Trump and NFL boycott

[Lurch]

You assume that the two things are mutually exclusive.

Indeed. All an incompetent requires are a few enablers and some fellow travelers.

 

[dudalb]

President Trump is now asking, via Twitter, why NFL receives tax breaks.


edited to add...



IMO taking a knee isn't "disrespecting our Anthem, Flag and Country" in any case.

I am now convinced that lot of this Donald getting payback for his being turned down in the 80s when he tried to buy a NFL Team.

 

[newyorkguy]

Trump wasn't turned down. He could have bought the Dallas Cowboys for about $50 million (current market value $4 billion) but he said he "couldn't do anything" with the Cowboys. Instead he bought a USFL team (the spring league) for about $10 million and convinced the other owners (everybody seems to fall for Trump's blather once) to switch to a Fall schedule. And sue the NFL on anti-trust grounds.

The USFL only lasted two more seasons, the NFL destroyed them in the ratings, though they did 'win' the lawsuit (they were awarded $3.00 in damages, yes that's right, three dollars)

Big winner? Dallas Cowboy fans.

 

[Lurch]

The fact of Trump's (claimed) hand behind Pence's stunt makes the whole sordid affair all the more reprehensible. These bumbling boobs hatched a plan aforethought, going through all this effort and expense purely to stage a little production, the drama queens.

And now the tweeting Orangutan distracts yet again about NFL team owner tax breaks. If this isn't merely an escalation of the turdblossom's vengeance for a decades old slight, then it's a deflection because of the revelation of his and Pence's backfiring ploy.

Don't these idiots have bigger issues on their goddamned plates!? Like, I don't know, Korea, Iran and Puerto Rico? Or how about just getting to the *root* of the protest itself? Instead of blowing it up into SOMETHING IT IS NOT!

 

[Minoosh]

I feel like there's still some Bannon influence going on - in that counterpunches seem planned in advance - if someone complains about Pence wasting taxpayer money there's a reply about tax breaks for NFL owners. In this way there is not really time to focus on one aspect before something else is brought up. Trump could rant about the NFL on his own, but there seems to be more going on. A sort of campaign vs. a one-off venting of spleen.

It's exactly the sort of thing I associate with "strategic" Bannon. Not sure where it's coming from these days. Stephen Miller? I'm not sure Trump on his own has the attention span to sustain it.

 

[newyorkguy]

On his reality show, The Donster let the cat out of the bag:

In the fifth season of “The Apprentice,” Ivanka Trump chastises a contestant for bearing grudges. Trump cuts her off: “Who doesn’t! I do. Nobody takes things more personally than me. When somebody says something personal about me, I hate them for the rest of my life. It’s probably wrong, but I hate people.” He pauses. “Do you understand that? I hate ’em. . . . I never recover from it.” Link

 

[Minoosh]

On his reality show, The Donster let the cat out of the bag:

Well that's a revealing flash of self-knowledge. Pretty honest of him, really. Probably a lot of his followers can relate.

Putting the id in "idiot."

 

[WilliamSeger]

If you don't care how much it cost, then logically it isn't relevant that it cost any money at all.

And if your premise is wrong, then your logic fails, doesn't it. I didn't say I "don't care" how much it cost; I said the specific complaint was not "about" how much it cost. The issue is that it cost anything at all to taxpayers, which is kinda the opposite of "don't care."

All that other stuff you list in the complaint is independent of expenditures, one can complain about it even if it was free. Bringing in cost to the complaint when the cost is irrelevant is really just an appeal to emotion, to make people feel like they're getting cheated.

Except that if the cost was paid with tax money, then it's not irrelevant. It's pretty simple: Government officials are accountable for how they spend tax money, even if it's only in the court of public opinion.

I'm not the one saying we should use a budgetary perspective. I'm just telling you what the logical consequences are of such an approach, since you seem to only be able to see the emotional consequences.

Perhaps you should correct your faulty logic above before bragging about your success, but you are indeed the one looking for some "budgetary perspective" where what Pense did doesn't matter.

 

[johnny karate]

No, Johnny, it isn't all the same. Revoking an invitation to a speaker is different than assaulting them. Both acts can suppress free speech, but there's a vast difference between them. It really isn't all the same, and to treat it as if it is basically trivializes violence.

No one is trivializing violence.

The issue is the suppression of free speech, not quibbling over the methods by which it's done.

I never said it was fine and dandy. I'm just not going to get my panties in a twist over a threat Trump doesn't even have the power to carry out.

Yes, you've made your position very clear.

Again:

The devotion to free speech of a lot of people here runs about as deep as a puddle.

And? Are you reading this to mean that I thought there would be no difference if they HAD broken the law?

No, my reading is that you are dismissive of Trump's attack on free speech because... technicalities.

Whereas, when it came to Twitter, technicalities didn't matter to you. It was about the principle.

But now suddenly, principles don't matter.

Because that's not what it means at all. Nor am I saying that you can't have any concern about this. But (get this) being of concern doesn't mean it's actually oppression.

Yes, your "concern" has been duly noted.

Speaking of which, I note a bit that you DIDN'T quote from that post:

Huh. It's almost as if I didn't think what Twitter did was oppression.

Yeah, that's a sick burn on whoever claimed otherwise.

Too bad for you it wasn't me.

 

[johnny karate]

There is no threat of suppression here.


Different president? Absolutely. But this is the same guy that gets angry about government not investigating things he can order investigated. He doesn't realize he has influence on tax breaks (that don't exist).

Yeah, I really don't get this contradictory belief that Trump is both monumentally incompetent but also about to turn the country into a dictatorship. The cognitive dissonance must be exhausting.

Trump is too stupid to actually do any serious damage, so nothing he does matters.

What a sad and dangerous mindset.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Trump is too stupid to actually do any serious damage, so nothing he does matters.

What a sad and dangerous mindset.

Just take the child safety latches off the cabinet under the White House kitchen sink and the problem will resolve itself within a matter of days. Or even faster if he toddles into the laundry room and there are brightly colored detergent pods.

 

[Ziggurat]

Trump is too stupid to actually do any serious damage, so nothing he does matters.

What a sad and dangerous mindset.

Can you post even a single reply to me without relying on strawmen?

No, apparently not.

 

[Ziggurat]

And if your premise is wrong, then your logic fails, doesn't it. I didn't say I "don't care" how much it cost; I said the specific complaint was not "about" how much it cost. The issue is that it cost anything at all to taxpayers, which is kinda the opposite of "don't care."

You are not being coherent or rational. If the amount doesn't matter at all, if it makes no difference if it was $1 million or $0.01, then the entire complaint is specious.

 

[dudalb]

Trump wasn't turned down. He could have bought the Dallas Cowboys for about $50 million (current market value $4 billion) but he said he "couldn't do anything" with the Cowboys. Instead he bought a USFL team (the spring league) for about $10 million and convinced the other owners (everybody seems to fall for Trump's blather once) to switch to a Fall schedule. And sue the NFL on anti-trust grounds.

The USFL only lasted two more seasons, the NFL destroyed them in the ratings, though they did 'win' the lawsuit (they were awarded $3.00 in damages, yes that's right, three dollars)

Big winner? Dallas Cowboy fans.

Correct, but Donald probably somehow blames the NFL for his not being an owner.

 

[phiwum]

Can you post even a single reply to me without relying on strawmen?

No, apparently not.

Exaggeration for humorous effect is not a fallacy. It's a joke.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Meadmaker]

You are not being coherent or rational. If the amount doesn't matter at all, if it makes no difference if it was $1 million or $0.01, then the entire complaint is specious.

Personally, the needless funds expenditure doesn't bother me. It costs money to transport presidents and vice presidents around the country. Sometimes they go for political purposes. That's part of their job. No big deal. I used to work right next to an air force base. During election years, we got several good looks at Air Force One, as presidents Bush and Obama came into Detroit to campaign. (2004 and 2012) They often used the military airport on the east side rather than the civilian airport on the west side.

s
MY objection is with the nature of the stunt itself. One second string quarterback decided to stage his protest, and the outrage machine got all worked up about it. (This time it was the right wing outrage machine. Other times it's the left wing outrage machine.) A few others joined in, but then President Trump got involved, and suddenly it was big news, and players started taking sides. Now Pence doesn't just comment on it; he stages a political stunt. He manufactures an opportunity to demonstrate his outrage.

You go, Mike! Tell those people just how outraged you are! Make sure the cameras are well positioned so that people can see your outrage clearly. That's important. You want to look good on camera in case you want to run that clip in your 2024 presidential campaign. Mike Pence bravely stood up to a bunch of football players.

So you have a bunch of overpaid celebrities boring people with their political views like they were on some sort of awards show or something, and instead of just letting it alone, Trump and Pence draw as much attention as they can to it. And, who benefits? Is the country better off?

 

[johnny karate]

Can you post even a single reply to me without relying on strawmen?

No, apparently not.

Yes, we certainly have that:

Yeah, I really don't get this contradictory belief that Trump is both monumentally incompetent but also about to turn the country into a dictatorship.

Nope, no strawmen there at all.

But your hypocrisy aside, BobTheCoward quite clearly stated that while the action might be objectionable, the fact that it's Trump renders it somehow harmless:

There is no threat of suppression here.

Different president? Absolutely.

And your immediate response was to agree with what he said.

So what are people supposed to think, if not that you believe what Trump does doesn't matter?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The same argument could be used to say that "Stunt or not, the 49ers upstaged Peyton".

I think Peyton will get over it.

Sans Pence, the 49s would not have upstaged Manning, your argument fails.

 

[jnelso99]

Just take the child safety latches off the cabinet under the White House kitchen sink and the problem will resolve itself within a matter of days. Or even faster if he toddles into the laundry room and there are brightly colored detergent pods.

Someone on Twitter said that a Chinese finger trap would bring down this administration in a day.

 

[dudalb]

If the NFL adapts a mandatory standing rule,be prepared for a massive protest the first Sunday after it is imposed.
The Players union will be up in arms about it.