Cont: The Trump Presidency VIII

Status
Not open for further replies.
There was Heaven: “Most say it’s gonna be 15,000 miles wide and that high,” Jewell said. “We don’t know whether when it comes down how far it will come, if it’s gonna come all the way or if there will be stairs. We don’t know that. But it’s gonna be suitable to each person.
Click to expand...
AND MEXICO IS GONNA PAY FOR IT!
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Next up is the U.S. Post Office which they use, at a fraction of real cost, as their “delivery boy” for a BIG percentage of their packages....
Click to expand...

I mean, I know he's usually inarticulate and says moronic things, but literally all he's saying here is that Amazon uses a company whose raison d'etra is to deliver parcels to deliver parcels for them, and that they get a bulk discount for doing so in high volume.
 
Craig4 said:
Forget about hell, she's not old enough to retire. Is she sure the owners of Fox News will be the same at the end of the Trump presidency? Fox is figuring out that it's in a bad way with no partnerships with digital providers and needs to sell off components. Does she want her only option to be Fox News, assuming it will have her? If you are a professional spokesperson, I don't see where you go from here. Maybe the NRA? They are one of the few single issue lobbying groups who still embrace the **** you strategy. For Republicans, there's no downside to not hiring her and plenty if they do. Why is she so set on being damaged goods at her age?
Click to expand...

It was reported a few months ago that she's leaving the job. The timeline given was by the end of this year.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I mean, I know he's usually inarticulate and says moronic things, but literally all he's saying here is that Amazon uses a company whose raison d'etra is to deliver parcels to deliver parcels for them, and that they get a bulk discount for doing so in high volume.
Click to expand...

He's suggesting that the USPS is delivering for Amazon well below cost price and are therefore getting some kind of backhand subsidy not available to more traditional bricks and mortar businesses - so it's more insidious than just a (modest) bulk discount.

That said, it's been demonstrated repeatedly that the USPS makes a good profit from the Amazon contract but facts no longer matter to the GOP in general and President Trump in particular. He sees this as a stick he can beat Jeff Bezos with and so he will continue to do so.
 
The Don said:
Then he should be polling around 25%-30%. Instead he's polling around 40% and even higher.

The Republican Base is actually larger than the 27% who self identify and/or he has significant appeal outside that base. Personally I think it's both. There are people who would never vote anything other than Republican (if they vote) who identify as independent for whatever reasons. There are still people who identify as Democratic Party supporters who think President Trump is doing a fine job.
Click to expand...

I just keep repeating the x% of 25,28,27 or whatever it is this month when people go "OMG 85% of Republicans Support Him". It's 85% of 27% which I think is a fair representation of his dyed in the wool base. He still shows nearly 40% among Independents and 11% with self-identified Democrats.

Obviously (well, to me) people are identifying as what party they last signed up with, not what party they always vote for. I cannot fathom that there are still 10/11 per cent of Democrats from the Blue Dog school. Even then, Trump's current 85% approval by Republicans merits an "OMG!" but I'd imagine that the Daily Bunker News in Butte is going "OMG, 89% of Democrats still don't like him." The party loyalty numbers are similar.

I think that at this juncture in a very partisan environment, the people who self-identify as one or the other party are going respond along party lines. The concentration is on the 42/44% who identify as Independent, quite obviously. And they aren't that independent. When you calculate "leaners" into the equation, there may be 10% actual Independents (and that's probably high).

ETA: Also noteworthy is how the news media covers these things. We're all aware of the shocking news that Trump's approval went up according to one poll. It plays into their narratives. No one's noticed that the favored OMG poll has Trump's 90% Republican approval eroded in one week to 85%? Because it's expected? Or because it doesn't make a good scare headline?
 
Last edited:
The Don said:
He's suggesting that the USPS is delivering for Amazon well below cost price and are therefore getting some kind of backhand subsidy not available to more traditional bricks and mortar businesses - so it's more insidious than just a (modest) bulk discount.

That said, it's been demonstrated repeatedly that the USPS makes a good profit from the Amazon contract but facts no longer matter to the GOP in general and President Trump in particular. He sees this as a stick he can beat Jeff Bezos with and so he will continue to do so.
Click to expand...

I know what he's suggesting. I was pointing out what he was actually saying.
 
The Don said:
He's suggesting that the USPS is delivering for Amazon well below cost price and are therefore getting some kind of backhand subsidy not available to more traditional bricks and mortar businesses - so it's more insidious than just a (modest) bulk discount.

That said, it's been demonstrated repeatedly that the USPS makes a good profit from the Amazon contract but facts no longer matter to the GOP in general and President Trump in particular. He sees this as a stick he can beat Jeff Bezos with and so he will continue to do so.
Click to expand...

Amazon, like other major online retailers, also allows small businesses to use their websites for shipping purposes - and I've ordered plenty of third-party stuff using Prime "free" 2-day shipping.

(And did they care much about the sales tax thing? As I recall they already collected sales taxes for every state that had a sales tax anyway...)

He's also suggesting that Amazon owns the Post - which it doesn't. Bezos owns it, and did found Amazon, which is now publicly owned anyway, but that's not the same thing.
 
Last edited:
Mumbles said:
Amazon, like other major online retailers, also allows small businesses to use their websites for shipping purposes - and I've ordered plenty of third-party stuff using Prime "free" 2-day shipping.

(And did they care much about the sales tax thing? As I recall they already collected sales taxes for every state that had a sales tax anyway...)

He's also suggesting that Amazon owns the Post - which it doesn't. Bezos owns it, and did found Amazon, which is now publicly owned anyway, but that's not the same thing.
Click to expand...

Sure, but facts do not matter one iota. President Trump is preaching to congregation who will not fact check any of his statements and in the unlikely event the facts drift into their consciousness, will chose to ignore them.

For President Trump and his supporters, Jeff Bezos is a threat to the US both from his propaganda newspaper which has made it its life's work to undermine the President and from a retail giant which is ripping off the American public by not paying taxes, underpaying the USPS and putting mom and pop stores out of business - the fact that they themselves buy loads of stuff from Amazon is immaterial. :rolleyes:
 
Segnosaur said:
So just to be clear...

To the Trump administration an individual who is suspected of domestic abuse, or has lied on their security clearance forms (Porter and Kushner respectively) should have access to classified documents.

An individual who has never been found to be a security threat, who does not have a history of lying on their security forms, but who's only fault is that they criticized the president should not have security clearance.

Tell me again why we should be so concerned about Hillary's handling of email documents?
Click to expand...

Is there a reason (other than tradition) a person who no longer works at or with an intelligence agency needs to keep a security clearance?

I am wondering exactly what does a security clearance allow for a person. Pretty sure there are different levels since i have watched a few spy movies and that makes me an expert.
 
eeyore1954 said:
Is there a reason (other than tradition) a person who no longer works at or with an intelligence agency needs to keep a security clearance?

I am wondering exactly what does a security clearance allow for a person. Pretty sure there are different levels since i have watched a few spy movies and that makes me an expert.
Click to expand...

It would likely be helpful in employment oportunities in the kinds of private sector jobs such people get. Like going to work for Boeing and losing your clearance could be a problem.
 
eeyore1954 said:
Is there a reason (other than tradition) a person who no longer works at or with an intelligence agency needs to keep a security clearance?

I am wondering exactly what does a security clearance allow for a person. Pretty sure there are different levels since i have watched a few spy movies and that makes me an expert.
Click to expand...

One of the people in question was on CNN yesterday (maybe Clapper) and pointed out that current leaders of these agencies regularly consult with past leaders for their input and discussion of how things were handled previously. Maintaining their clearance is required for such discussions.
 
In my opinion when Comey leaked information that was reason for him to lose security clearances.
 
eeyore1954 said:
Is there a reason (other than tradition) a person who no longer works at or with an intelligence agency needs to keep a security clearance?

I am wondering exactly what does a security clearance allow for a person. Pretty sure there are different levels since i have watched a few spy movies and that makes me an expert.
Click to expand...

Many key positions are switched when an administration changes, especially if the incumbent is of a different party than the previous office holder. Since there is a good chance that the administration will change again in 4 or 8 years, it makes a lot of sense to keep probable future members of an administration (or mentors) in the loop - otherwise you lose valuable expertise every time you have an election.
 
acbytesla said:
Its more about not wanting to be pigeonholed.
Click to expand...

Meh. If you only vote Republican you are a Republican. It’s a description accurately describes you complaining that you are being pigeonholed by it is nonsensical.

Hellbound said:
Republican voters, but also straight Democrat voters who class themselves as independent.
Click to expand...

Certainly. I’d suggest the number is probably a lot lower than the number of Republicans though.

Hellbound said:
I'd guestimate it's probably close to an even split: about 1/3rd Democrats in all but name, 1/3rd Republican in all but name, and 1/3rd in-between. Completely unscientific WAG based on personal experience, there, just as a warning :)
Click to expand...

Anecdotally, nearly all the people I’ve talked to that say they are independents but vote strictly on Republican lines are some flavor or Libertarian.

I don’t recall more “independent” voters supporting the Republicans ever dropping much below about 45%. The fact that 40% STILL support Trump suggests to me that is pretty close to the number of independents who only vote Republican. The number of people who report as independents but only vote Democrat is likely much smaller IMO.

One possible contributing factor is that when Lou Dobbs decided to transition for business reporter to political commentary for CNN in the early 2000’s he would always claim to be an independent and encourage people to be independents but his rhetoric was almost exclusively anti-immigrant. Before Dobbs started his rhetoric, Republicans were much more balanced on immigration policy and IMO he was the one that really kicked off the current right wing xenophobia, but he did so under the guise of political independence. I would not be surprised if a significant portion of right wing xenophobes that support Trump don’t still view themselves as “independents”
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Many key positions are switched when an administration changes, especially if the incumbent is of a different party than the previous office holder. Since there is a good chance that the administration will change again in 4 or 8 years, it makes a lot of sense to keep probable future members of an administration (or mentors) in the loop - otherwise you lose valuable expertise every time you have an election.
Click to expand...

Getting rid of experts is the entire republican plan. See what they did with the DOE. They were going to have no one in charge of the maintenance of our nuclear arsenal after all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom