US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[vienna]

The only thing wrong with that cartoon is, Trump being Trump, he'd be mounted facing the back of the elephant...

...oh, and, removal may occur sooner than 2018...





<O>

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by vienna

The only thing wrong with that cartoon is, Trump being Trump, he'd be mounted facing the back of the elephant...

...oh, and, removal may occur sooner than 2018...





<O>

There you go again trying to be a prophet ... hate won't make it happen.

Love your enemies, love your neighbors, love the GOP, love late night TV, but don't hate the POTUS.

[vienna]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

There you go again trying to be a prophet ... hate won't make it happen.

Love your enemies, love your neighbors, love the GOP, love late night TV, but don't hate the POTUS.

I don't hate Trump; couldn't care less about him, actually. What I do care about is how very badly this country is being run from the current Oval Office and the current occupant just happens to be Trump, and he happens to be a massive idiot. I'd feel the same way about a very badly run administration regardless of who was in the WH. When Trump is out of the WH, I'll be more than happy to ignore him as in the past and just hope we can right ourselves from the mess(es) he's made...

As for as your Kumbaya neo-hippism (), those who know me are aware I do not discriminate: I hate everybody, in a gentlemanly curmudgeonly sort of way...

Besides, I'm an 'Merican and I have the freedom to hate who I please...

(Cue unfurling of waving, windblown Stars & Stripes and swelling of patriotic music...)...




<O>

[Dowly]

Our very much loved president Koivisto burial. He was loved by all.



Take note of what a great president was.

[August]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Take note of what a great president was.

[Onkel Neal]

Here's your goofball president in his natural habitat

[Platapus]

Well he used to be a Democrat. Somehow just claiming to be a Republican was enough for some of the Republican voters, I guess.

[Onkel Neal]

A lot of people will believe what they hear when it is what they want to hear.

[vienna]

A long while back, when Trump first announced his run for office, I posted about how the national GOP might find itself in the same situation as the California-GOP. The California glommed onto Arnold Scwarzenegger as a CA Gubernatorial candidate like he was some political life preserver after their having been repeatedly torpedoed by the CA-DEMs. Arnold was a widely known celebrity and seemed to say all the 'right' things the CA-GOP wanted to hear. When he was elected Governor, winning a plurality but not a majority, the CA-GOP rushed to get their agendas passed under the cover of Arnold's charisma. Firstly, Arnold discovered governance and politics takes more than a winning smile and catchy platitudes. Then, at the behest of the CA-GOP, he championed a slew of initiatives and referendums in an attempt by the CA-GOP to get their long-sought pet projects and peeves addressed, the majority of which had been widely unpopular for years, if not decades; the resulting election was one of the most stunning political defeats in CA history and was a firm repudiation of CA-GOP "values". At about that point, Arnold pretty much gave up the facade of Far Right champion and embraced a sort of 'partnership' with the CA-DEMs. The CA-GOP has not yet recovered from the debacle that was the Arnold "The Governator"'s terms in office. Currently, not a single one of the CA statewide elected offices is held by a GOP member; the CA-GOP simply has not been able to field any candidates the CA-GOP endorses. Such is the state of the CA-GOP...

So, now what has the national GOP got? They have, in the Oval Office, a well-known celebrity, who says all the 'right' things and who got elected, not with a majority of the popular vote, but even worse, not even a plurality. The GOP and Trump have tried to ram through their pet projects; first, by EO, but they soon found EOs are not the same as laws and the President's words are not writ; likewise, in Congress, both the GOP-controlled House and Senate are finding little traction in their pursuit of their agenda and have even had to resort to "poison pill" and "nuclear" option in order to get what very little they have been able to achieve squeaking through. Now, Trump, faced with failure on all fronts for his 'agenda', is, like Arnold in CA, trying to make nice in order to salvage what he can and score a win for himself, if not the GOP. And make no mistake, if it comes down to it, Trump is in this only for himself, as he has always been throughout his life and in his dealings; he will not hesitate to sell-out his Trumpettes and the GOP if he feels he can get a win, any win, out of what may be his brief tenure in office...

The Trumpettes and the GOP knew all about the person they backed; all the details about his lying, duplicity, avarice, double-dealing and more were widely put out there by journalists and analysts of all political stripes in the months before the election, but, just to try and get whatever narrow agendas each faction sought passed, they made a deal with the devil and now they are about to get royally burned...

To those who have backed Trump because they think Trump will firmly back their play, get ready to be disappointed; Trump has less spine than a jellyfish and will dump you and your cause if he can see a way to aggrandize himself at your expense. The flip-flops on DACA and the deals with the DEMs on other issues are just the beginning...




<O>

[August]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Well he used to be a Democrat. Somehow just claiming to be a Republican was enough for some of the Republican voters, I guess.

Only if you forget how and why he won. There were plenty of establishment Republicans running but Trump was nominated over them because in spite of all his faults and lack of conservative history he had one over riding attribute, he was not one of them.

Then he won the election because for all his faults he was not an establishment politician and just as importantly (perhaps more so) he was not the crooked HRC.

See the pattern here?

I'm beginning to think that anyone who wasn't part of the political establishment could have won the oval office last year.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

A lot of people will believe what they hear when it is what they want to hear.

I once read a paper on "confirmation bias". It was a good paper , but it did not tell me anything I didn't already know.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by August

I'm beginning to think that anyone who wasn't part of the political establishment could have won the oval office last year.

I agree. Hillary's legacy is probably being the only candidate that could lose against a buffoon like Trump.

The Republicans could have put up anyone else and they still would have beaten Hillary.

The Democrats could have put anyone else up and they probably would have beaten Trump.

It was truly a race to the bottom.

In my opinion, the only reason Trump won was because of Hillary.

The Republicans did not win the election, the Democrats lost it.

[August]

Originally Posted by Platapus

The Democrats could have put anyone else up and they probably would have beaten Trump.

I'm not so sure about that. I really think that people were looking for an outsider. Someone not part of the Washington political cabal. Had the Dems run another establishment pol like say Schumer or Pelosi I believe they still would have lost.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by August

Indeed, I have no recollection of posting that (I remember watching it). One of my drunken posts, I do apologize, it had no place in here. I cannot say why I posted it here.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by August

I'm not so sure about that. I really think that people were looking for an outsider. Someone not part of the Washington political cabal. Had the Dems run another establishment pol like say Schumer or Pelosi I believe they still would have lost.

It would be hard to determine who is more disliked between Hillary and Nancy. Both are liabilities. Yikes, each one is more despised than the other.

I honestly don't understand this "Outsider" mentality. PotUS is not an entry level position. There are very good reasons why I am not CEO of Exon. I don't have the background, experience, nor the connections that would make me effective. The same goes for PotUS.

PotUS is a skilled position and requires special skills, experience, and connections.

If I am not happy with my doctor, should I just grab someone off the street with the idea of "well an outsider might be better"? Of course not.

Would you put a career politician as CEO of a huge international corporation? Of course not. Different experiences and skill sets are needed.

So I truly don't understand any attraction of electing someone with no experience, no education, nor any of the political connections to the office of president.

PotUS IS a political position and needs political education, political experience, and political connections in order to be effective.

I would think that we would have learned that lesson with the past two presidents.

If the problem is that we are electing the wrong politicians to office, then the solution is to start electing the right politicians to office... not to elect uneducated, inexperienced "outsiders" in some random hope that they might do well.

That may work for a mayor, but not the PotUS, in my opinion.