• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

So out of all the places that you could get a meal for this team, you choose fast food as the commander in chief. Hell, you could have called up the best BBQ in DC and said it was for the clemson football team and gotten a better meal.. but this was by far the best picture..

Dw6SgmhVsAER6UO.jpg
 
I know what I'm serving at our Super Bowl party!!!



Did you notice there was no Taco Bell?

Can you imagine the person in the drive thru line behind the presidential limo with the bigly order?
 
Planit said:
I know what I'm serving at our Super Bowl party!!!

Did you notice there was no Taco Bell?

Can you imagine the person in the drive thru line behind the presidential limo with the bigly order?
Click to expand...

This was my first thought! No Taco Bell?! Blasphemy. Not enough Chick Fil A either. Those boys go to Clemson, there's CFA there for sure!

I was told today that his incessant penchant for fast food stems from an unfounded fear of being poisoned. He claims that it's impossible to get poisoned when eating fast food because no one knows who it's for and it's impossible to prepare ahead of time.
 
Well, the SS sends agents out on 'incognito' shopping trips to randomly selected local grocery stores to buy food for the White House kitchen and AF1 - it's the most secure way to source it.

Mike

Dan said:
Some days, I feel like I'm the only left-leaning American who despises identity politics. It is possible to be a progressive liberal without being "woke?" Whatever happened to "don't be a jerk?"
Click to expand...
Identity politics is also a HUGE turn-off to average Joe voters, regardless of what way they normally vote.

Mike
 
AG74683 said:
This was my first thought! No Taco Bell?! Blasphemy. Not enough Chick Fil A either. Those boys go to Clemson, there's CFA there for sure!

I was told today that his incessant penchant for fast food stems from an unfounded fear of being poisoned. He claims that it's impossible to get poisoned when eating fast food because no one knows who it's for and it's impossible to prepare ahead of time.
Click to expand...

Talk to a few cops. None of them eat fast food because they can't see the food being prepared all the time. There have been several stories about people adding ingredients to the cops burger.

I no longer think those shopping trips are "secret". Hello sir, I see you're buying large quantities of steak and ketchup and nothing else. I wonder who that could be for.
 
dvdneal said:
Talk to a few cops. None of them eat fast food because they can't see the food being prepared all the time. There have been several stories about people adding ingredients to the cops burger.
Click to expand...

I think that is an interesting point about seeing the food being made. There are exceptions like the Sandwich Places (ie. Jimmy Johns, Subway, or Jersey Mike's) or the Burrito Places (ie. Chipotle, Qdoba, or Moes) , but I think that for the vast majority of restaurants, fast food or not, you don't see your food being made. I am curious what the guys from Clemson thought when they walked in and saw this spread of food.


Personally, I really hope that the GOP grows a spine and backs the democrats to impeach and convict this guy to get him out of office. The sad part is no one is really surprised by his antics anymore. I think that as we progress into tax season, you will see an increasing call to reopen the government.
 
dvdneal said:
Talk to a few cops. None of them eat fast food because they can't see the food being prepared all the time. There have been several stories about people adding ingredients to the cops burger.

I no longer think those shopping trips are "secret". Hello sir, I see you're buying large quantities of steak and ketchup and nothing else. I wonder who that could be for.
Click to expand...

Well yeah but that's entirely different. They are buying the food in person, it's very obvious who they are and what they do. Trump just sends out some random assistant to get his food. Regular Joe won't get stuff in his burger.
 
mendelman said:
Dittos.

We need Mr. Jesus Gandi-Budda Allah, himself, to replace Trump as the only viable to mend this horribly embarrassing national fiasco.
Click to expand...

No we just need Obi Wan. You don't need a wall (wave hand). This is not the Congress you disagree with. Vote along, vote along.
 
As someone looking in, from the outside (Canada), I feel badly for everyone, regardless of which side you're on. Such turmoil must be very hard to live with. It's difficult just watching it all on TV. I must say that it is worrisome, as the USA is the "face" of democracy.
 
Just consider us your crazy relative that lives down south. We might sober up in a couple years, then again we might not.
 
I chaperoned two middle school trips to Washington, D.C. On both trips, we never discussed the possibility of finding ourselves in a situation like the one that transpired this weekend or what we would do if we did. I would like to think we would have quickly moved our kids away from the instigators to reduce/defuse the situation. It's just too hard to say how we would have reacted.

I'm thankful that we didn't confront that situation. I wonder whether future school administrators/teachers/chaperones will now have a plan, in case?
 
Thoughts on School Group in DC: The only victim is the American public. Neither side is innocent in this situation and the media is just pouring gas on a blowtorch.

SOTU: I don't care if the president give the speech or not. But he should write up a report and send it to congress as constitutionally required. I will not watch, but I will read the transcript.

Shut Down: I don't care if there is wall funding or not. One side needs to put their pride behind them and open the freaking government. Given the maturity of our President, I think he rather see the country burn than give in.
 
michaelskis said:
SOTU: I don't care if the president give the speech or not. But he should write up a report and send it to congress as constitutionally required. I will not watch, but I will read the transcript.

Shut Down: I don't care if there is wall funding or not. One side needs to put their pride behind them and open the freaking government. Given the maturity of our President, I think he rather see the country burn than give in.
Click to expand...

Why do we still do the SOTU? It is really a relic of old times that provide very little value. I like it in that it allows the President to explain his goals and objectives, but that certainly could occur in other ways or other places. The standing and clapping is just really offputting.

The D's put out a plan that gives 5.7 billion, just not for the wall as Trump wants it. This is just petty. Both sides are really digging in and only hurting the Federal workers. I will say that the D's certainly feel like they are doing it for a solid reason, the R's that I have spoken to are doing it because they want a wall, but also because "those terrible Federal workers knew what the risks were, and they should plan for being out of work... I mean I was laid off once and I had to find another job". Ugh.
 
Hink said:
Why do we still do the SOTU? It is really a relic of old times that provide very little value. I like it in that it allows the President to explain his goals and objectives, but that certainly could occur in other ways or other places. The standing and clapping is just really offputting.
Click to expand...

I agree that there should not be this big elaborate televised speech anymore with a televised opposing party response. Section II article 3 clause 1 of the Constitution states "that from time to time the president “shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” It does not set a time period and it does not say it shall be in person. In fact there have only there have been only 95 in-person annual messages/state of the union addresses.

Hink said:
The D's put out a plan that gives 5.7 billion, just not for the wall as Trump wants it. This is just petty. Both sides are really digging in and only hurting the Federal workers. I will say that the D's certainly feel like they are doing it for a solid reason, the R's that I have spoken to are doing it because they want a wall, but also because "those terrible Federal workers knew what the risks were, and they should plan for being out of work... I mean I was laid off once and I had to find another job". Ugh.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that the Democrats are trying to work with Trump on this and I am disappointed that the Republicans in the house are unwilling to put their foot down and tell Trump to compromise or resign.
 
michaelskis said:
I have no doubt that the Democrats are trying to work with Trump on this and I am disappointed that the Republicans in the house are unwilling to put their foot down and tell Trump to compromise or resign.
Click to expand...

I'm more disappointed in the GOP in congress. They should wake up and realize they are an independent branch of government and don't have to follow the president. Just because the pres claims to be an R (I say claims because I don't think he really cares about GOP values) doesn't make him the GOP leader. Mr. Turtle (Mitch) could easily say this is what the GOP wants to accomplish. It might not line up with the pres, but we'll get the votes to get it through congress. Yep, that might take some compromise. Stop supporting some dumb political white elephant like a wall just because the pres does.

Also, to solve the KY school protest thing and all future things like that there should be an app that lets you push a button to reach out and smack the idiot on TV. Think of the millions of slaps both sides would get. No one will ever want to get on TV again. Yeah it's extreme, but don't you just feeling like smacking everyone upside the head once in a while.
 
It stinks that federal employees can't legally strike during situations like this.

I keep seeing news articles about "China lands on the moon" or "China 3-D prints a concrete bridge" or "China does this new and exciting thing" and over here it's like "U.S. still in the dumpster fire of its own making."
 
terraplnr said:
It stinks that federal employees can't legally strike during situations like this.

I keep seeing news articles about "China lands on the moon" or "China 3-D prints a concrete bridge" or "China does this new and exciting thing" and over here it's like "U.S. still in the dumpster fire of its own making."
Click to expand...
China is willing to spend government money on new and exciting ideas. We are not. We are more worried about who gets credit for the government even being open.
 
Hink said:
China is willing to spend government money on new and exciting ideas. We are not. We are more worried about who gets credit for the government even being open.
Click to expand...

Well it's not just that, what repercussions are there if the Chinese government suddenly decided to spend 100 billion on "The Great Wall of China 2"? There are none. Anyone want to revolt over that? Well just ask Tank Man how well that worked out for him....but you can't because he was most likely erased from existence, the picture being the only proof of his life. He probably would have been better off getting mushed into paste like countless others and washed down the sewer drains rather than be subject to the torture he probably received.

Frankly, we're just lucky that the Chinese government sees merit in investing in exploring the dark side of the moon or 3-D printing a concrete bridge. Yes, the NPC exists, but it's not much more than a simple rubber stamp. It's still a Communist ruled country and Xi Jinping no longer has term limits so he could theoretically be president until he dies. It's a blessing that he seems to have a modicum of common sense and understands that China's position as a global partner is better in the long term than it would be as an outright enemy to the western world like the CCCP was.
 
I spoke with a buddy from back home who is a "non essential" federal employee with the Forest Service, and he went out and found a job working for an energy company because he said that based on what his bosses have told him that the government won't be opening up anytime soon. He was lucky and only missed one paycheck, but it put a serious dent in his savings.

What is your prediction on when this will will end?
 
Roger Stone was arrested in his Ft. Lauderdale home this morning. That brings the number to 6 direct tRump campaign associates arrested & indicted - Stone, Manafort, Gates, Flynn, Cohen & Papadopoulos.

Sarah said none of this has to do with pResident tRump & the White House. Nothing for tRump to worry about - HA!.

I can't wait to hear how Rudy mangles his next interview.
 

I'm curious how many conservative folks feel like their party was 'stolen' in 2016?
 
Looks like some sort of short term agreement was reached to end the govt. shutdown...at least for three weeks. No funding for any wall, but I expect Trump will throw another hissy and shut down government again in three weeks time when no funding is approved for his highly partisan, impractical, and ultimately unpopular with the American public pet project.
 
Yea, his speech couldn't just be positive, he had to push and push again.

With that said this is refreshing to have Ted Cruz called out for his hypocrisy... as stated by Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado:

“Now it’s his business, not my business, why he supports a president who wants to erect a medieval barrier on the border of Texas,” Bennet said of Cruz and Trump. “Who wants to use eminent domain to build that wall, who wants to declare an unconstitutional emergency to build that wall. That’s the business of the senator from Texas. I can assure you that in Colorado if a president said he was going to use eminent domain to erect a barrier across the state of Colorado, across the Rocky Mountains of Colorado, he was going to steal the property of our farmers and ranchers to build his medieval wall, there wouldn’t be an elected leader from our state that would support that idea. Which goes to my final point, how ludicrous it is that this government is shut down over a promise that the president of the United States couldn’t keep, and that America is not interested in having him keep. This idea that he was going to build a medieval wall across the southern border of Texas, take it from the farmers and ranchers that were there and have the Mexicans pay for it isn’t true. That’s why we’re here.”
 
Personally, I am surprised that Trump gave in, but I fear it is duct tape on a leaking water tank. I do not have much confidence that everyone will come to terms with budget bill before Feb 15th and the next shutdown will be much longer than this one. I just hope the GOP grows a backbone and tells Trump to sign the bill or get out of the WH.
 
michaelskis said:
Personally, I am surprised that Trump gave in, but I fear it is duct tape on a leaking water tank. I do not have much confidence that everyone will come to terms with budget bill before Feb 15th and the next shutdown will be much longer than this one. I just hope the GOP grows a backbone and tells Trump to sign the bill or get out of the WH.
Click to expand...
Nothing has changed. The pressure got to be too high. Nothing has changed though. We will get to the end of three weeks and they will pass a bill without wall funding, then Trump will go the Emergency route and "everyone" wins. Then the courts will have their say, but Trump will blame them, even though he will not get what he wants.

Also our democracy will be hurt by allowing a President to go around Congress because he isn't getting his way. Checks and balances people, checks and balances. He shouldn't be allowed to get his way if he can't negotiate with Congress. Obama had to negotiate with a very hostile Republican Congress. Trump should be required to as well. So should Bloomberg or whoever is our President in 2020.
 
Asked if he'd raise taxes on corporations as president, Howard Schultz says: "I don't want to talk in the hypothetical about what I would do if I was president."https://t.co/Db6OQriTlQ

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) January 28, 2019


So this guy is "running for president" but doesn't want to talk about what he'd do if he was president. Got it? Good.
 
Planit said:
Asked if he'd raise taxes on corporations as president, Howard Schultz says: "I don't want to talk in the hypothetical about what I would do if I was president."https://t.co/Db6OQriTlQ

— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) January 28, 2019


So this guy is "running for president" but doesn't want to talk about what he'd do if he was president. Got it? Good.
Click to expand...
He is running to make the Democrats not shoot themselves in the foot. He won't actually stay in, but he will stay in long enough to assure that the D's pick a centrist candidate and not someone on the far left like AOC or someone crazy progressive like her.
 
WSU MUP Student said:
^ AOC isn't old enough to be elected in 2020. She only just turned 29 a few months ago.
Click to expand...
My point wasn't super clear, sorry. My point is her (or the Democratic Party) pushing for more progressive candidates like her. Not actually her.
 
Hink said:
My point wasn't super clear, sorry. My point is her (or the Democratic Party) pushing for more progressive candidates like her. Not actually her.
Click to expand...

I disagree. If they really were, Pelosi wouldn't be the Speaker. I think most of the long term democrats see people like AOC, Harris, Gabbard, and Sanders as outliers who threaten to disrupt the establishment. There are policies and protocols even for democrats and these folks push the envelope. From what I've read, there is a significant number of House democrats that dislike AOC. I'd say I'm relatively centrist, but if I were to classify myself in one of the two parties, I'd be a conservative democrat. I cannot stand AOC to be honest. She is trying way too hard without any real experience and needs to chill out. She is wearing out her welcome fast.

Dem's need a great uniter. Someone who can bring in the center of both parties. Those new progressives are just too progressive for those in the middle or even slightly right. None of those folks above will get any respect from the right, save for Sanders, simply because he's got experience. If they want to establish a long term base of power, they need someone who can work with both sides and get conservatives to forget that they are a Democrat.
 
FWIW, while I don't agree with all of her policy positions, I have no problem with AOC or her "behavior" or "composure". She's under 30. She's of a different generation than 95% of the rest of the folks in the House and Senate and I don't expect her to behave the same as them. I also don't have much sympathy for the, "She needs to sit down and learn her role and earn some respect" argument that you hear from so many on the left and the right. She was elected by her constituents and is beholden to them. She's earned her position just as much as any of the other 434 members of the House.

Let her get in there and shake things up a bit. I fully expect that her positions will change as she's been in office longer and she gains more experience but I haven't seen anything that she's done that has been offensive or that I would view as trying too hard - she definitely hasn't done anything as cringeworthy as Elizabeth Warren's Instagram video with the beer. In fact, I'd say that thanks to her age, nearly every social media post or video I've seen with AOC comes off as far more natural and relatable than just about anything any of the other high-profile members put out which always seem so contrived and focus-grouped.
 
AG74683 said:
I disagree. If they really were, Pelosi wouldn't be the Speaker. I think most of the long term democrats see people like AOC, Harris, Gabbard, and Sanders as outliers who threaten to disrupt the establishment. There are policies and protocols even for democrats and these folks push the envelope. From what I've read, there is a significant number of House democrats that dislike AOC. I'd say I'm relatively centrist, but if I were to classify myself in one of the two parties, I'd be a conservative democrat. I cannot stand AOC to be honest. She is trying way too hard without any real experience and needs to chill out. She is wearing out her welcome fast.

Dem's need a great uniter. Someone who can bring in the center of both parties. Those new progressives are just too progressive for those in the middle or even slightly right. None of those folks above will get any respect from the right, save for Sanders, simply because he's got experience. If they want to establish a long term base of power, they need someone who can work with both sides and get conservatives to forget that they are a Democrat.
Click to expand...
Pelosi was chosen so she could burn bridges and then retire without blood on the newbies hands. The Democrats are really good at screwing up easy wins. I completely agree with you about uniting our country, but the Democrats should just want to win. They need to pick someone who doesn't alienate half the electorate with their views. They need someone who can stay on message and focus on bringing middle America up. A message of inclusivity and open government would work. They also need to figure out how to rebrand the Green New Deal into something more digestable. People want efficiency, and better infrastructure, and smarter cities, etc., but they are selling it too hard with the old style. They cannot say they will tax anyone more. It won't sell to middle America. Villianizing / punishing successful people has never worked for the D's. They should stay clear of those arguments.
 
WSU MUP Student said:
FWIW, while I don't agree with all of her policy positions, I have no problem with AOC or her "behavior" or "composure". She's under 30. She's of a different generation than 95% of the rest of the folks in the House and Senate and I don't expect her to behave the same as them.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good, and I'm inclined to agree, but our positions are irrelevant, it's the party that matters. If she wants to do good for her constituents, she's going to need party support, and she's off to a bad start. It's frustrating because you absolutely want her to be herself, but that just won't work. She's doing more harm than good right now. It's a game, and right now she's in last place.

Hink said:
Pelosi was chosen so she could burn bridges and then retire without blood on the newbies hands. The Democrats are really good at screwing up easy wins. I completely agree with you about uniting our country, but the Democrats should just want to win. They need to pick someone who doesn't alienate half the electorate with their views. They need someone who can stay on message and focus on bringing middle America up.
Click to expand...

I think "just win" isn't the best position, because then you end up with candidates like Clinton or Obama. I didn't dislike Obama, and I think he did a good job, but clearly there was significant animosity, otherwise Trump/Clinton wouldn't have the same result. To be fair, Clinton was an atrocious candidate.

They need a long term plan, someone who can stick through two terms and not have to worry about the next candidate taking the election. They use the wrong arguments for every single social or environmental thing they try to push. It's all about the "people" or "saving the planet" which is all well and good, but those aren't things Republicans generally think about, nor really care. Bottom line is that they want fiscal responsibility (which is hilarious but it's still an important party position), and those programs cost money. The argument should be based on return on investment. YES these programs will cost money, but here are the potential savings. Every argument should be based on how these programs can directly benefit the economy.
 
I think my problem with the parties is the same old tired people the keep trotting out for potential candidates. When it comes to house or senate I take that as a more local issue. The state and the state parties should get the right people out there. If NY want AOC then that's fine with me. She represents NY and not me (good or bad). My problem is the next or last presidential race. Both parties keep throwing their used junk at us to vote on. So a good centrist like me has no one I can get behind to vote for. I get the choice of extremes or candidates that have so much baggage that I'm ready for a change. There must be some benign and effective Senator, Governor or someone that can actually do a good job and not just ham it up for the cameras or make radical statements just to get coverage. You know, someone who will actually govern.
 
While its early I honestly think Shultz would take away votes from any democratic nominee, thus giving trump 4 more years, assuming he survives nomination. I honestly wouldn't mind Bloomberg. I think he would be good for the nation. The dems will figure out a way to put the least electable person on the ballot.
 
See I can like AOC. She at least speaks to a lot of points that the R's seem to forget...

Bloomberg Article said:
Soon, though, Meadows and other Republicans were telling Chairman Elijah Cummings of Maryland that members should get more than three days’ notice to attend questioning of witnesses by Democratic staff lawyers. Meadows said five days was better, particularly for lawmakers who live far from Washington.
Ocasio-Cortez wasted no time in offering her first remarks on the committee. “I don’t believe we need five days” if lawmakers are doing their jobs, she responded.
Meadows wasn’t going to let that go. Formally directing his remarks to Cummings, he responded: “Mr. Chairman, I can tell you on all of this at this particular point, we’re all wanting to cooperate.” But he said, “Sometimes our schedules, you know, we’re not just sitting around eating bonbons, waiting for the call of anybody.”
Ocasio-Cortez then asked Cummings whether Republicans gave members ample notice for such matters during the last congressional session, when they ran the committee.
“No,” said Cummings, of Maryland.
“OK, thank you,” said Ocasio-Cortez.
Click to expand...

Do you remember a month ago when the rules were different? The smell of hypocrisy is ripe.
 
Our governor (Virginia) is making a big mess of this recent scandal. If you haven't heard, someone found a photo in his med school yearbook that is allegedly of him that shows him posing in black face with someone else dressed as a klans man. He's a democratic governor. Initially he apologized for it, then later said that he is not the person in the photo. Everyone is calling for him to resign.

I'm torn on the whole thing. It's a crappy thing to do, and if he took responsibility and owned it, I feel like maybe people wouldn't be so hard-core over calling for his resignation. But at the same time, he was still the best option to promote the welfare of minorities when he was elected. Our Lieutenant Governor is African American, so I'm also wondering if maybe that contributes to the calls for his resignation at this point. If he would be replaced by another white man, would people be pushing so hard?

I did vote for our Lieutenant Governor, and I liked him, but he's also REALLY young and inexperienced. So this could be interesting.
 
Back
Top