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.
On November 13 2024 23:11 KT_Elwood wrote: @ oBlade
Having an incompetent, but eager, sucker at the helm of the biggliest and bestiest Army in the world, isn't reassuring, and shouldn't be.
Competence in this position would be a conflict of interest with stupid ideas. Remember, the US will get president "why not inject bleach?" "Why not nuke hurricanes?"
Which will now only get "What brand bleach, sir?" and "Can we wait till landfall, then the Nuke would be visible from Mar-A-Lago".
You have any independent evidence this man is incompetent or is it just that he touched Fox News and got appointed by Blumpf so it's automatic?
Who would you make Secretary of Defense?
I don’t think you necessarily need someone with x qualifications in many an office.
It depends what you want to do, and how you intend to govern. There’s plenty of solid Defence Secretaries/Minister equivalents without military experience, or Chancellors/Finance Ministers who aren’t economists by profession.
If you’re otherwise competent, politically savvy and good at delegating, knowing who to delegate to, and learn, ultimately you can lean on collective expertise.
Where I think you do need personal expertise is if you’re tasked with implementing particular policy that may actually go against general institutional wisdom, or as part of an administration with a somewhat unilateral style
For me the problem isn’t the experience of x candidate being insufficient, it’s that Trump hands the keys of the kingdom to folks who lack it, and wants them to implement their ideas wholesale if possible.
I’m not sure if that’s the case here. He may have a ton of great soft skills I’m not aware of. So I’ll reserve judgement.
For me, ideally you want a Defence Secretary who’s a great politician who understands military reality/can have it conveyed, than a great technocrat general with terrible political instincts.
My wider issue with Trump administrations is the aforementioned combination.
On November 14 2024 01:09 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: His qualifications seems "fine" but his moral character seems poor.
Cheating on your wife that you have 3 kids with. And a bit of grift with political money.
Maybe I am old fashioned but I think moral fiber is almost more important for politicians then pure qualifications.
Seems exactly who Trump would pick, based solely on ethics. Elon Musk fits well too.
It really shows that hard core American Christians care a lot more about what people say than what actions they take.
Depends on the actions.
I think a lot of Christians just want policy they think is amenable to their beliefs. If one delivers it, they’re happy enough. It wouldn’t make them an atypical political bloc.
If a Christian claims that Trump, personally is a great Christian, which I’ve definitely seen, that person is an insane person. Or at least temporarily, on that specific topic.
Hey if a guy that I considered a total arsehole also managed to deliver some approximation of my form of socialism, I really wouldn’t give much of a shit if it turned out he’d cheated on his wife
But I’ve always made a demarcation between one’s personal life and moral fibre, and one’s moral fibre on consistently advocating for the betterment of society.
Martin Luther King Jr didn’t restrict his sex life to the confines of his marriage, I’d still consider him on balance a rather admirable, impactful figure
He is working for NGOs and PACs ...clearly seeking (R) interest, he is working as host of a TV show.
He once was in charge of collecting campaign money, got 15k.. and used 5k on his birthdayparty.. which isn't stealing if you are in charge according to minnesota law.
He got divorced for fucking around -twice... and said it should be harder to file for divorce (LoL).
He is working for NGOs and PACs ...clearly seeking (R) interest, he is working as host of a TV show.
He once was in charge of collecting campaign money, got 15k.. and used 5k on his birthdayparty.. which isn't stealing if you are in charge according to minnesota law.
He got divorced for fucking around -twice... and said it should be harder to file for divorce (LoL).
Ah the classic "my wife shouldn't be allowed to leave me for sleeping around".(but men should totally be allowed to punish their wives if they cheat)
Thune in as 119th Senate majority leader by secret ballot.
Endorsements for Florida senator Scott from Cruz and others failed to put him over the line.
Scott was the most "conservative" rated of the 3 candidates by far. This leadership election will ultimately bear out whether the GOP is still in a civil war or not.
While Senate GOP was meeting, Pete Aguilar and Ted Lieu gave a press conference from the House Democrats caucus, talking about the future and bipartisanship and protecting California from Blumpf.
About 10 seconds of public cordiality for Blumpf and Biden's first public transition meeting today.
Otherwise Biden's morning today was a light-hearted home stretch speech for teachers with his first lady where levity and humor were at center stage and no kids got unduly sniffed, touted investments in the workforce, the fact that it takes time to feel the effects of progress:
Melania is apparently turning down the role of first lady and not moving into the white house. While I don't think even the hardest core MAGAs (oblade can correct me if I'm wrong) think that marriage is built on love and trust, it is still a pretty shocking move as I think keeping up appearances is very important to Trump.
Christian MAGAs must not be concerned enough about which 9 figure property a president's wife stays at at any particular time. Their lack of interest is shocking. How can a marriage function if there isn't even enough trust for the man to need to keep the woman within a 10 foot radius of him 24/7?
On November 14 2024 03:47 oBlade wrote: Christian MAGAs must not be concerned enough about which 9 figure property a president's wife stays at at any particular time. Their lack of interest is shocking. How can a marriage function if there isn't even enough trust for the man to need to keep the woman within a 10 foot radius of him 24/7?
Facetiousness is a powerful rhetorical device but I’d argue shouldn’t be employed 100% of the time
On November 14 2024 03:47 oBlade wrote: Christian MAGAs must not be concerned enough about which 9 figure property a president's wife stays at at any particular time. Their lack of interest is shocking. How can a marriage function if there isn't even enough trust for the man to need to keep the woman within a 10 foot radius of him 24/7?
Are you genuinely making an argument for the presumption of fidelity within the Trump marriage?
On November 14 2024 03:47 oBlade wrote: Christian MAGAs must not be concerned enough about which 9 figure property a president's wife stays at at any particular time. Their lack of interest is shocking. How can a marriage function if there isn't even enough trust for the man to need to keep the woman within a 10 foot radius of him 24/7?
Facetiousness is a powerful rhetorical device but I’d argue shouldn’t be employed 100% of the time
Let me treat these claims with more seriousness than they deserve then and I think you'll agree the pithy way was better: How does a liberal stoop to calling a spouse a gold digger? How does a progressive's view of "her body, her choice" end when it comes to the political opposition not sleeping where she's supposed to? Why does tolerance for two consenting adults always immediately disappear when they've got red ties? Why am I supposed to believe this concern trolling about Melania not being close enough to a person this thread gaslights me into thinking is a maniacal serial rapist Hitler? All due respect to First Ladies like Hillary, Michele, and Jill, people do not elect the First Lady, they elect the president to do a job, regardless of their spouse, their spouse can do whatever the fuck they want to do or not want to do including be part of raising a family which they have a child together named Barron.
Melania was a great First Lady, despite the claims of my esteemed colleagues of her being a gold digger or mail order bride and all the other tolerance she endured. They aren't divorcing anytime soon. However, they could theoretically divorce tomorrow and it would not be a national emergency or matter at all, because, see above.
On November 14 2024 03:47 oBlade wrote: Christian MAGAs must not be concerned enough about which 9 figure property a president's wife stays at at any particular time. Their lack of interest is shocking. How can a marriage function if there isn't even enough trust for the man to need to keep the woman within a 10 foot radius of him 24/7?
Facetiousness is a powerful rhetorical device but I’d argue shouldn’t be employed 100% of the time
Let me treat these claims with more seriousness than they deserve then and I think you'll agree the pithy way was better: How does a liberal stoop to calling a spouse a gold digger? How does a progressive's view of "her body, her choice" end when it comes to the political opposition not sleeping where she's supposed to? Why does tolerance for two consenting adults always immediately disappear when they've got red ties? Why am I supposed to believe this concern trolling about Melania not being close enough to a person this thread gaslights me into thinking is a maniacal serial rapist Hitler? All due respect to First Ladies like Hillary, Michele, and Jill, people do not elect the First Lady, they elect the president to do a job, regardless of their spouse, their spouse can do whatever the fuck they want to do or not want to do including be part of raising a family which they have a child together named Barron.
Melania was a great First Lady, despite the claims of my esteemed colleagues of her being a gold digger or mail order bride and all the other tolerance she endured. They aren't divorcing anytime soon. However, they could theoretically divorce tomorrow and it would not be a national emergency or matter at all, because, see above.
You are completely missing the point being made. It is not about fidelity. It is: "Not even Trumps wife can stand being around him."
On November 14 2024 03:47 oBlade wrote: Christian MAGAs must not be concerned enough about which 9 figure property a president's wife stays at at any particular time. Their lack of interest is shocking. How can a marriage function if there isn't even enough trust for the man to need to keep the woman within a 10 foot radius of him 24/7?
Facetiousness is a powerful rhetorical device but I’d argue shouldn’t be employed 100% of the time
Let me treat these claims with more seriousness than they deserve then and I think you'll agree the pithy way was better: How does a liberal stoop to calling a spouse a gold digger? How does a progressive's view of "her body, her choice" end when it comes to the political opposition not sleeping where she's supposed to? Why does tolerance for two consenting adults always immediately disappear when they've got red ties? Why am I supposed to believe this concern trolling about Melania not being close enough to a person this thread gaslights me into thinking is a maniacal serial rapist Hitler? All due respect to First Ladies like Hillary, Michele, and Jill, people do not elect the First Lady, they elect the president to do a job, regardless of their spouse, their spouse can do whatever the fuck they want to do or not want to do including be part of raising a family which they have a child together named Barron.
Gold diggers exist, you have the right to be one, not an immunity to criticism. Likewise ‘her body, her choice’
I don’t think it’s a particularly productive angle of political attack, I don’t support it, I think it’s predicated on assumptions that may be incorrect
I think it’s stupid to try to assume how another humans feel about various things, unless one has solid information. Melania may be perfectly happy with the Donald, or otherwise, I’ve not really seen anything conclusive in either direction. Crucially I also don’t really care
On November 14 2024 03:47 oBlade wrote: Christian MAGAs must not be concerned enough about which 9 figure property a president's wife stays at at any particular time. Their lack of interest is shocking. How can a marriage function if there isn't even enough trust for the man to need to keep the woman within a 10 foot radius of him 24/7?
Facetiousness is a powerful rhetorical device but I’d argue shouldn’t be employed 100% of the time
Let me treat these claims with more seriousness than they deserve then and I think you'll agree the pithy way was better: How does a liberal stoop to calling a spouse a gold digger? How does a progressive's view of "her body, her choice" end when it comes to the political opposition not sleeping where she's supposed to? Why does tolerance for two consenting adults always immediately disappear when they've got red ties? Why am I supposed to believe this concern trolling about Melania not being close enough to a person this thread gaslights me into thinking is a maniacal serial rapist Hitler? All due respect to First Ladies like Hillary, Michele, and Jill, people do not elect the First Lady, they elect the president to do a job, regardless of their spouse, their spouse can do whatever the fuck they want to do or not want to do including be part of raising a family which they have a child together named Barron.
Melania was a great First Lady, despite the claims of my esteemed colleagues of her being a gold digger or mail order bride and all the other tolerance she endured. They aren't divorcing anytime soon. However, they could theoretically divorce tomorrow and it would not be a national emergency or matter at all, because, see above.
You are completely missing the point being made. It is not about fidelity. It is: "Not even Trumps wife can stand being around him."
On November 14 2024 03:47 oBlade wrote: Christian MAGAs must not be concerned enough about which 9 figure property a president's wife stays at at any particular time. Their lack of interest is shocking. How can a marriage function if there isn't even enough trust for the man to need to keep the woman within a 10 foot radius of him 24/7?
Trump has repeatedly cheated on all three of his wives, including Melania.
And HR9495 just failed to pass a 2/3 vote just adding to this being literally the most eventful day in politics since the election and this is what you want to talk about.
EPT
