|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) defended President Donald Trump’s approach to race relations amid accusations that the president has fueled discord with his attacks on peacefully protesting football players and officials trying to help the millions of Puerto Ricans affected by Hurricane Maria.
“Like I said before, he’s learning,” Ryan said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday, when asked by host John Dickerson to rate Trump’s ability to bring the U.S. together.
“I know his heart’s in the right place,” Ryan added.
As evidence, he cited “some very candid conversations” ― particularly around the time of the clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August, when Trump said a white supremacist-dominated group rallying to defend a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee included some “very fine people.” The president offered ambiguous remarks about what happened in Charlottesville and who was to blame, which some in the racist movement said emboldened them further.
Trump had both “bad” reactions and then “good” ones to the Charlottesville violence, Ryan said.
Source
Is Ryan up for re-election in '18? This is just more lip service.
|
On October 02 2017 05:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) defended President Donald Trump’s approach to race relations amid accusations that the president has fueled discord with his attacks on peacefully protesting football players and officials trying to help the millions of Puerto Ricans affected by Hurricane Maria.
“Like I said before, he’s learning,” Ryan said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday, when asked by host John Dickerson to rate Trump’s ability to bring the U.S. together.
“I know his heart’s in the right place,” Ryan added.
As evidence, he cited “some very candid conversations” ― particularly around the time of the clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August, when Trump said a white supremacist-dominated group rallying to defend a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee included some “very fine people.” The president offered ambiguous remarks about what happened in Charlottesville and who was to blame, which some in the racist movement said emboldened them further.
Trump had both “bad” reactions and then “good” ones to the Charlottesville violence, Ryan said. SourceIs Ryan up for re-election in '18? This is just more lip service.
Members of the House are up for re-election every year. Speakership is every new congress. This is about preserving his speakership rather than his seat (there was a lot of talk about replacing him if the GOP lost in 2016, but they won so it got punted). He's wildly unpopular with both sides of the GOP caucus, but the movement pretty much stalls when you ask who they want to replace him (last tea party answers were like... Newt Gingrich, who isn't even in congress).
|
On October 02 2017 05:48 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 05:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) defended President Donald Trump’s approach to race relations amid accusations that the president has fueled discord with his attacks on peacefully protesting football players and officials trying to help the millions of Puerto Ricans affected by Hurricane Maria.
“Like I said before, he’s learning,” Ryan said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday, when asked by host John Dickerson to rate Trump’s ability to bring the U.S. together.
“I know his heart’s in the right place,” Ryan added.
As evidence, he cited “some very candid conversations” ― particularly around the time of the clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August, when Trump said a white supremacist-dominated group rallying to defend a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee included some “very fine people.” The president offered ambiguous remarks about what happened in Charlottesville and who was to blame, which some in the racist movement said emboldened them further.
Trump had both “bad” reactions and then “good” ones to the Charlottesville violence, Ryan said. SourceIs Ryan up for re-election in '18? This is just more lip service. Members of the House are up for re-election every year. Speakership is every new congress. This is about preserving his speakership rather than his seat (there was a lot of talk about replacing him if the GOP lost in 2016, but they won so it got punted). He's wildly unpopular with both sides of the GOP caucus, but the movement pretty much stalls when you ask who they want to replace him (last tea party answers were like... Newt Gingrich, who isn't even in congress).
The quote in the article that I'm referencing is at the end. Which is pathetic. But the one that is really unforgivable is the "He's learning." You can't be learning how to be president with literally millions of lives on the line (just talking US here).
|
On October 02 2017 05:53 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 05:48 Nevuk wrote:On October 02 2017 05:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) defended President Donald Trump’s approach to race relations amid accusations that the president has fueled discord with his attacks on peacefully protesting football players and officials trying to help the millions of Puerto Ricans affected by Hurricane Maria.
“Like I said before, he’s learning,” Ryan said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday, when asked by host John Dickerson to rate Trump’s ability to bring the U.S. together.
“I know his heart’s in the right place,” Ryan added.
As evidence, he cited “some very candid conversations” ― particularly around the time of the clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August, when Trump said a white supremacist-dominated group rallying to defend a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee included some “very fine people.” The president offered ambiguous remarks about what happened in Charlottesville and who was to blame, which some in the racist movement said emboldened them further.
Trump had both “bad” reactions and then “good” ones to the Charlottesville violence, Ryan said. SourceIs Ryan up for re-election in '18? This is just more lip service. Members of the House are up for re-election every year. Speakership is every new congress. This is about preserving his speakership rather than his seat (there was a lot of talk about replacing him if the GOP lost in 2016, but they won so it got punted). He's wildly unpopular with both sides of the GOP caucus, but the movement pretty much stalls when you ask who they want to replace him (last tea party answers were like... Newt Gingrich, who isn't even in congress). The quote in the article that I'm referencing is at the end. Which is pathetic. But the one that is really unforgivable is the "He's learning." You can't be learning how to be president with literally millions of lives on the line (just talking US here).
I think you won't find any argument even from our native republicans that Paul Ryan is a really ineffectual leader who has said some really dumb things. It's probably a literal random roll of the dice as to who would replace him though(I fully expect him to be ousted within a couple years).
The flaw with congress right now is that it has some truly atrocious leadership. McConnell is probably the better of the two, which says a lot. He also has a bit harder of a job with a 52 seat majority, while Ryan is having issues despite having a massive majority in the house.
Congress has been sending letters telling the white house not to do things, but are refusing to make legislation about those things. That's kind of stupid. (Sessions trying to start the war on drugs again, being told not to, then finally providing 0 funding for it rather than making real legislation about the issue). Hell, they can barely even agree to defund civil forfeiture.
|
On October 02 2017 06:02 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 05:53 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On October 02 2017 05:48 Nevuk wrote:On October 02 2017 05:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) defended President Donald Trump’s approach to race relations amid accusations that the president has fueled discord with his attacks on peacefully protesting football players and officials trying to help the millions of Puerto Ricans affected by Hurricane Maria.
“Like I said before, he’s learning,” Ryan said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” Sunday, when asked by host John Dickerson to rate Trump’s ability to bring the U.S. together.
“I know his heart’s in the right place,” Ryan added.
As evidence, he cited “some very candid conversations” ― particularly around the time of the clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August, when Trump said a white supremacist-dominated group rallying to defend a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee included some “very fine people.” The president offered ambiguous remarks about what happened in Charlottesville and who was to blame, which some in the racist movement said emboldened them further.
Trump had both “bad” reactions and then “good” ones to the Charlottesville violence, Ryan said. SourceIs Ryan up for re-election in '18? This is just more lip service. Members of the House are up for re-election every year. Speakership is every new congress. This is about preserving his speakership rather than his seat (there was a lot of talk about replacing him if the GOP lost in 2016, but they won so it got punted). He's wildly unpopular with both sides of the GOP caucus, but the movement pretty much stalls when you ask who they want to replace him (last tea party answers were like... Newt Gingrich, who isn't even in congress). The quote in the article that I'm referencing is at the end. Which is pathetic. But the one that is really unforgivable is the "He's learning." You can't be learning how to be president with literally millions of lives on the line (just talking US here). I think you won't find any argument even from our native republicans that Paul Ryan is a really ineffectual leader who has said some really dumb things. It's probably a literal random roll of the dice as to who would replace him though(I fully expect him to be ousted within a couple years). The flaw with congress right now is that it has some truly atrocious leadership. McConnell is probably the better of the two, which says a lot. He also has a bit harder of a job with a 52 seat majority, while Ryan is having issues despite having a massive majority in the house. Congress has been sending letters telling the white house not to do things, but are refusing to make legislation about those things. That's kind of stupid. (Sessions trying to start the war on drugs again, being told not to, then finally providing 0 funding for it rather than making real legislation about the issue). Hell, they can barely even agree to defund civil forfeiture.
The flaw of congress is that the Republican party is utterly split in 2. No amount of leadership is going to get the moderates and the tea party to work together (which doesn't mean that McConnell isn't a piece of shit)
Remember last time they needed to pick a new Speaker they ended up begging Ryan to do it because they could not find anyone else who was acceptable to both sides of the Republican party and willing to be responsible for the clusterfuck.
|
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders.
|
On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders.
Do you mean new democrat presidential candidate? That's after a primary that will start in probably late 2018, and last approximately 500 years compressed into about 20 months.
If you mean their congressional leaders, that's Trump BFF's Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. The head of the party is the DNC chair Tom Perez.
|
On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders.
2.5 years?
|
On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders.
They are desperate to find anyone they can to carry the neoliberal flag and still get elected. Bernie isn't center right enough for the Democratic establishment.
Doesn't matter how much more popular and more likely to win they are if they rallied behind Bernie (instead of constantly sniping at him) they'll find someone who won't call them out for their history of failures.
EDIT: That said I'd prefer if Bernie backed a younger version of himself more attuned with the groups Bernie isn't.
EDIT2: Kamala Harris is the frontrunner for establishment Dems and Gillibrand is also a favorite for Hillary and NYC donors. Corey Booker probably wants it more than anyone else but hasn't seemed to convince enough establishment folks to get the kinda press Kamala has been.
|
On October 02 2017 06:58 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders. They are desperate to find anyone they can to carry the neoliberal flag and still get elected. Bernie isn't center right enough for the Democratic establishment. Doesn't matter how much more popular and more likely to win they are if they rallied behind Bernie (instead of constantly sniping at him) they'll find someone who won't call them out for their history of failures. EDIT: That said I'd prefer if Bernie backed a younger version of himself more attuned with the groups Bernie isn't.
I want Hillary Clinton to run again.
|
On October 02 2017 06:58 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders. They are desperate to find anyone they can to carry the neoliberal flag and still get elected. Bernie isn't center right enough for the Democratic establishment. Doesn't matter how much more popular and more likely to win they are if they rallied behind Bernie (instead of constantly sniping at him) they'll find someone who won't call them out for their history of failures.
Bernie was basically the same as Trump though just for the left when it came to the issues.
A man with great ideals but when you looked closely it all fell apart at the seams. For all his plans not a single one had math that backed it up. It was all empty promises and guarantees that the money would happen somehow. That is the sole reason I didnt vote for him. Not because of some democratic conspiracy but because his plans were not based in reality which is the same reason I didnt vote for Trump.
|
On October 02 2017 07:00 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 06:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders. They are desperate to find anyone they can to carry the neoliberal flag and still get elected. Bernie isn't center right enough for the Democratic establishment. Doesn't matter how much more popular and more likely to win they are if they rallied behind Bernie (instead of constantly sniping at him) they'll find someone who won't call them out for their history of failures. Bernie was basically the same as Trump though just for the left when it came to the issues. A man with great ideals but when you looked closely it all fell apart at the seams. For all his plans not a single one had math that backed it up. It was all empty promises and guarantees that the money would happen somehow. That is the sole reason I didnt vote for him. Not because of some democratic conspiracy but because his plans were not based in reality which is the same reason I didnt vote for Trump.
I thought this was bull in 2016 I still think it is. Bernie was not "Basically the same as Trump" it's really hard to take someone seriously if they start with that premise.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Yeah "Bernie is basically the same as Trump" sounds like the kind of horseshit that the DNC would say. Trying to paint a false equivalency based on little more than a common tendency towards populism and a deviation from the undesirable party norm.
|
|
|
Because actually doing the job and getting them the aid they need in a timely manner without childish insults is too much to ask. A trophy will go over fine with them. Where are we now? $250bn in damages?
|
On October 02 2017 07:00 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 06:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders. They are desperate to find anyone they can to carry the neoliberal flag and still get elected. Bernie isn't center right enough for the Democratic establishment. Doesn't matter how much more popular and more likely to win they are if they rallied behind Bernie (instead of constantly sniping at him) they'll find someone who won't call them out for their history of failures. EDIT: That said I'd prefer if Bernie backed a younger version of himself more attuned with the groups Bernie isn't. I want Hillary Clinton to run again.
3rd time lucky right?
She did win last time in my eyes how can you have 3 million more votes than the opponent in a modern democracy but not win is beyond me but w/e. Her time is up now IMO democrats need someone new.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
She clearly doesn't want to step aside though. Everyone but her realizes that her time has come and gone.
|
On October 02 2017 07:23 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 07:00 RealityIsKing wrote:On October 02 2017 06:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders. They are desperate to find anyone they can to carry the neoliberal flag and still get elected. Bernie isn't center right enough for the Democratic establishment. Doesn't matter how much more popular and more likely to win they are if they rallied behind Bernie (instead of constantly sniping at him) they'll find someone who won't call them out for their history of failures. EDIT: That said I'd prefer if Bernie backed a younger version of himself more attuned with the groups Bernie isn't. I want Hillary Clinton to run again. 3rd time lucky right? She did win last time in my eyes how can you have 3 million more votes than the opponent in a modern democracy but not win is beyond me but w/e. Her time is up now IMO democrats need someone new.
Every other seat is government is decided by popular vote. But because we are a nation of states, the presidency is decided though a different system. And sometimes that popular vote does not mean the person becomes president.
On October 02 2017 07:26 LegalLord wrote:
She clearly doesn't want to step aside though. Everyone but her realizes that her time has come and gone.
Except for that book she released which might as well have been titled, "I'll never run again, so you all going on blast."
|
On October 02 2017 07:28 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 07:23 Zaros wrote:On October 02 2017 07:00 RealityIsKing wrote:On October 02 2017 06:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders. They are desperate to find anyone they can to carry the neoliberal flag and still get elected. Bernie isn't center right enough for the Democratic establishment. Doesn't matter how much more popular and more likely to win they are if they rallied behind Bernie (instead of constantly sniping at him) they'll find someone who won't call them out for their history of failures. EDIT: That said I'd prefer if Bernie backed a younger version of himself more attuned with the groups Bernie isn't. I want Hillary Clinton to run again. 3rd time lucky right? She did win last time in my eyes how can you have 3 million more votes than the opponent in a modern democracy but not win is beyond me but w/e. Her time is up now IMO democrats need someone new. Every other seat is government is decided by popular vote. But because we are a nation of states, the presidency is decided though a different system. And sometimes that popular vote does not mean the person becomes president.
I know that, I still think its a dumb system for a presidential election, if your electing a parliament sure go by states but not what is essentially a 1on1 contest for 1 man/woman to be president.
|
On October 02 2017 07:30 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2017 07:28 Plansix wrote:On October 02 2017 07:23 Zaros wrote:On October 02 2017 07:00 RealityIsKing wrote:On October 02 2017 06:58 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 02 2017 06:40 sc-darkness wrote:
When do democrats announce who their new president will be? I'm curious. Hopefully someone like Bernie Sanders. They are desperate to find anyone they can to carry the neoliberal flag and still get elected. Bernie isn't center right enough for the Democratic establishment. Doesn't matter how much more popular and more likely to win they are if they rallied behind Bernie (instead of constantly sniping at him) they'll find someone who won't call them out for their history of failures. EDIT: That said I'd prefer if Bernie backed a younger version of himself more attuned with the groups Bernie isn't. I want Hillary Clinton to run again. 3rd time lucky right? She did win last time in my eyes how can you have 3 million more votes than the opponent in a modern democracy but not win is beyond me but w/e. Her time is up now IMO democrats need someone new. Every other seat is government is decided by popular vote. But because we are a nation of states, the presidency is decided though a different system. And sometimes that popular vote does not mean the person becomes president. I know that, I still think its a dumb system for a presidential election, if your electing a parliament sure go by states but not what is essentially a 1on1 contest for 1 man/woman to be president.
I think this is called "geographical equality".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
