|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On April 13 2019 05:23 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2019 05:16 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 13 2019 05:09 IyMoon wrote:
So after the WH comes out and says the dumping if immigrants in sanctuary cities saying it was considered and then rejected. Trump tweets out that that is still being considered.
The WH is a well oiled machine of not knowing how to stay on message Have you considered it's intentional? Ascribing intent to Trump’s tweets is a fools errand. The only thing they are good for is figuring out what TV show he is watching at the given time.
You're familiar with Trump. One of the few things he's "good" at is playing people off of each other. Surely as someone who follows this closely you've noticed he commonly puts at least 2 people with contrary but overlapping positions in charge of things then goes with the solution he prefers?
This isn't an accident. It might be chaotic, unpredictable, and potentially catastrophic as a presidential strategy, but it's most definitely intentional.
Saying completely contradictory things — even on tape/the record — is a part of that. It's more checkers than 7d chess, but it's not an accident.
On April 13 2019 05:23 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2019 05:16 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 13 2019 05:09 IyMoon wrote:
So after the WH comes out and says the dumping if immigrants in sanctuary cities saying it was considered and then rejected. Trump tweets out that that is still being considered.
The WH is a well oiled machine of not knowing how to stay on message Have you considered it's intentional? Of course it's intentional. The Democrat response to it has been predictably terrible. They look like massive hypocrites when they promote open borders policies and massive benefits for illegals and then object to the illegals being dumped in their communities.
I think you should let this go, with me anyway, until you have a deployment date. 
|
You really don't get it? People explaining it to you and you just don't understand....
Example 1) Trump: We are working closely with cities that have expressed an interest in immigration to house people caught crossing the boarder while we work on their legal status.
Example 2) Trump: We are going to dump people in sanc cities because I want to stick it to democrats.
Sure, same thing is done in the grand scheme of things but far different.
Edit- I should not have done the personal attack, my bad
|
On April 13 2019 05:34 IyMoon wrote:
You really don't get it? People explaining it to you and you just don't understand....
Example 1) Trump: We are working closely with cities that have expressed an interest in immigration to house people caught crossing the boarder while we work on their legal status.
Example 2) Trump: We are going to dump people in sanc cities because I want to stick it to democrats.
Sure, same thing is done in the grand scheme of things but far different.
Let me give you another example
Example 1) Moon: xDaunt, you're being a moron.
Example 2) Moon: xDaunt, hey man you might not being seeing where I am coming from and why people are mad.. Let me try to explain.
Don't get me wrong, I am calling you a moron in the grand scheme of things both ways, but they are so different He gets it but pretends not to because that lets him 'stuck it to the libs' some more.
|
On April 13 2019 05:30 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2019 05:27 IyMoon wrote:On April 13 2019 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On April 13 2019 05:16 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 13 2019 05:09 IyMoon wrote:
So after the WH comes out and says the dumping if immigrants in sanctuary cities saying it was considered and then rejected. Trump tweets out that that is still being considered.
The WH is a well oiled machine of not knowing how to stay on message Have you considered it's intentional? Of course it's intentional. The Democrat response to it has been predictably terrible. They look like massive hypocrites when they promote open borders policies and massive benefits for illegals and then object to the illegals being dumped in their communities. Look at those silly democrats, not wanting the executive to use people as political pawns! Silly silly That's the thing you're not getting.... Think for a second, I don't give a shit if they started locating these people into communities that wanted them if they had a good motive behind it. Owning the libs isn't a good motive, it's Trump being a dick and using poor people in order to do it. Did you get that? Did you understand why people are mad? People are mad because they are mindlessly buying a stupid talking point. Think about it from the perspective of the illegal alien who is crossing the border today. Where do you think he wants to go? The liberal sanctuary city that won't report him and is also willing to provide him all sorts of government-funded benefits, or some other city where he's far more likely to be deported and that will not provide him benefits?
Assuming you're not seeking asylum. I'd go where I have connections, somewhere I have friends or family to get me set up.
|
Apparently the reason trump is firing all his DHS people is that they were refusing to do illegal things. There have been many similar reports of trumps people ignoring or refusing his orders. Hopefully this issue boils over sometime soon so we can get on with impeachment.
|
On April 13 2019 06:04 Doodsmack wrote:Apparently the reason trump is firing all his DHS people is that they were refusing to do illegal things. There have been many similar reports of trumps people ignoring or refusing his orders. Hopefully this issue boils over sometime soon so we can get on with impeachment. https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1116787246303195136
You really get the sense that the rule of law matters to these folks.
|
On April 13 2019 06:04 Doodsmack wrote:Apparently the reason trump is firing all his DHS people is that they were refusing to do illegal things. There have been many similar reports of trumps people ignoring or refusing his orders. Hopefully this issue boils over sometime soon so we can get on with impeachment. https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1116787246303195136
I don't think that's quite how the story ends.
If there was going to be impeachment it would have happened already imo. I suppose there's a second bite at the apple if Trump get's a second term but I presume that's not what your suggesting.
There's nothing about firing DHS folks for refusing to break the law (presuming this is how it shakes out in a court) that even phases his supporters so the political calculus for impeachment stays the same as it ever was.
|
Northern Ireland26523 Posts
Also to anyone who doesn’t have a particular dog in this squabble, it also invalidates other rationales anyway.
‘Hey I’m going to use people as a political weapon’ just makes the already obviously bullshit ‘oh it’s because we actually care about sexual trafficking’ arguments hold even less water.
|
On April 13 2019 06:15 Wombat_NI wrote:
Also to anyone who doesn’t have a particular dog in this squabble, it also invalidates other rationales anyway.
‘Hey I’m going to use people as a political weapon’ just makes the already obviously bullshit ‘oh it’s because we actually care about sexual trafficking’ arguments hold even less water.
It feels like people are stumped on what to do about a political contingency that simply doesn't care about accusations of hypocrisy and managed to seize the white house.
Particularly in the face of a justice (social in many ways) and political system incapable of holding said contingency accountable for the consequences of their actions or hypocrisy in court or in public.
|
If he tells congress the president told them to break the law and he would pardon them afterwards, that could be a problem. That isn't something that will go away. I doubt it leads to impeachment on its own, but it will make it harder for Republicans to counter the Democrat's pushes for investigations.
|
On April 13 2019 06:27 Plansix wrote:
If he tells congress the president told them to break the law and he would pardon them afterwards, that could be a problem. That isn't something that will go away. I doubt it leads to impeachment on its own, but it will make it harder for Republicans to counter the Democrat's pushes for investigations.
I agree with all that (no more than anything he's done has "gone away" anyway). I'm just pointing out it will be fruitless other than for rather esoteric political points. Additionally, that it seems indicative of a lack of a political strategy that holds Trump and his cronies accountable and leads to justice.
|
United States43861 Posts
The idea that the only reason to follow the law is the threat of punishment and that once that has been neutered we can get to work doing what we all really want to do is classic Trump.
|
On April 13 2019 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2019 06:27 Plansix wrote:
If he tells congress the president told them to break the law and he would pardon them afterwards, that could be a problem. That isn't something that will go away. I doubt it leads to impeachment on its own, but it will make it harder for Republicans to counter the Democrat's pushes for investigations. I agree with all that (no more than anything he's done has "gone away" anyway). I'm just pointing out it will be fruitless other than for rather esoteric political points. Additionally, that it seems indicative of a lack of a political strategy that holds Trump and his cronies accountable and leads to justice.
Without the backing of the at least 3-5 Republicans in the Senate, there isn’t a lot that can be done to hold Trump’s people accountable at this time. I don’t know where the political breaking point is for those Republicans is or if it exists at all. It is hard to plan without knowing that.
|
On April 13 2019 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2019 06:27 Plansix wrote:
If he tells congress the president told them to break the law and he would pardon them afterwards, that could be a problem. That isn't something that will go away. I doubt it leads to impeachment on its own, but it will make it harder for Republicans to counter the Democrat's pushes for investigations. I agree with all that (no more than anything he's done has "gone away" anyway). I'm just pointing out it will be fruitless other than for rather esoteric political points. Additionally, that it seems indicative of a lack of a political strategy that holds Trump and his cronies accountable and leads to justice. What strategy holds Trump accountable when such a move would need Republican support and they have decided not to give a shit?
They can go after the people under him and from what I understand investigations and inquires are going on and have been increasing since the Democrats gained control of the House but those take time to do and this administration is producing incidents faster then you can resolve them.
When one side unilaterally decides to stop giving a shit the system breaks down while they hold power.
|
On April 13 2019 06:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2019 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 13 2019 06:27 Plansix wrote:
If he tells congress the president told them to break the law and he would pardon them afterwards, that could be a problem. That isn't something that will go away. I doubt it leads to impeachment on its own, but it will make it harder for Republicans to counter the Democrat's pushes for investigations. I agree with all that (no more than anything he's done has "gone away" anyway). I'm just pointing out it will be fruitless other than for rather esoteric political points. Additionally, that it seems indicative of a lack of a political strategy that holds Trump and his cronies accountable and leads to justice. Without the backing of the at least 3-5 Republicans in the Senate, there isn’t a lot that can be done to hold Trump’s people accountable at this time. I don’t know where the political breaking point is for those Republicans is or if it exists at all. It is hard to plan without knowing that.
It takes 3-5 just to slow him down (particularly with Manchin basically being a Republican). It's going to take more than a dozen (even if Dem's won some unlikely seats in 2020) to actually hold him accountable and it seems abundantly clear (at least imo) that the "breaking point" for them is going to be far too late, if it ever comes.
On April 13 2019 06:40 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2019 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 13 2019 06:27 Plansix wrote:
If he tells congress the president told them to break the law and he would pardon them afterwards, that could be a problem. That isn't something that will go away. I doubt it leads to impeachment on its own, but it will make it harder for Republicans to counter the Democrat's pushes for investigations. I agree with all that (no more than anything he's done has "gone away" anyway). I'm just pointing out it will be fruitless other than for rather esoteric political points. Additionally, that it seems indicative of a lack of a political strategy that holds Trump and his cronies accountable and leads to justice. What strategy holds Trump accountable when such a move would need Republican support and they have decided not to give a shit? They can go after the people under him and from what I understand investigations and inquires are going on and have been increasing since the Democrats gained control of the House but those take time to do and this administration is producing incidents faster then you can resolve them. When one side unilaterally decides to stop giving a shit the system breaks down while they hold power.
A massive movement of the people based on principles instead of politics. But my point wasn't so much to offer an alternative (a more in-depth endeavor) but point out what I recognize as an error in judgement regarding the state of affairs ala Trump and accountability.
|
Northern Ireland26523 Posts
On April 13 2019 06:43 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2019 06:38 Plansix wrote:On April 13 2019 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 13 2019 06:27 Plansix wrote:
If he tells congress the president told them to break the law and he would pardon them afterwards, that could be a problem. That isn't something that will go away. I doubt it leads to impeachment on its own, but it will make it harder for Republicans to counter the Democrat's pushes for investigations. I agree with all that (no more than anything he's done has "gone away" anyway). I'm just pointing out it will be fruitless other than for rather esoteric political points. Additionally, that it seems indicative of a lack of a political strategy that holds Trump and his cronies accountable and leads to justice. Without the backing of the at least 3-5 Republicans in the Senate, there isn’t a lot that can be done to hold Trump’s people accountable at this time. I don’t know where the political breaking point is for those Republicans is or if it exists at all. It is hard to plan without knowing that. It takes 3-5 just to slow him down (particularly with Manchin basically being a Republican). It's going to take more than a dozen (even if Dem's won some unlikely seats in 2020) to actually hold him accountable and it seems abundantly clear (at least imo) that the "breaking point" for them is going to be far too late, if it ever comes. Show nested quote +On April 13 2019 06:40 Gorsameth wrote:On April 13 2019 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 13 2019 06:27 Plansix wrote:
If he tells congress the president told them to break the law and he would pardon them afterwards, that could be a problem. That isn't something that will go away. I doubt it leads to impeachment on its own, but it will make it harder for Republicans to counter the Democrat's pushes for investigations. I agree with all that (no more than anything he's done has "gone away" anyway). I'm just pointing out it will be fruitless other than for rather esoteric political points. Additionally, that it seems indicative of a lack of a political strategy that holds Trump and his cronies accountable and leads to justice. What strategy holds Trump accountable when such a move would need Republican support and they have decided not to give a shit? They can go after the people under him and from what I understand investigations and inquires are going on and have been increasing since the Democrats gained control of the House but those take time to do and this administration is producing incidents faster then you can resolve them. When one side unilaterally decides to stop giving a shit the system breaks down while they hold power. A massive movement of the people based on principles instead of politics. But my point wasn't so much to offer an alternative (a more in-depth endeavor) but point out what I recognize as an error in judgement regarding the state of affairs ala Trump and accountability.
Basically yeah, across the board.
Again as per my earlier post, I think too much has to happen, at the same time for things to really get much better anytime soon.
My only hope for any kind of GOP scrutiny of Trump that’s at all useful is that he overplays his hand even more egregiously so they turn on him.
If not for the current political climate and things being as they are, in a vacuum I’m pretty sure many of them would have already, divorced from a big backlash.
Even aside from political differences, he must be an absolute, absolute nightmare to work with. He’ll throw you under the bus, he demands fealty to him and doesn’t show any to anyone else, and he’s so impulsive he goes off-message even against himself, never mind follow any kind of vague consistent party line.
Again not giving them any kind of pass, I think they fear for their own skin being consumed by the ‘anti-establishment’ Trump wake if they’re seen to impede him.
Not entirely the same but Brexit, regardless of stance or whatever it’s pretty obvious that any real re-evaluation of the whole thing won’t happen for a fear of the backlash from the leave voters, almost no matter how bad not re-evaluating gets
|
On April 13 2019 06:33 KwarK wrote:
The idea that the only reason to follow the law is the threat of punishment and that once that has been neutered we can get to work doing what we all really want to do is classic Trump.
It reminds me of a Penn Jillette "what’s to stop me from raping all I want? And my answer is: I do rape all I want. And the amount I want is zero. And I do murder all I want, and the amount I want is zero. The fact that these people think that if they didn’t have this person watching over them that they would go on killing, raping rampages is the most self-damning thing I can imagine. I don't want to do that."
|
On April 13 2019 07:02 Wombat_NI wrote:
My only hope for any kind of GOP scrutiny of Trump that’s at all useful is that he overplays his hand even more egregiously so they turn on him.
I hate to break it to you, but getting any kind of "scrutiny" on Trump from anyone who isn't a hardcore opponent of him is going to be damned near impossible now.
Like I pointed out during the 2016 campaign, the problem with how Trump has been covered by the media is that they reported on everything that they possibly could, regardless of merit, that might be used to hurt him. In 2016, the consequence of the media's over-saturation of the airwaves with this crap was that the negative coverage of Trump became white noise. Many voters simply tuned it out and stopped caring.
Now we are coming out of a two-three year period of intense reporting that Trump and/or people in his campaign conspired to sell the country out to Russia or otherwise conspired to obstruct justice. All of that reporting is rapidly being exposed as outright fraudulent (and as a relevant aside, you can bet that Trump is manipulating and coordinating this exposure from behind the scenes for maximum political effect). Uncoincidentally, Trump's poll numbers are now rapidly rising and hitting term highs (and will likely surpass them). Given this environment, do you really think that a majority of the voting public is going to be inclined to listen to additional scrutiny of Trump? I think not.
Y'all shot your wad. And missed. There are going to be very significant political consequences for that. All very bad for the Democrats.
|
Wishful thinking. Let's not forget that Trump is still an incompetent fool aggressively unfit for the office he holds. That will be al problem for him in 2020 no matter what. Just wait for the next fuck up and his poll numbers will tank again. We've been here before.
|
On April 13 2019 07:50 On_Slaught wrote:
Wishful thinking. Let's not forget that Trump is still an incompetent fool aggressively unfit for the office he holds. That will be al problem for him in 2020 no matter what. Just wait for the next fuck up and his poll numbers will tank again. We've been here before.
People once said that Trump becoming president was wishful thinking. I agree with xDaunt's analysis
Also, if Trump is "aggressively unfit for the office he holds" then so were Obama, Bush, and Clinton, and that didnt stop any of them from two terms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
