• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: President Trump: Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting article on Politico: White House blame game intensifies as Trump agenda stalls

"The various warring fiefdoms and camps within the White House are constantly changing and are so vast and complicated in their nature,” said one former Trump campaign aide, “that there is no amount of reporting that could accurately describe the subterfuge, animosity and finger-pointing that is currently happening within the ranks of the senior staff."
Click to expand...
They must be so tired of winning ...
 
Emily's Cat said:
Does that mean that you also don't mind sharing common cause with idiots and bigots? Or are you under the mistaken and naive impression that idiots and bigots do not exist within supporters of the Democratic Party?
Click to expand...

And of course that is good reason to vote for an idiot and bigot. Because who better to represent your positions.
 
Emily's Cat said:
None of this is what I've done. Many of the Clinton supporters have been hating on Trump supporters (not Trump himself), and have written them off as "supporting" or "condoning" racism and sexism. The argument has been made that Trump supporters are bad people, because they continued to support a candidate who was also supported by bigots.
Click to expand...

Wrong, it is that they support an candidate who is a big league sexist bigot. This shows that he is really the best to represent their interests and those interests are not opposed to sexism and bigotry.

Why shouldn't people be judged based on the person they choose to represent them?
 
pgwenthold said:
Again, I don't understand politics.

Why does this have to be?

Why can't they actually spend time working on a new bill that does something good, instead of trying to ram this through?
Click to expand...

Because they realized they can not get the votes needed to pass on any bill, the teaparty block and the block with enough empathy to care about millions losing health insurance and tens of thousands of unnecessary american deaths can not be brought together to vote on any bill that has a chance of being signed. When they knew the bills would never become law they could be brought together to vote on them. But when these things might actually happen and have consequences getting those two groups to vote on the same bill is impossible.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I have no problem pointing out how short Germany has been in their commitments. As a nation that has made it a point to honor agreements, they dropped the ball on this one.
Click to expand...




Ahem...


BobTheCoward said:
Countries are a social construct. They do not have "honesty" or "principles".

You are assuming somehow for the Americans in that country somehow have a collective principle to Europe. That simply isn't true.
Click to expand...
 
3point14 said:
Ahem...
Click to expand...

Thank you. I didn't make my point clear at all in previous posts.

Explicitly addressed in post 2509

You know the line in sweet home Alabama "Watergate does not bother me, does your conscience bother you?"

Yes! Absolutely! I wasn't even alive for it, I personally reject most notions of society and government, and I am deeply ashamed by Watergate
Click to expand...

You also left out an important detail. The older post was in support of leaving NATO under the principle that​ the government agreed to it previously. This is about an agreement agreed to currently that they can choose to leave and I wouldn't have a problem.

The right moment has not come up, but I wanted to use a sports analogy that I told my wife the other day. I don't understand how any person can root for the same sports team over decades. The team has no actual common thread over that time period. The people on the field are not the same from 15 years ago. There is nothing there that is the same to root for.

But you are correct. It is especially wrong to just say Germany when I mean the Germans that voted for their leadership. It is lazy and easy, but wrong.
 
Last edited:
ferd burfle said:
This could explain Trump's demeanor in the photo-op. Trump presents Merkel with the "bill", she explains to little Donny that that there are no dues in NATO, owed to the US or otherwise, and tells him in the nicest way possible what he can do with his bill. Maybe she points out that Germany has spent a ****-ton of money lately for war refugees while he's been trying to bar them from his country. Oh, to have been a fly on the wall...
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Besides the NATO, there could be some other source for the "bill": The military actions after 9/11. Since Germany did not (still does not have) the troops and materiel to contribute significantly on that level, we contributed money. Which is either already paid, or with a payment plan in place. The related treaties and numbers Merkel probably recited verbatim to Donnie until his poor little brain shut down.
 
BobTheCoward said:
But you are correct. It is especially wrong to just say Germany when I mean the Germans that voted for their leadership. It is lazy and easy, but wrong.
Click to expand...

Good, good. Now take the extra step of realising that when someone talks of a country, that's exactly what they mean, and stop saying nonsense about them.
 
Argumemnon said:
Good, good. Now take the extra step of realising that when someone talks of a country, that's exactly what they mean, and stop saying nonsense about them.
Click to expand...

I don't think they do. People are red Sox fans for years and years in their life (see Bill Simmons). It doesn't make sense that each iteration of the team is their most aesthetically favored team each year they watch baseball. It seems like people are viewing the construct itself as what they care about.
 
So, there's this: Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner to lead US federal overhaul

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39403746

Remind me who elected Trump's daughter's husband to something?

And he said this:

Mr Kushner told the newspaper that the "government should be run like a great American company".

"Our hope is that we can achieve successes and efficiencies for our customers, who are the citizens," he added.
Click to expand...

So the citizens are the customers, not the shareholders. How nice. I wonder who the shareholders are? Is it any millionaires, or only those friendly to Trump? Or is it restricted to his own family?
 
TragicMonkey said:
So, there's this: Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner to lead US federal overhaul

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39403746

Remind me who elected Trump's daughter's husband to something?

And he said this:



So the citizens are the customers, not the shareholders. How nice. I wonder who the shareholders are? Is it any millionaires, or only those friendly to Trump? Or is it restricted to his own family?
Click to expand...
Kushner's also in charge of the admin's Middle East peace plan.
 
Argumemnon said:
They don't literally mean "the country" as some sort of independant entity from the people in it, Bob. Come on, now.
Click to expand...

But people​ mean the sports team and not the players on it. I see a lot a similar personalities between sports team fans and Patriots.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom