• 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

A referendum to pave the way (figuratively speaking) for MARTA expansion into Gwinnett County (northeastern Atlanta suburb) failed yesterday, roughly by a 54% - 46% margin. Anyone who thinks that the northern Atlanta suburbs have flipped to blue (or are even trending towards blue absent candidates running on an ORANGE MAN BAD platform and/or accepting millions of dollars of out-of-state dark money campaign contributions) is apparently sorely mistaken...
 
Bubba said:
A referendum to pave the way (figuratively speaking) for MARTA expansion into Gwinnett County (northeastern Atlanta suburb) failed yesterday, roughly by a 54% - 46% margin. Anyone who thinks that the northern Atlanta suburbs have flipped to blue (or are even trending towards blue absent candidates running on an ORANGE MAN BAD platform and/or accepting millions of dollars of out-of-state dark money campaign contributions) is apparently sorely mistaken...
Click to expand...

Phoenix is also having a vote on the future of light rail expansion. I call it the rich people want bigger roads and no buses bill. I wish people would explain that the more poor people that take bus or light rail the fewer cars that are in your way and you can happily drive that jag or bmw.

We're also getting a state ballot just for Phoenix (councilman can't get it through Phoenix). It's the pay off the Phoenix pension debt bill. Oh, and the city can't raise it's budget until the pension is paid off. Kind of like saying you don't get a raise until you pay your debts knowing you don't have the money to pay your debts now. Arizona still carries a lot of red. I think we get it from the retired midwesterners who keep coming here and ruining our state like they did theirs.
 
What's with the Beto love? I really don't get it. The dude couldn't win an election in his home state but I'm supposed to think he's the one to unseat the sitting president. What gets people excited about him? What policy positions does he have? It's just weird to me. I've been saying for two years the Dems will totally screw up this next election even though it's there for the taking. But nope, gotta try to be all things to all people and instead alienate a whole lot more. Ugh. Wake me in 2024.
 
MD Planner said:
What's with the Beto love? I really don't get it. The dude couldn't win an election in his home state but I'm supposed to think he's the one to unseat the sitting president. What gets people excited about him? What policy positions does he have? It's just weird to me. I've been saying for two years the Dems will totally screw up this next election even though it's there for the taking. But nope, gotta try to be all things to all people and instead alienate a whole lot more. Ugh. Wake me in 2024.
Click to expand...

He did win his Congressional seat. The level of crazy in Texas means he can have a pass for not beating the leader of the American Taliban. There is a LONG way to go.
 
MD Planner said:
What's with the Beto love? I really don't get it. The dude couldn't win an election in his home state but I'm supposed to think he's the one to unseat the sitting president. What gets people excited about him? What policy positions does he have? It's just weird to me. I've been saying for two years the Dems will totally screw up this next election even though it's there for the taking. But nope, gotta try to be all things to all people and instead alienate a whole lot more. Ugh. Wake me in 2024.
Click to expand...

Well, he's tall, so he's got that going for him which is good...
 
This comes from 2 math teachers with a combined total of 70 years experience.

It has an indisputable mathematical logic It also made me Laugh Out Loud This is a strictly mathematical viewpoint ... and it goes like this:
What Makes 100% ?
What does it mean to give MORE than 100%?
Ever wonder about those people who say they are giving more than 100%? We have all been to those meetings where someone wants you to give over 100%.
How about achieving 103%?
What makes up 100% in life?
Here's a little mathematical formula that might help you answer these questions:

If:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Is represented as:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26.

Then:
H-A-R-D-W-O-R-K
8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11 = 98%
And
K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E
11+14+15+23+12+5+4+7+5 = 96%
But ,
A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E
1+20+20+9+20+21+4+5 = 100%

And,
B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T
2+21+12+12+19+8+9+20 = 103%
AND , look how far ass kissing will take you.
A-S-S-K-I-S-S-I-N-G
1+19+19+11+9+19+19+9+14+7 = 118%

So, one can conclude with mathematical certainty, than while Hard work
and Knowledge will get you close, and Attitude will get you there. Its the Bullshit and Ass Kissing that will put you over the top.

Now you know why Politicians are where they are!

I’ve never seen a better explanation than this formula ………….. how true it is.
Click to expand...


one way to explain it.
 
Crickets.... Just two days after some pretty big political new dropped. What's that all about?
24185
 
el Guapo said:
Crickets.... Just two days after some pretty big political new dropped. What's that all about?
View attachment 24185
Click to expand...
I am waiting for the final report to be released to pass judgement, but honestly, I am not sure how this isn't good news for all involved. At least our President cannot easily have been proven to have colluded with Russia. Isn't that a good thing? I mean he isn't in the clear on a number of other issues he still has to deal with, including obstruction of justice, but at least he isn't out there colluding.

I would like to believe this will have our congress bi-partisanly put up more barriers for future elected officials to do stupid things, but it will end up with both parties yelling at each other - either because they didn't find something, or because they even looked.

It is also quiet about the emails that the Trump team has been using. Oddly enough Hannity didn't have that as a topic...

Both sides do stupid things. The Mueller Report will be a good read about how inept and corrupt the Trump team is, but clearly it will not show collusion, which in my mind is a good thing. I am glad we didn't elect someone that is that stupid to collude with the Russians.

Now let's get back to not fixing any of the slew of other problems our country faces...
 
I would very much like to read the report for myself before coming to any thoughtful conclusions about its contents. This post is based on taking the Barr summary information available today at its word.

I agree, Hink. It is a relief that the worst case scenario is not, in fact, the finding. I mean honestly--did any of us most strident opponents of Trump really want to go through what would have happened had Mueller made essentially a treasonous Trump conclusion? Think about what that would've looked like, and what the result would have been. That's what I told my wife when the summary was released--she was perplexed that I was relieved rather than angry. Besides, the investigation and report did make one key conclusion: that Trump has TERRIBLE judgment in who he allowed in his orbit and continues to allow in his orbit. Spectacularly so... like a modern Teapot Dome (I'm looking at you, Ryan Zinke), but more widespread throughout the cabinet and advisors.

And it is good for the Democratic Party, as it will force the Party to focus on policies and actions. They'll have to acknowledge what went terribly wrong in the last election, rather than seeking an external factor. They'll have to focus on Trump's actions as President, rather than technical aspects of how he got there (turtle on a fence post analogy). And they'll focus on how this country managed to elect such a morally & ethically bankrupt person through populist rage--how evangelicals were able to look past virtually everything about him, how factory workers were able to look past Trump's actions throughout his career of kicking around the little guy, how economically distressed individuals were able to accept a familial silver spoon billionaire as their lord and savior, how conservatives were able to embrace an economic free market interventionist. These are hard questions, because there will be some really, really ugly answers to them. These are questions I'm having to ask my parents as well, as even my hardcore evangelical conservative brother refused to vote for him.

And Trump still has a laundry list of other legal issues related to business and charity dealings. Those always had more smoke than the Russian angle did. His kids, in particular, are doing him no favors with their actions, and are showing why government leadership should not be a family business.

My greatest hope is that someone wakes up and decides to reassert separation/balance of powers. The executive branch has been on this dangerous path for a long time, and Trump is demonstrating what happens when someone actually starts really screwing around with things that have resulted from particularly the legislative branch ceding authority. I'm convinced someone could run for President with a limited platform of rebuilding executive guardrails and redistricting reform and probably win with no other policy platforms to speak of.
 
Suburb Repairman said:
My greatest hope is that someone wakes up and decides to reassert separation/balance of powers. The executive branch has been on this dangerous path for a long time, and Trump is demonstrating what happens when someone actually starts really screwing around with things that have resulted from particularly the legislative branch ceding authority. I'm convinced someone could run for President with a limited platform of rebuilding executive guardrails and redistricting reform and probably win with no other policy platforms to speak of.
Click to expand...

If someone ran on reducing the power of the President they would win. "I will run for one term. I will pressure both parties to pass laws. I will force legislation on budgets and emergency orders. I will reduce my roll to as little as possible and be the grease that makes the government work, not the wheel that runs over my opponents."

What a dream, huh? Someone running because they care instead of wanting power?
 
el Guapo said:
Crickets.... Just two days after some pretty big political new dropped. What's that all about?
Click to expand...

I think too many huge political drops have happened. Everyone is just getting conditioned to them. It's like mass shootings. Oh, another one of those. Ok. We all know nothing is going to come out of this until someone actually releases the report and we're all ignoring what already came out of this...how many indictments, arrests, actual guilty pleas?

On the pres front, he might be guilty, he might be innocent, or like any politician there is plausible deniability. I don't care. I just think he's a crap man (I wouldn't trust him with my daughters), and his policies generally suck and have cost me in taxes with little to no return on service that I can see. I'll vote for the candidate that actually is half decent as a person (I can't expect perfect, they are politicians), and the one that actually wants to do something useful like balance the budget. Love the fancy ideas on the democrat side, but without a good budget how are we going to pay for it. Or do we just keep ignoring that?
 
Republicans during Obama years:
we'll do anything to stop him
our first job is to make him a one term president
block everything we can in congress

Republicans yesterday:
The Democrats will try to block everything
They are more concerned with stopping our great president than doing anything
We should have a bipartisan approach
 
Planit said:
Republicans during Obama years:
we'll do anything to stop him
our first job is to make him a one term president
block everything we can in congress

Republicans yesterday:
The Democrats will try to block everything
They are more concerned with stopping our great president than doing anything
We should have a bipartisan approach
Click to expand...
Stop looking backwards, I am talking about the present. Well at least until another Democrat is President, then it is different.

The hypocrisy on both sides is painful. Trump should just be pleased he wasn't indicted. Instead of gloating about not being indicted, he probably should just move on. Lindsay Graham now wants to look into the Obama White House and if they worked to keep Trump out. Seriously? We just spent 2 years looking at issues about Trump and you were all angry, now you want to look at Obama?

The Democrats should look at the situation as a net positive and move on. The Republicans should be thankful it wasn't worse and move on.

Remember when we were going to pass bi-partisan infrastructure bills? Or work on policy things? Do you remember what policy is? Or passing laws?
 
As we progress towards next years political season, let me ask you two questions...

What has Trump done that has made America better than the day he took office.
What has Trump done that has made America worse than the day he took office.

Now I am not talking about stuff that he had zero influence over, but what actions has he taken?
 
If the Special Counsel Investigation had decided to hold off on all indictments and plea deals until Mueller dropped the final report on the AG's desk last week, I have a feeling that we'd be talking about things very differently.

Can you imagine the news cycle last friday if Mueller had simultaneously delivered his report while dropping unsealed indictments against 30+ individuals, including folks like campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Trump's personal lawyer (Michael Cohen), personal advisor Roger Stone, and 3-star general and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn along with the plea deals from Flynn, Cohen, Rick Gates, etc? People on both sides would be talking about impeachment much more seriously. The narrative would be more along the lines of "While the investigation did not find evidence that Individual #1 or the campaign directly conspired with foreign powers to defraud the government in regards to the election and interfere with the political process, there was sufficient evidence to charge XX individuals with various crimes related to the campaign, crimes related to their contacts and interactions with foreign governments, crimes related to lies made under oath to the U.S. Congress, etc. and we have already secured guilty pleas from some of those individuals. Additionally, we have found enough evidence to charge XX foreign nationals and Russian GRU officers with crimes related to interfering with the American election process and hacking and leaking emails from the DNC and the '16 Clinton campaign."

Anybody who thinks the Investigation resulted in a whole lot of nothing isn't looking at the big picture.
 
"I support the Great Lakes, always have. They're beautiful. They're big, very deep, record deepness."

"Then it comes to a place called Michigan. Have you ever heard of Michigan?"

Huh?
 
WSU MUP Student said:
If the Special Counsel Investigation had decided to hold off on all indictments and plea deals until Mueller dropped the final report on the AG's desk last week, I have a feeling that we'd be talking about things very differently.

Can you imagine the news cycle last friday if Mueller had simultaneously delivered his report while dropping unsealed indictments against 30+ individuals, including folks like campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Trump's personal lawyer (Michael Cohen), personal advisor Roger Stone, and 3-star general and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn along with the plea deals from Flynn, Cohen, Rick Gates, etc? People on both sides would be talking about impeachment much more seriously. The narrative would be more along the lines of "While the investigation did not find evidence that Individual #1 or the campaign directly conspired with foreign powers to defraud the government in regards to the election and interfere with the political process, there was sufficient evidence to charge XX individuals with various crimes related to the campaign, crimes related to their contacts and interactions with foreign governments, crimes related to lies made under oath to the U.S. Congress, etc. and we have already secured guilty pleas from some of those individuals. Additionally, we have found enough evidence to charge XX foreign nationals and Russian GRU officers with crimes related to interfering with the American election process and hacking and leaking emails from the DNC and the '16 Clinton campaign."

Anybody who thinks the Investigation resulted in a whole lot of nothing isn't looking at the big picture.
Click to expand...
Anyone who thinks that the council didn't do anything and hasn't even seen the final document yet is pontificating political non-sense. The special council found a whole lot of things. He acted on a whole lot of things. He didn't find that the President colluded. Or at least there isn't enough direct evidence to prosecute him for it. Barr had a four page letter to summarize 300 pages of report. My guess is that there is more in there. Who knows what it is, but it isn't going to just have a last paragraph that says:

"We were stupid for ever starting this. Sorry for wasting your time and money. Have a nice day."
 
There is absolutely no way Barr even read half of it.


I disagree. As a middle of the pack former law student I can easily see how a very bright attorney, such as Attorney General Barr is generally recognized by even his opponents, could read, summarize, and report upon the Mueller report in the time used by Barr.

First, Barr has a team of eager young attorneys along with seasoned attorneys who would have assisted the AG with the process. Even Cyburbia's beloved Notorious RBG has as similar team. However, I believe he could have done it as a solo project if he was concerned about leaks.

Next, what we don't know is how much of the report was narrative versus the the necessary references such a report would contain to to case law citations, depositions, witness statements, documents, and other dicta. So maybe the Mueller report wasn't as dense as a James Joyce novel.

Third, Mueller, acting as a professional, may have also provided an executive summary to Barr. Barr, being an ethical professional and knowing that the full report WILL eventually be made public, may have faithfully summarized the report.

Finally, the AG wasn't under any legal or ethical obligation to release anything to anyone. The AG released the summary in the 'interests of justice.'
 
Last edited:
Richmond Jake said:
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has no heart. No soul.
Click to expand...
Ok, having no soul myself, I'll bite.

1. Why should the Special Olympics be federally funded?

2. Will the Special Olympics disintegrate if federal funding stops?

3. Are the Special Olympics an excellent example of a nonprofit group receiving federal funding because some politicians were pandering for votes with taxpayer dollars and other politicians were afraid of being labeled has having no soul by the DemoMedia consortium?

5. How many other worthwhile causes remain unfunded by the federal government?

6. If all citizens making a dollar more than the median income were taxed at 90% of their income, how awesome would this nation be? Am I right, or what?

In America, we use the ballot box to force other people to pay for things we like but don't support ourselves. We do this because we have been taught by the propagandists that people with more money than we have obviously got that money unethically. And people with less money than we have are only in that state because of systemic ____________ism.

Once you accept that you have no soul you're free to think.
 
Last edited:
el Guapo said:
Ok, having no soul myself, I'll bite.

1. Why should the Special Olympics be federally funded?
Click to expand...

There is just a good of a reason as anything else. Should hospitals be non-profit? Should NPR be funded? Should farmers get subsidies? Sure. They all provide something to our country.

el Guapo said:
2. Will the Special Olympics disintegrate if federal funding stops?
Click to expand...

I don't know. My guess though is yes. They are not marketing money makers. They exist only as a way to show fair game or that we appreciate everyone, no matter their ability (or disability).

el Guapo said:
3. Are the Special Olympics an excellent example of a nonprofit group receiving federal funding because some politicians were pandering for votes with taxpayer dollars and other politicians were afraid of being labeled has having no soul by the DemoMedia consortium?
Click to expand...

Again, hospitals, schools, churches? None of these should probably be non-profit, but they are. This is really no different.

el Guapo said:
5. How many other worthwhile causes remain unfunded by the federal government?
Click to expand...

A lot. But this isn't something that is going to change the trajectory of our deficit. I very much wish our government understood how to use its money more wisely, but this isn't going to make any difference, so why are we even arguing over it.

el Guapo said:
6. If all citizens making a dollar more than the median income were taxed at 90% of their income, how awesome would this nation be? Am I right, or what?
Click to expand...

I think our taxation system sucks. I also don't think it is unreasonable for someone who is making billions to pay more. How much more is a fair debate that our country should be having. The idea that we can't even talk about it is stupid. We can. We can have a civil discussion on the merits of a progressive taxation system. I might not agree with pushing up the tax rate until someone makes $10 million or more in a year, but maybe that number should be $50 million, or $5 million. Beats me, but it is worth having the conversation.

el Guapo said:
In America, we use the ballot box to force other people to pay for things we like but don't support ourselves. We do this because we have been taught by the propagandists that people with more money than we have obviously got that money unethically. And people with less money than we have are only in that state because of systemic ____________ism.

Once you accept that you have no soul you're free to think.
Click to expand...

Our government has laws that require funding. That funding comes from the country that we all freely chose to live in. We argue over who leads it, what priorities that we have, and how to spend the money that the government brings in. That is part of the ugly crying face we call democracy. We have moved the world forward more times that we have watched it regress. We continue to evolve even when our country sometimes wants to stay the same. That evolution has made us the strongest, most emulated democracy in the world.

Personally, I disagree with spending money on a lot of things. I think our government should have a balanced budget. I think our priorities are wrong on a lot of levels. The special Olympics is just not on my radar. It is something that adds to the fabric of our society, and I am okay spending the very little money that it cost to run it. If we want to have a conversation of budgets, we really should only be talking about military and entitlements. Everything else doesn't matter.
 
el Guapo said:
6. If all citizens making a dollar more than the median income were taxed at 90% of their income, how awesome would this nation be? Am I right, or what?
Click to expand...

The local fish wrapper jumped head-first into this last week, printing an article that defines "the rich" as any household making twice or more the median household income in the metro area. Um, no. That ain't rich - it's arguably the upper half of middle-class, it's maybe definable as "well off" or "comfortable", but it is by no means rich.
 
When Trump took office many people said that it was the end of the world and that he was going to destroy America. Guess what happened, almost nothing. I say almost because his personal style and lack of candor gave the political pundits and SNL so much to play off of that it seems like an ongoing joke.

But the fact is the system that we have in place in DC promotes a lack of instantaneous destruction. Trump taking office did not change any real trajectory. Things did not get substantially better or substantially worse. A few weeks ago I asked for examples of specific actions that Trump has personally done to make America better or worse and got crickets.

Perhaps the real issue is not the R or D sitting in the White House, but those who we elect to Congress and the Senate who just play the political game and follow party lines. Perhaps it is time that people start supporting candidates at multiple levels that really want to focus on partnerships and making things better for everyone, not just the wealthy or impoverished. Perhaps it is time for us to abandon the idea of political parties and start electing true Statesmen (and stateswomen) who will be more focused on doing the right thing and less focused on getting reelected.
 
michaelskis said:
But the fact is the system that we have in place in DC promotes a lack of instantaneous destruction. Trump taking office did not change any real trajectory. Things did not get substantially better or substantially worse.
Click to expand...

A couple of our younger staffers had absolute meltdowns after the past Presidential election - us old(er) folks had to explain to them that it's not the end of the world. Sure, there'll be some policy changes - we'll help our clients navigate them, and then whenever someone else is elected POTUS, we'll help them change again. Relax, kid, the Union will persevere.
 
The possibility of Trump blundering into a war remains a real risk, greater now that there are fewer adults to prevent a catastrophe

McConnell's enabling of Trump's judicial appointees (those that, ahem, are even mildly qualified) will most certainly change the landscape for civil liberties (for the worse, IMO, but YMMV) though it will be by dribs and drabs, not overnight. Death by a thousand cuts

Gorsuch and Kavanaugh

No one can say with a straight face that environmental protections have not been weakened

But for John McCain, millions of Americans would have lost health care and those, like me with pre-existing conditions, would have found it impossible to afford health care any longer

Transgender servicemen and servicewomen have been told their services are no longer appreciated in the United State Military

Children have been separated from their families and we might never be able to reunite them

Trump has insulted our allies and emboldened our enemies. To what end?

What consumer protection?

Trump has instigated trade wars amongst allies and enemies alike and he has no idea how devastating they are on our economy

Truth as we used to know it has been unceremoniously flushed down the crapper - he's up to some 9,000 lies now give or take

Sadly, I could go on, but this is depressing enough
 
The greatest harms Trump has inflicted on our democracy have been of a corrosive and systemic nature. The way he’s tried to shake public confidence in this country’s national institutions in order to protect his own skin or advance his agenda at the expense of truth is a sort of pernicious harm. People in this country should be very concerned that there’s an administration willing to declare an ‘national emergency’ in order to circumvent Article 1 of the Constitution. This has potential ramifications well beyond any silly wall construction. We should be even more concerned that there are a sizeable number of legislators willing to go along with this in the interests of their own reelection. When a President changes the national dialogue and openly speaks of things like creating a ‘Muslim registry’, it’s all well and good to say ‘Hey, I’m not a Muslim, so Trump hasn’t sworn to do anything against ME. This is just innocent posturing and we should all just calm down shut up and accept this as being perfectly normal. Besides, the economy happens to be doing well this quarter and what more do you want?’ But the dangers in this kind of thing lie down the road. The courts may rightly strike down such a registry as being unconstitutional…this time, but the wind is shifting and there’s no guarantee this won’t change in some future ruling. Is the sky falling? No, but the political environment and public discourse is being shifted in a way that increases the likelihood of sky falling events in the future.
 
Last edited:
Two to four years in federal government time is, in my opinion, equivalent to 'instantaneous'.

Just as 10,000 years in geologic terms is instantaneous.

Corrosive is one of the best adjectives for this President. We don't feel the failure until it breaks, but there are clear and objective signs the entire time leading to the failure due to corrosion.

Now, is this cosmetic corrosion or structural corrosion? And how long does it take for the two to become the same? I'm not sure, but I'm focusing alot of my radar capacity on it.
 
The soulless side of me agrees with Mskies. Not much has changed for me other than the huge bump in taxes. I don''t like this pres mostly because he's an idiot, womanizer, racist, and the list goes on. I'm not expecting perfect, but somewhat closer to an upright citizen who is reasonably in touch with the world. I'm more upset with Congress. They are the ones passing the laws or not. It's their inability to get behind decent policy like fix our roads and bridges. Remember that gem that never happened? We would rather argue the value of border walls and special project funding than actually do what our government was meant to do. At the same time, just because nothing personally affected me it doesn't mean there isn't a slow erosion of rights going on. I wish government would stick to important government things and not frivolous regulations. Maybe not to the point el Guapo is talking about, but maybe actually limit spending?
 
I actually have a bigger issue with McConnell than Trump. This has to do with me often judging those that enable harsher than the perpetrator--it might be a weird quirk of my personality. And he's been around long enough that he should get a great deal of credit for the Congress's ceding of legislative power to the executive branch. He is likewise complicit in the gerrymandering that has fundamentally undermined representative government in this country. Congress is dysfunctional largely because of this.

There are plenty of things that perhaps should not be funded, but you could strip every small one out and still not make an ounce of difference. The budget conversation has to start with the grossly bloated and wasteful Defense Department and the jacked-up entitlement programs. Yes it is hard, but I didn't elect these sorry asses to be timid and lazy.
 
DVD said:
The soulless side of me agrees with Mskies. Not much has changed for me other than the huge bump in taxes. I don''t like this pres mostly because he's an idiot, womanizer, racist, and the list goes on. I'm not expecting perfect, but somewhat closer to an upright citizen who is reasonably in touch with the world. I'm more upset with Congress. They are the ones passing the laws or not. It's their inability to get behind decent policy like fix our roads and bridges. Remember that gem that never happened? We would rather argue the value of border walls and special project funding than actually do what our government was meant to do. At the same time, just because nothing personally affected me it doesn't mean there isn't a slow erosion of rights going on. I wish government would stick to important government things and not frivolous regulations. Maybe not to the point el Guapo is talking about, but maybe actually limit spending?
Click to expand...

I don't like Trump either, but I think that the hatred towards him is tearing this country apart. For example, there was a woman in CA who was proud to publicly ridicule at 74 year old jewish man who had a MAGA hat on. NBC Link The act later cost her a job. Now I might be wrong, but I don't recall people publicly ridiculing people who wore Bush or Obama gear. And this recent act is not the first time. The kid in DC, who was a little punk, received death threats thanks to the media's inaccurate portrayal of an event. I think society as a whole would benefit from being a bit more civilized.
 
The hat has become a thing in itself. No other candidate has so successfully marketed a campaign item since I like Ike buttons. It has become more of a symbol people are attaching to racism because the originator is kind of racist. Granted the old guy probably isn't racist just supports the pres, but symbolism is what it is. At the same time, why is this lady attacking some poor old guy. It's not like yelling at him will make him change his mind and take the hat off much less change his political views. We all really need to become more civil towards each other again. We might differ on political or religious views, but that doesn't mean we can't have a beer and enjoy a hockey game - unless of course your religious views actually prevent that and I respect that. You can have water instead.

The other part is all the attention we, society, and the media are giving these things. It spurs some people to yell at old men to get their 5 minutes of fame. It makes some people think this is acceptable behavior. The truth is, if we all just turned and walked away from red hats or what ever stupid event is going on then it would just die from lack of interest. We also need to stop hyprebolizing - is that a word? - everything. the pres is now claiming the highest level of presidential harassment ever. Like no one ever harassed past presidents for lets say a birth certificate, sleeping with interns, weapons of mass destruction, and the list goes on. It seems there's a pattern of harassment from actual issues to more and more pointless things.

Before we revamp congress to actually get people who care more about issues than elections can we get rid of the cable news networks? I don't need 24 hour reports on how the AG went to the bathroom carrying a 300 page report to possible consider using it as toilet paper when it turns out he just had a stack of Playboys and wanted a little private time. Someone wake me up when actual events happen.
 
DVD said:
The other part is all the attention we, society, and the media are giving these things. It spurs some people to yell at old men to get their 5 minutes of fame. It makes some people think this is acceptable behavior. The truth is, if we all just turned and walked away from red hats or what ever stupid event is going on then it would just die from lack of interest. We also need to stop hyprebolizing - is that a word? - everything. the pres is now claiming the highest level of presidential harassment ever. Like no one ever harassed past presidents for lets say a birth certificate, sleeping with interns, weapons of mass destruction, and the list goes on. It seems there's a pattern of harassment from actual issues to more and more pointless things.
Click to expand...

The Democrats are in a tough spot. If they stand up for what they believe, they are likely going to look as bad as the Republicans who are yelling. But if they go for the respectful angle, they aren't going to get the media attention. Trump has made attention the only thing that matters. Policy isn't important. Reasoning isn't important. Attention is. He gets eyes. He gets your attention.

I believe that the D's should still play the reasonable and respectful card, but I don't see it happening. Look at Buttigieg. He is moving up on the D side, mainly because he is relaxed and sounds reasonable. Yet there is still the firebrands who want to yell back at Trump like Warren and Harris.

Society likes this mess. Although we all say we want decorum and class, we like the Kardashians. We like the Real Housewife's of wherever. We want others to act right and be classy. But in the end we support candidates and people who continue to act wrong and are classless. This is on society. We can be hurt and angry, but until people start voting for people instead of party, we are likely to just keep having D's yell at R's for wearing a red hat.
 
That's just it. You gotta angry up your base with fear and yelling to get them out the door to vote. If you do respectable no one is going to get off the couch to vote for you. It is known.
 
I'm operating under the assumption that those of you who identify as Democrats accept that it was your party that got President Trump elected.

You did that by nominating an insanely machiavellian major party candidate. You and the press conspired to knowingly nominate a documented pathological liar and criminal on a grand scale.

Your nomination of Hillary was an intentional giant FU to the rest of us. Hillary appealed to you - in part - because you are mad at the rest of America. Hillary was the personification of your disdain for those of us deplorables. I can't blame you though, as you've been spoon fed a media diet of hate, identity politics, and envy for most of your lives.

Because of YOU, we now have our first man-child president.

Karma can be either a teacher or a punisher. The cool part is you decide which. Lately it looks like you are doubling down on your anger. Let's see how that works out.
 
Back
Top