• 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.

The Trump Presidency VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lexington is not as off the beaten track as you think. What of "SMall Towns in the Shenandoah Valley are full of weekenders from DC in spring and summer" don't you get. Maybe someone fro NYC driving out to the Hamptons is a good comparasion.
And, yes I have been to Lexington, Virginia . Nice little with nice scenary,and quite a few B and B's for the overnight trade.
Also something of a attraction for Civil War buffs because of who is buried at VMI and Washington and Lee College...

I noticed on Google Maps that the Stonewall Jackson House museum is across the street from the Red Hen. Maybe they are fans?

Lexington was one of the towns that began removing Confederate statues from their public places last year. However, VMI decided to keep theirs.
 
The Trump presidency is lethal to its own supporters: Farmers in America are killing themselves in staggering numbers

Reads like poetic justice:
Finances are a major reason. Since 2013, farm income has been dropping steadily, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This year, the average farm's income is projected to be 35 percent below its 2013 level.
"The current incomes we've seen for the last three years … have been about like farm incomes from early in this century," said Hurt, a professor of agricultural economics at Purdue University in Indiana.
  • Farmers are also at the mercy of elements outside their direct control, from extreme weather events that threaten crops to commodity prices that offer less for farm goods than it costs to produce them. ...
  • As America's trading partners slap tariffs on U.S. crops, those prices are set to be further undermined. ...
  • Health care and mental-health services can be critical, Knudson said, particularly in rural areas, where medical care may be scarce. The farm bill that passed the House last week threatens to undo that, she said, because it allows for health insurance to sell plans that exclude mental health coverage.
  • Such programs are even more crucial today, said Fahy, because many publicly-funded programs that were created in the wake of the 1980s farm crisis have been chipped away over the years.
GOP moralizing leads to personal demoralizing. Who woulda thunk.
 
Looks like the Muslim travel ban has been upheld by the supreme court.

From: https://www.vox.com/2018/6/26/17492410/travel-muslim-ban-supreme-court-ruling
Donald Trump’s travel ban now appears to be a permanent part of US immigration policy. On Tuesday, in an opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court ruled for the government in Trump v. Hawaii, the lawsuit over the current version of the travel ban... In a 5-4 decision (the court’s liberals dissented), Roberts reversed the ruling of the 9th Circuit Court that had attempted to put the travel ban on hold.

So Trump and the republicans can call it a Muslim ban during the campaign, Trump can tell Guilianni "help me ban Muslims", but its still not a violation of the first amendment. Yet Republican congresscritters act all shocked and horrified when the Trump administration causes children to be locked in cages.
 
First of all, the initial problems of the wall (the huge cost and ineffectiveness, the we environmental costs) are still there.

Secondly it would require that you trust trump and/or the Republicans in Congress. You may find you agree to fund the walk in exchange for DACA, only to find trump goes back on his word and cancels DACA after he has got his wall funding.
There are court orders preventing the termination of DACA right now.
Yes there are. But then, there is always a chance that it will end up getting decided on by the supreme court. Given the fact that the republicans have done their best to staff the court with right-wingers and they just voted to allow Trump's travel ban, I don't really hold out much hope should they be called to rule on DACA.
Let's what and see what happens in November. Dems could tie a DACA fix to every must move in both houses in November if they win.
First of all, the particular question I was dealing with is "why not support the border wall if it means an agreement on DACA. It was a very narrow question that I was addressing (one where "wait until November" was not one of the options.)

Secondly, it is possible that Democrat success in the midterms might allow congress to force DACA agreements into various legislation. The problem is, that might end up in gridlock, with Trump vetoing every piece of legislation that mentions it. Granted, Congress isn't too functional NOW, but it could end up being worse.
 
Here's a debatable case, should any illustrious Trump supporter wish to discuss it:

Trump threatens Harley-Davidson with taxes ‘like never before’ and predicts its eventual collapse

I hope you do realize this is like ripping a chunk out of the tattered remnants of US-manufactured mojo internationally.
Here's what I find ironic...

One of Trump's tweets says:
Early this year Harley-Davidson said they would move much of their plant operations in Kansas City to Thailand. That was long before Tariffs were announced. Hence, they were just using Tariffs/Trade War as an excuse.

So Trump recognizes that companies have long-standing plans that have nothing to do with politics, but sometimes use political events as a convenient excuse.

However, after the big republican tax cut, companies claimed they were "investing in America", despite the fact that their plans were probably made years ago, and were likely just announced in a way to try to appease the president.
 
Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment...

Imagine your goal is to ban Muslims, and you sit down to make a list of countries.

Would one not put Indonesia at the top of the list?

I don't doubt that the desire was to ban certain Muslims - they spelled it out pretty clearly. But it still sees like factors in addition to religion were at play in the list they formed.
 
On Tuesday, in an opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court ruled for the government in Trump v. Hawaii, the lawsuit over the current version of the travel ban... In a 5-4 decision (the court’s liberals dissented), Roberts reversed the ruling of the 9th Circuit Court that had attempted to put the travel ban on hold.
Anything coming out of the 9th Circuit is going to be vulnerable. I hope the process of writing & rewriting managed to make it less onerous.

But yeah it's kind of a drag.

So Trump and the republicans can call it a Muslim ban during the campaign, Trump can tell Guilianni "help me ban Muslims", but its still not a violation of the first amendment. Yet Republican congresscritters act all shocked and horrified when the Trump administration causes children to be locked in cages.
Maybe it wasn't an act. I'm trying to stop myself from thinking that one crisis means the balance has been tipped against (or for) Trump. Whatever happens in November, it will be a cumulative effect, not a single smoking gun.

What are Democrats doing to mobilize the vote? Make sure people are registered, have proper ID, a ride to the polls? If there is good turnout and people decide they want another 2 years of one-party rule I really don't think I'll want to live here anymore. I know it's a cliche but I mean it, I don't want to watch America being dismantled brick by foundational brick.

So what is the strategy?
 
Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment...

Imagine your goal is to ban Muslims, and you sit down to make a list of countries.

Would one not put Indonesia at the top of the list?

I don't doubt that the desire was to ban certain Muslims - they spelled it out pretty clearly. But it still sees like factors in addition to religion were at play in the list they formed.

And if you were trying to keep out terrorists wouldn't you put saudi arabia on the list?
 
Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment...

Imagine your goal is to ban Muslims, and you sit down to make a list of countries.

Would one not put Indonesia at the top of the list?

I don't doubt that the desire was to ban certain Muslims - they spelled it out pretty clearly. But it still sees like factors in addition to religion were at play in the list they formed.

I guess the other factors are terrorism-based, which begs an obvious question: why isn't Saudi Arabia on the list?

But Trump told us many times he wanted a total ban on Muslim immigration, so I think we should take him at his word. The travel-ban obviously isn't a total ban, but it's intention is to reduce Muslim immigration.
 
I guess the other factors are terrorism-based, which begs an obvious question: why isn't Saudi Arabia on the list?
Because it's not about the level of terrorism, but the level of vetting.

Pantsganistan could be 99% terrorists, and as long as we're convinced that the 1% in charge are doing their part to stop the terrorists from emigrating, we don't need a travel ban--just a lot of cooperation in vetting the Pantsgani immigrants that do arrive on our shores.

And this is a recurring theme, with Saudi Arabia. You may have noticed that the Saudis get a pass on a lot of stuff. And that's because, unlike some other nations <cough>Iran<cough>, the Saudis cooperate on a lot of the really important issues.

But Trump told us many times he wanted a total ban on Muslim immigration, so I think we should take him at his word. The travel-ban obviously isn't a total ban, but it's intention is to reduce Muslim immigration.
Apparently reducing immigration from countries that combine terrorist activity with inadequate security controls also reduces Muslim immigration. Trump's alleged ulterior motive doesn't invalidate the stated reason for the ban. And the stated reason for the ban is valid on its face, and well within the authority of the Executive branch. So who cares if, as a result of this ruling, Trump gets to tick the "less Muslim immigrants" box on the scorecard in his head?
 
I suspect he holds a rather simplistic view on where Muslims come from, and probably doesn't even realize Indonesia is a Muslim country.

I "suspect" that...

It was just some bigoted nonsense he came up with or some white nationalist like Sessions or Bannon told him, and decided to support when people cheered for it at his klan-esque rallies.
 
ISTR that when the list of countries that were included in the Muslim ban was first announced it was claimed that the ones not included are the ones in which Trump has business interests. I never checked the veracity of that, but it sounds plausible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom