• It's easy to sign up and post! Register with a working email address (we won't give it to others, or spam you), or through Facebook, Twitter, or a Microsoft ID. Google and LinkedIn coming soon. 🙂

The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

JNA

Cyburbian Plus
Messages
23,932
Likes
16
Points
39
Last edited:
Messages
18,888
Likes
4
Points
34
I've always considered myself mostly a centrist, and generally support Democrats.

That said, I am completely sick and tired of hearing about damn Ocasio-Cortez. I don't care that she was dancing on a rooftop in college. I don't care that she worked at some bar. Just stop covering the nonsense, good Lord.
Here is what I find interesting... what conservatives were offended by it or signaled that it makes her unfit to be a representative. Personally, I have concerns with her lack of experience... as I do with any candidate that holds a position like this (ie. Trump) But she is not my representative and I support the idea of new voices in congress. However it sounds like her and I have different ideas on some political topics. But overall, I question if the dancing story is Faux News in terms of making it out to be something more than it is, or if there really was someone who was stupid enough to be offended by it.

It does make me happy that cell phones and social networks were not around when I was in college...




The shutdown is ridiculous and while I support border security, I stand with the Democrats on this one. I wall on the border is not going to fix the issue. I also think that it was lame that Trump mentioned that Obama built a wall around his house... he did that 2 years ago and it is no more secure than the fence around the WH or the fencing around many Trump golf course. Privacy is a good thing, but the wall is going to be ineffective.





I don't watch award shows anymore because I think that too many people are taking political direction from people who are famous because they can pretend to be someone other than who they are in front of a camera and we pay money to see it.
 

AG74683

Cyburbian
Messages
5,064
Likes
10
Points
18
Personally, I have concerns with her lack of experience... as I do with any candidate that holds a position like this (ie. Trump) But she is not my representative and I support the idea of new voices in congress.
Yeah that's my issue with it. She seems to like to make lots of comments that probably aren't the best to make as a freshman member of Congress. As is the case with any sort of political body, there's a hierarchy here and bucking that trend is likely to hurt you more than it is to help. She needs to calm down a bit, settle in, and learn the job before she rattles sabers.
 

Planit

Cyburbian
Messages
11,047
Likes
6
Points
27
Unrelated to the theatrics of the border wall & tRump's Festivals of Lies tonight, you might want to think about this:

As of Thursday, DOD will be run by a former senior Boeing executive. EPA is run by a former coal lobbyist. HHS is run by a former pharmaceutical lobbyist. And Interior will be run by a former oil-industry lobbyist. Welcome to 2019.
 

JNA

Cyburbian Plus
Messages
23,932
Likes
16
Points
39
From the Congressional Research Service in 2007

National Emergency Powers
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/98-505.pdf

The President of the United States has available certain powers that may be exercised in the event that the nation is threatened by crisis, exigency, or emergency circumstances (other than natural disasters, war, or near-war situations). Such powers may be stated explicitly or implied by the Constitution, assumed by the Chief Executive to be permissible constitutionally, or inferred from or specified by statute. Through legislation, Congress has made a great many delegations of authority in this regard over the past 200 years.
 

Maister

Chairman of the bored
Staff member
Messages
24,477
Likes
10
Points
40
So, I didn't watch Trump's speech last night, but from all accounts the content was pretty much what everyone expected - recycled half-truths and outright lies we've heard dozens of times before from his campaign rallies. I did, however, this morning come across an interesting take on the speech I can honestly say I didn't expect....namely, there's compelling evidence that the speech was not delivered live, but was recorded previously and green screened Trump to appear as if he was in the oval office. Seriously! Check out the link.

 
Messages
3,721
Likes
0
Points
19
Unrelated to the theatrics of the border wall & tRump's Festivals of Lies tonight, you might want to think about this:

As of Thursday, DOD will be run by a former senior Boeing executive. EPA is run by a former coal lobbyist. HHS is run by a former pharmaceutical lobbyist. And Interior will be run by a former oil-industry lobbyist. Welcome to 2019.
He said he would drain the swamp...he didn't say what he would refill it with...
 

Hink

OH....IO
Moderator
Messages
13,847
Likes
9
Points
29
I watched both the President's speech and the speeches by Pelosi and Schumer. My take away is that Trump wants to frame this as a humanitarian crisis that the only solution for is a wall. The D's just focused on the government shut down and how it shouldn't be tied to Trump's request for a wall.

I don't think either speech did anything to persuade the other group to change their minds. I will say though that Trump really looks terrible doing things like this. He isn't good at speaking to people. He does much better at rally's and yelling when he can get applause. His breathing and demeanor are just not suited for this environment.

With that said the D's really missed the mark by putting up their two leaders. They had an opportunity to look new and fresh, and they looked really old and tired. Nancy Pelosi may well be the Hilary Clinton of the next year, in that they went with the easy choice instead of the one that would get them a win. She and Chuck Schumer were much better at speaking, but they just came off as a parent telling us their children, how silly this whole thing is. It didn't sell me anything, it just made me wish they weren't the people spreading the message.

Overall I think it did little to nothing. I am not pleased that our President thinks this is the kind of thing that he should do on our TV in primetime. He has really made everything into politics, which is the main problem we have in our country now, in my view. Well that and our inability to accept differing points of view and hear things we disagree with (*trigger warning*). :rolleyes:
 

Gedunker

Mod
Moderator
Messages
10,332
Likes
5
Points
26
Strategically for the 'publicans, that was a waste of the power of the Oval Office. Scripted president has no chutzpah.
Nancy and Chuck reminded me of a slightly punk version of Grant Wood's "American Gothic". Certainly a "ho hum" response.

Is it 2021 yet?
 

dvdneal

Cyburbian
Messages
12,754
Likes
24
Points
27
I agree with HInk. In the back of my mind I thought the dems would have taken the opportunity to showcase some soon to be pres candidates. I was hoping no Cortez, to junior, but instead the trot out the same dog and pony show that lost them the election last time. People are tired of old. They wanted something new so they elected tRump. For both parties, maybe give us someone worth voting for?
 
Messages
18,888
Likes
4
Points
34
With that said the D's really missed the mark by putting up their two leaders. They had an opportunity to look new and fresh, and they looked really old and tired. Nancy Pelosi may well be the Hilary Clinton of the next year, in that they went with the easy choice instead of the one that would get them a win. She and Chuck Schumer were much better at speaking, but they just came off as a parent telling us their children, how silly this whole thing is. It didn't sell me anything, it just made me wish they weren't the people spreading the message.
This is all I have to say about last night:

 

kjel

Super Moderator
Moderator
Messages
11,239
Likes
6
Points
27
Didn't watch. Cheeto's speech wasn't going to be a mystery, neither were Chuck & Nancy's response.
 

Wannaplan?

Galactic Superstar
Messages
3,072
Likes
1
Points
19
I am seeing a lot of "We can solve this!" posts from Bernie Sanders supporters in regards to solving climate change - "We must continue to take on the fossil fuel billionaires, accelerate our transition to clean energy, and finally put people before the profits of polluters." I can only guess there are a lot of people who don't want power plants (wind farms) in their back yard. I also watched AOC on 60 minutes on Sunday talking about this Green New Deal idea. I am wondering where these ideas will go, politically speaking - it's not like the U.S. has a national energy policy anymore that is incentivizing a certain amount of energy be produced from renewables. Is the idea to revive the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, or is it to get people to consider something else? Just thinking out loud here as the pro-carbon folks are still out there, as well as moderate dems ready to disenfranchise the liberal wing of their party.
 

Hink

OH....IO
Moderator
Messages
13,847
Likes
9
Points
29
I am seeing a lot of "We can solve this!" posts from Bernie Sanders supporters in regards to solving climate change - "We must continue to take on the fossil fuel billionaires, accelerate our transition to clean energy, and finally put people before the profits of polluters." I can only guess there are a lot of people who don't want power plants (wind farms) in their back yard. I also watched AOC on 60 minutes on Sunday talking about this Green New Deal idea. I am wondering where these ideas will go, politically speaking - it's not like the U.S. has a national energy policy anymore that is incentivizing a certain amount of energy be produced from renewables. Is the idea to revive the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, or is it to get people to consider something else? Just thinking out loud here as the pro-carbon folks are still out there, as well as moderate dems ready to disenfranchise the liberal wing of their party.
I really think the idea of a Green New Deal is great, but the reality is that they are going to get buried trying to sell it. The D's have determined that they need to go WAY left to try and differentiate themselves from the R's. This was the cause of the R's losing when they went all Tea Party. The pendulum really needs to stay more in the middle if a party wants to win.

There shouldn't be any argument for improved infrastructure, stronger power grid, renewables, etc. That isn't a party issue, or at least it shouldn't be. How we pay for it, what it replaces, and the economic impact of those decisions should be the talking points. If we were talking about how we were going to pay for the new power grid, instead of deciding if coal jobs are more valuable than wind jobs, we would be in a much better place. Both parties should be trying to focus the country towards bigger ideas, and then fight over how they see they should be implemented. I don't know how any person can not support our country moving towards renewable energy, if it means cheaper, more efficient energy for us?

Politicians make up issues to get people fired up. Once the D's or R's figure out how to "win" an issue they just keep riding that horse. **See wall discussion **
 

mendelman

Unfrozen Caveman Planner
Moderator
Messages
11,238
Likes
7
Points
27
I don't see any major effort to green ourselves until uniform catastrophe stares us in the face. Then it might be too late.

I would like to see some enterprising community sized group of 'greens' politically take over some level of local government - like a small city or township or county.

Once they have political control they change the specific regulations/prohibitions of that government to allow the kind of super low or effectively zero carbon footprint they're looking for.
 
Top