing it up. Bravo and good for her.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top