|
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. |
On October 31 2017 07:43 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2017 07:04 Wulfey_LA wrote:Rumor mill is that Papadoulos was wearing a wire during the last 3 months. He was secretly arrested in July and weird exculpatory leaks started coming out of the Whitehouse shortly after then in August. Papa may have tipped off the Whitehouse that he was arrested and then they started making moves and talking in front of him. 'proactive cooperator' EDIT: and yeah, Manafort is proper fucked. Lying to the FBI is what got Patreaus in so much shit. Manafort has only one thing to offer to get the FBI off his back ... + Show Spoiler + The Papadopoulos guy does sound like a much better leverage point than Manafort. I'm still skeptical this ends with big prison time for anyone. A year or two is the most I expect. I'd be genuinely surprised if anyone actually served more than a few years. So basically everything everyone did, none of it will be as bad (in the eyes of the law) as having an ounce of crack.
Honestly that's my biggest complaint against this country. Money just can't be the answer to legal problems. If you do something, no matter who you are, you have to do the time.
|
On October 31 2017 07:38 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2017 06:10 KwarK wrote:On October 31 2017 05:32 RealityIsKing wrote:On October 31 2017 04:38 KwarK wrote:On October 31 2017 04:37 RealityIsKing wrote:On October 31 2017 04:14 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 31 2017 04:10 xDaunt wrote:On October 31 2017 03:52 Jockmcplop wrote:
I don't understand how the Trump team think they can spin this in such a way that it doesn't look bad for him. He hired a fucking criminal as his campaign manager. Aren't presidents supposed to have good judgement? It's not just Trump that was fooled. Manafort was well-known in political circles nationally, and he was a major figure in the republican party. A lot of people worked with him, including Tony Podesta. You need to look beyond Trump and consider the magnitude of how all of this potentially affects the political establishment. Yeah its bad for everyone. If this is draining the swamp I'm all up for it. I hope both sides are shown to be what they are (in the more elite circles, anyway). As far as the Dem elite go, I'm sure there's dirt on them for years and if there is I hope this investigation brings it all out. The fact is, though, a president is only as good as the people he surrounds himself with. Trump is going to be shown to have made consistently terrible decisions. Lots of things that Trump does is to uniquely piss off the people opposing to him. The country is split ideologically, some people would think what Trump is doing is absolutely brilliant, others would be like "This person doesn't fit into MY definition of a president, so I don't like him." That's not why people don't like Trump. If your employee rarely showed up, stole from you when they did show up, and sexually harassed everyone in the office you wouldn't say that the issue was that the employee doesn't fit into your definition of an employee. Trump is really, really bad at being President. By anyone's definition. The man hasn't managed to achieve a single part of his legislative agenda, despite controlling all three branches of government, and he can barely utter a coherent sentence. But the question is that are all those accusations true or are they just smokes and mirror that people are forced to believe due to political correctness. This goes back to how the press was lying that trump raped people and how he is sexist and how no way Hillary was going to win. And they are a lot of people that believes in that narrative. Lots of people belong to one hard end of the spectrum that uses absolutism words like "by anyone's definition." It is important to have nuanced stance instead of going to the far end. Let's examine the accusation of Trump not achieving his legislative agenda. Is there a wall yet? Is the Obamacare repeal done yet? Is tax reform done yet? If you follow these things correctly, you know that that some of these things happened and others are in progress.
There is no wall. He specifically cannot build any part of the wall as a matter of law right now. The only thing he can do is maintenance on the wall that already exists so that has not happened yet.
On healthcare the short version is he signed a bunch of executive orders to spend 200B of government money (over 10 yrs) to raise health insurance of everyone by 20% next year and have 1 million people drop out of the market. That is the closest he has come to repealing Obamacare and replacing it with something great. Let me just reiterate that. The closest he has come is making everyone worse off and saying that Obamacare is gone (which is really stupid to basically just concede any healthcare increases are your fault).
Tax reform is the thing being worked on and you are a fool if you expect it to get done. Either they go for 60 votes because it isnt deficit neutral in which case its DoA in the senate because you will not get 8 democrats to vote for what the plan looks like AND you need to hold the deficit hawks in your own party OR you try to make it deficit neutral and the cuts you have to make to pay for some of those tax cuts (largely going to the wealthy) and the way those cuts will hurt the low and middle class of the country will make the moderate republicans not vote for it so its DoA on that approach. Basically there is no approach that does not have tax reform as dead in the senate and everything that is happening right now is merely just a song and dance to delay that moment and make it look like they tried.
|
Nice. One of the few GOP to walk away from this crap with some shred of integrity.
|
I fully expect him to get lambasted as a RINO before this is over. Republicans are putting themselves in an interestingly deep hole.
|
Well, every major Republican who speaks public truth about Trump gets labeled a worthless RINO with practically reflexive speed by apologists, so I'd say your expectations are spot on lol.
|
I don't understand why the term RINO is used pejoratively. What/who is the "real Republican" that these "RINOs" are imitating in name only?
|
On October 31 2017 09:03 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't understand why the term RINO is used pejoratively. What/who is the "real Republican" that these "RINOs" are imitating in name only?
To those who use the term?
Hard core tea party who would watch the country burn to ash before giving an inch.
|
The people who concern themselves with who qualifies as a "real man" are the same kind of people who think a term like RINO is good invective.
|
On October 31 2017 09:05 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2017 09:03 GreenHorizons wrote:
I don't understand why the term RINO is used pejoratively. What/who is the "real Republican" that these "RINOs" are imitating in name only? To those who use the term? Hard core tea party who would watch the country burn to ash before giving an inch.
Flake was instantly condemned as a RINO on this board and elsewhere despite having a strongly conservative voting record. RINO means you won't go along with the day to day Trump lies and alt-reality. Also failing to clap loud enough gets you called a RINO.
|
Practically the official announcement that he’s retiring in 2022. He’ll be 86, so it’s not totally unexpected. It will rob his primary challenger of playing back-to-back ads of his 2016 campaign spots promising to lead the fight to repeal Obamacare.
|
On October 31 2017 09:17 Danglars wrote:Practically the official announcement that he’s retiring in 2022. He’ll be 86, so it’s not totally unexpected. It will rob his primary challenger of playing back-to-back ads of his 2016 campaign spots promising to lead the fight to repeal Obamacare.
Pretty sure his brain cancer is terminal.
|
Or to be a harsh realist he is an old man who knows he's dying and the world will keep turning when he's gone so he's in a desperate attempt to mend his legacy.
|
On October 31 2017 09:20 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2017 09:17 Danglars wrote:Practically the official announcement that he’s retiring in 2022. He’ll be 86, so it’s not totally unexpected. It will rob his primary challenger of playing back-to-back ads of his 2016 campaign spots promising to lead the fight to repeal Obamacare. Pretty sure his brain cancer is terminal.
I’m waiting for a similar grandstanding announcement for a Republican Senator that’s running in 2018. That one takes political courage and not these parting shots as you cruise out the door.
|
|
|
Norway28890 Posts
I mean, there's clearly a connection between being willing to stand up to Trump and not seeking reelection. I still think it's respectable when GOPs call out Trump on all his bullshit and distance themselves from him, because it's inevitable that they will get harsh negative reactions from many people that have supported them in the past. And seeking reelection and depending on Trump's support to achieve it also doesn't excuse the political players who don't distance themselves from Trump. Better a loser than to win the Trumpian way.
|
If I could be said to be prejudiced, it'd be against rich people of any kind. Money rules too much in our society.
|
RINO was created back in the Bush years in reaction to the 'neo-con" trend. It was a really weird idea to react to democrats "the era of big government is over" with a desire to make the world a better place through fire and the sword, letting god sort out his own ofc. Now its just a shitty deogrative to real republicans who want to use reactionaries to get power and then not listen to them afterwords because they're reactionaries and don't deserve to be listened to.
|
While I can't be surprised by, and I appreciate the answers, Any chance someone who seriously uses the term answers the question?
|
On October 31 2017 08:49 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2017 07:38 RealityIsKing wrote:On October 31 2017 06:10 KwarK wrote:On October 31 2017 05:32 RealityIsKing wrote:On October 31 2017 04:38 KwarK wrote:On October 31 2017 04:37 RealityIsKing wrote:On October 31 2017 04:14 Jockmcplop wrote:On October 31 2017 04:10 xDaunt wrote:On October 31 2017 03:52 Jockmcplop wrote:
I don't understand how the Trump team think they can spin this in such a way that it doesn't look bad for him. He hired a fucking criminal as his campaign manager. Aren't presidents supposed to have good judgement? It's not just Trump that was fooled. Manafort was well-known in political circles nationally, and he was a major figure in the republican party. A lot of people worked with him, including Tony Podesta. You need to look beyond Trump and consider the magnitude of how all of this potentially affects the political establishment. Yeah its bad for everyone. If this is draining the swamp I'm all up for it. I hope both sides are shown to be what they are (in the more elite circles, anyway). As far as the Dem elite go, I'm sure there's dirt on them for years and if there is I hope this investigation brings it all out. The fact is, though, a president is only as good as the people he surrounds himself with. Trump is going to be shown to have made consistently terrible decisions. Lots of things that Trump does is to uniquely piss off the people opposing to him. The country is split ideologically, some people would think what Trump is doing is absolutely brilliant, others would be like "This person doesn't fit into MY definition of a president, so I don't like him." That's not why people don't like Trump. If your employee rarely showed up, stole from you when they did show up, and sexually harassed everyone in the office you wouldn't say that the issue was that the employee doesn't fit into your definition of an employee. Trump is really, really bad at being President. By anyone's definition. The man hasn't managed to achieve a single part of his legislative agenda, despite controlling all three branches of government, and he can barely utter a coherent sentence. But the question is that are all those accusations true or are they just smokes and mirror that people are forced to believe due to political correctness. This goes back to how the press was lying that trump raped people and how he is sexist and how no way Hillary was going to win. And they are a lot of people that believes in that narrative. Lots of people belong to one hard end of the spectrum that uses absolutism words like "by anyone's definition." It is important to have nuanced stance instead of going to the far end. Let's examine the accusation of Trump not achieving his legislative agenda. Is there a wall yet? Is the Obamacare repeal done yet? Is tax reform done yet? If you follow these things correctly, you know that that some of these things happened and others are in progress. There is no wall. He specifically cannot build any part of the wall as a matter of law right now. The only thing he can do is maintenance on the wall that already exists so that has not happened yet. On healthcare the short version is he signed a bunch of executive orders to spend 200B of government money (over 10 yrs) to raise health insurance of everyone by 20% next year and have 1 million people drop out of the market. That is the closest he has come to repealing Obamacare and replacing it with something great. Let me just reiterate that. The closest he has come is making everyone worse off and saying that Obamacare is gone (which is really stupid to basically just concede any healthcare increases are your fault). Tax reform is the thing being worked on and you are a fool if you expect it to get done. Either they go for 60 votes because it isnt deficit neutral in which case its DoA in the senate because you will not get 8 democrats to vote for what the plan looks like AND you need to hold the deficit hawks in your own party OR you try to make it deficit neutral and the cuts you have to make to pay for some of those tax cuts (largely going to the wealthy) and the way those cuts will hurt the low and middle class of the country will make the moderate republicans not vote for it so its DoA on that approach. Basically there is no approach that does not have tax reform as dead in the senate and everything that is happening right now is merely just a song and dance to delay that moment and make it look like they tried.
I won't comment on the wall or healthcare but are there any conservative posters in this thread that think the tax reform is good for us?? (I'm assuming most of us here are middle class)
If you're on the right and also middle class, how do you come to terms with this tax plan Trump is so vehemently trying to push thru Congress?
|
On October 31 2017 09:40 GreenHorizons wrote:
While I can't be surprised by, and I appreciate the answers, Any chance someone who seriously uses the term answers the question?
I use RINO to label all of the republicans who promised and then failed to deliver big conservative policy objectives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
