• 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

michaelskis said:
Well, the North Carolina republicans hit a new low yesterday. Despite telling the democrats that they would not vote on anything on Wednesday Morning so some could attend 9/11 memorial services, they changed up at the last minute to override the governors veto regarding the budget with a 55-9 vote knowing that many of those on the democrat side would not be there to vote.

LINK TO STORY

I know people who have always supported the GOP who have indicated that this was the last straw for them.
Click to expand...

This was really one of the dumbest things they could have done. No one will be able to justify their actions here. In the world of PR, this is what one would call a "bad look".
 
AG74683 said:
This was really one of the dumbest things they could have done. No one will be able to justify their actions here. In the world of PR, this is what one would call a "bad look".
Click to expand...


I think that's one of the things that have changed - they don't care if it looks bad - that PR line is now over - very sad, unless people fight back
 
Anyone who experienced or is familiar with the events of the 1960's can tell you the amount of civil discord/division we're experiencing now is not nearly as bad as it's been in the past. One thing, however, has changed from previous generations. It used to be that if one wanted to profess allegiance to some view or actively voice displeasure with the other 'side' of an issue you had to go through considerable effort to do so. In the past, one could start a grass-roots 'underground press', but that took a lot of coordination, organization and resources to be able to print, broadcast, and/or distribute materials to get the word out. Social media has changed all that. Now one can announce their allegiances and broadcast whatever ill-supported conspiracy theories they care to with no more than a few clicks. Suddenly, Karen or Jamal on Facebook can reach as many eyes and ears as the John Birch Society, or Weather Underground Organization did in years past. This state of affairs is made manifestly worse when the Leader of the Free World routinely increases certain fringe organizations visibility and prestige when he re-tweets their unsupported conspiracy theories. Sadly, because many Americans have been conditioned to regard the office of President as being one associated with wielding power responsibly and with restraint they are inclined to accept this information without (sufficient) question.
I felt sad yesterday when a Facebook friend shared two things: one about "It's official, Muslims have taken over Michigan. Click if you agree." The other was something about "Real Americans have to work hard their whole lives, pay taxes, and still can't afford medical care, while Illegals get it for free. Click if you agree."

How best to respond (if indeed at all) to these?
 
Last edited:
I don't respond to idiot or racist Facebook posts. I just think as a municipal employee, it is unwise. I've only blocked messages from a couple of people who were just completely over the top, so I still see some sheet that gives me agita. I like to think, sometimes, that after I leave public service, I'd reply to these types of posts, but I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind, so I probably never will.
 
Gedunker said:
I don't respond to idiot or racist Facebook posts. I just think as a municipal employee, it is unwise. I've only blocked messages from a couple of people who were just completely over the top, so I still see some sheet that gives me agita. I like to think, sometimes, that after I leave public service, I'd reply to these types of posts, but I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind, so I probably never will.
Click to expand...


I think BigOwl said he was going to be a professional internet troll when he retires.
 
Gedunker said:
I don't respond to idiot or racist Facebook posts. I just think as a municipal employee, it is unwise. I've only blocked messages from a couple of people who were just completely over the top, so I still see some sheet that gives me agita. I like to think, sometimes, that after I leave public service, I'd reply to these types of posts, but I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind, so I probably never will.
Click to expand...
el Guapo kind of addressed this issue on a thread he started a couple months ago. How does one go about actually changing hearts and minds in the face of ignorance? Similar to his N-word contractor, we've all likely encountered this sort of thing on message boards and social media... Mexicans are a bunch of rapists and drug dealers, Muslims are a bunch of terrorists, anyone supporting Trump is a racist/fascist, etc. To call this out and openly condemn people propagating these views calling them bigots or morons might feel gratifying but it's certainly not the best way to go about changing hearts and minds as it closes the doors to folks ever entertaining alternate views. Human nature is such that we are hardwired to assume an us/them binary view, and as soon as you've identified your tribe it's frequently on like Donkey Kong. The trick is in devising ways to successfully circumvent this programming. It's not an easy or simple thing to do in practice.
 
Maister said:
Anyone who experienced or is familiar with the events of the 1960's can tell you the amount of civil discord/division we're experiencing now is not nearly as bad as it's been in the past. One thing, however, has changed from previous generations. It used to be that if one wanted to profess allegiance to some view or actively voice displeasure with the other 'side' of an issue you had to go through considerable effort to do so. In the past, one could start a grass-roots 'underground press', but that took a lot of coordination, organization and resources to be able to print, broadcast, and/or distribute materials to get the word out. Social media has changed all that. Now one can announce their allegiances and broadcast whatever ill-supported conspiracy theories they care to with no more than a few clicks. Suddenly, Karen or Jamal on Facebook can reach as many eyes and ears as the John Birch Society, or Weather Underground Organization did in years past. This state of affairs is made manifestly worse when the Leader of the Free World routinely increases certain fringe organizations visibility and prestige when he re-tweets their unsupported conspiracy theories. Sadly, because many Americans have been conditioned to regard the office of President as being one associated with wielding power responsibly and with restraint they are inclined to accept this information without (sufficient) question.
I felt sad yesterday when a Facebook friend shared two things: one about "It's official, Muslims have taken over Michigan. Click if you agree." The other was something about "Real Americans have to work hard their whole lives, pay taxes, and still can't afford medical care, while Illegals get it for free. Click if you agree."

How best to respond (if indeed at all) to these?
Click to expand...
There has been a long history of people who used pseudonyms to say how they really feel for various reasons. For example, Silence Dogood was not a middle age female widow, but a 16 year old Ben Franklin.

I have a friend (who also lives in Michigan) who posted a couple of 9/11 conspiracy links yesterday. Personally, I ignore them because I think they are looking for a reaction more than anything else. I do however think that there are situations where one can gather support for a grass roots effort with the desire to peruse some greater cause and given the nature of things with DC over the past several decades, I would love to see more 3rd party candidates have a real chance.
 
Did anyone watch the debates? If so, can you provide an overview of you thoughts, who you thought won, and who, if anyone, would be able to actually unify this country again.

Also what were the best moments?
 
The debate was on at our house, but The Girl & I ended up having a fairly in depth conversations about her (& her peers) thoughts about the overall political issues today. That was pretty cool.

Still too many participants to say which was a 'winner' or 'loser' - there are a couple that are fading and one or 2 that should be cabinet members, but I'm still in the evaluation mode.
 
I didn't watch the debates because I've already read enough about the various candidates positions (or in some cases "positions"). As to 'who can unify this country again', there are no charismatic titans currently in play on the national stage that could even come close to filling that role. It's likely to be a 'what' rather than a 'who' that reunites us.

In thinking about this whole unifier thing, you notice how moderates seldom inspire the masses...oh man, I loved how that leader cut a great compromise on that tax bill! And the way they spent their political capital in brokering those congressional appointments in exchange for that relatively unpopular appropriations measure was awesome! And yet these are the hallmarks of competent leadership and essential for getting business of governance done. Politicos selling some vision seem to appeal to one end of the spectrum at the expense of the other. A candidate selling an inspiring vision where health care is considered a basic human right is sure to alienate those on the right, just as surely as a candidate selling a vision where people of color are no longer welcome in this country is sure to alienate the left. It's actually a bit more complicated than that, but that's the crux of the problem.

As to third parties, I have had it up to here with them. They have a way of showing up at our doorstep in a most annoying fashion every four years when they trot out some Presidential candidate who dependably trims a critical 1.3% of the electorate thus throwing the balance of the race one way or the other. So you want to be in charge of the country? Here's a novel idea: how about you prove you possess the capability to operate in a governing role from the ground up. You know, invest in developing candidates to first serve as state legislators, secretary of state, county commissioners, mayors, etc. then once you've proven you can handle governance on a smaller scale move up the food chain. Build your freakin' party instead of treating the Chief Executive as some sort of entry level position.
 
michaelskis said:
Did anyone watch the debates?
Click to expand...

Maybe it's just me, but I see no point in watching them. The Democratic party will hand pick their candidate anyway even with the primary votes through whatever means they can. Plus it's a stable full of lame ducks just trying to out crazy each other.
 
In tRump's speech last night, he called his VP Mike Pounce.

I guess Mike will have to go this morning and fill out forms with a sharpie to legally change his name just to prove his bossman right.
 
561BC6FB-0803-40C6-A241-EB6E56FD6D7C.jpeg


This sums up my thoughts on that...
 
Maister said:
I felt sad yesterday when a Facebook friend shared two things: one about "It's official, Muslims have taken over Michigan. Click if you agree." The other was something about "Real Americans have to work hard their whole lives, pay taxes, and still can't afford medical care, while Illegals get it for free. Click if you agree."
Click to expand...

I don't know, but if you love Jesus, like this post. If you worship Satan, keep on scrolling.
 
Yeah, but without a senate that would vote to do something and with most senators thinking the house is run by a bunch of whinny dems that are just out to get him and all the stuff is made up charges the whole thing goes nowhere. It's the senate we need to change more than anything and for all the people who say your senator isn't the problem I'm looking at you, because my senator sure the hell ain't the problem. Actually one of my senators is absolutely the problem. I didn't vote for her, nobody did. She was appointed.
 
DVD said:
Yeah, but without a senate that would vote to do something and with most senators thinking the house is run by a bunch of whinny dems that are just out to get him and all the stuff is made up charges the whole thing goes nowhere. It's the senate we need to change more than anything and for all the people who say your senator isn't the problem I'm looking at you, because my senator sure the hell ain't the problem. Actually one of my senators is absolutely the problem. I didn't vote for her, nobody did. She was appointed.
Click to expand...

Few thoughts... First, there was a point in history where all Senators were appointed by the individual states. This changed with the ratification of the 17th amendment. Second, I don't think this will go anywhere similar to how Bill Clinton was impeached. Finally, I wonder what the impeachable offenses will be and how serious they will be.
 
In the end it is just another stain on the Trump presidency. I would imagine that this wouldn't have occurred if Trump would have just clarified or allowed the whistle blower to testify right away. If he didn't do anything wrong, why has he stonewalled so much?

I think Pelosi doesn't want to impeach because it looks petty. I think she understands that impeachment won't go anywhere and can be used by Trump as another political weapon to show how he is ALWAYS being attacked by the left.

With that said, Trump continues to bend the rules, walk the line, and just do things that President's have never done before. Personally, I don't care if it is a D or an R, but the President needs to reflect the values and decency of our country. Provide stability and clarity to our country. This President has viewed this office much differently than any President before. I think that is a bad thing. I don't think he respects the office, which is my biggest issue (well... beyond his rhetoric and demeanor).

Impeachment will go no where and likely come out as a win for Trump. I'm not sure what else the D's can do though. If the whistle blower turns into a partisan person who was going after Trump, than the D's have really put themselves in a bind again...
 
We're hearing the POTUS pressed the Ukrainian president to start an investigation of a private American citizen eight times in a single conversation while military aid to help them stave off Russia was being withheld. Starting an impeachment inquiry would seem to be the right thing to do in such a case, regardless of whatever political outcomes might follow.
 
At the same time, it's the right thing to do. Pick any of the several crimes, misuse of office, using foreign powers for his election purposes, whatever, and it should all be brought to a proper investigation (by proper I mean not partisan - can we even do that anymore) and get actual closer. The Mueller report should have been the kickoff for the whole thing, but for whatever reason we're buying the line that nothing happened here.
 
DVD said:
At the same time, it's the right thing to do. Pick any of the several crimes, misuse of office, using foreign powers for his election purposes, whatever, and it should all be brought to a proper investigation (by proper I mean not partisan - can we even do that anymore) and get actual closer. The Mueller report should have been the kickoff for the whole thing, but for whatever reason we're buying the line that nothing happened here.
Click to expand...

I think that's the idea the Dem's are on about. Realistically they know the chance of succeeding here is low, but it's for the benefit of their own base and perhaps those who are on the fence but no longer trust Trump.

I have to wonder whether there's some intel that the Dem's have that really pushed them to begin the inquiry. I think this whistleblower complaint might be bigger than what it's being made out to be right now.
 
Wow....


The way he speaks.... the discussions... I can't imagine the Republicans are going to be happy about this. It makes him and the US look pretty bad to the world. If I was a European leader I would be pretty mad.

Trump said:
Germany does almost nothing for you. All they do is talk and I think it's something that you should ·really ask them about. When I.was· ·speaking to Angela Merkel she talks Ukraine, but she ·doesn't do· anything. A lot of the European countries are the. same way· so I think it's.something you want to look at but the United States has been very ·very good to Ukraine. I wouldn't say that it's reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very . good to Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Zelenskyy said:
I· will personally tell you that one· of my assistants· spoke with Mr. Giuliani just.recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. G1uliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and. we will meet once · he comes to Ukraine. I just wanted to assure you once again_that you have nobody but friends around-us. I w.ill make sure -that-I surround myself with the best and most experienced people. I also· wanted to ·tell you that we are friends. We are great· friends and you Mr. President have. friends -in our country so we can continue our strategic·partnership. I also plan to surround · myself with great people ·and in addition to that investigation, I guarantee as the President of Ukraine that all the investigations.will be done_openly and candidly .. That I can assure you ..
Click to expand...

Zelenskyy said:
I would like to tell you that I also have.quite a few·Ukrainian friends that live iri the United· States. ·Actually last time I traveled to the Unit'ed States, I stayed in New York near Central Park and I stayed at the Trump Tower.
Click to expand...
 
"Yes you are absolutely right. Not only 100%, but actually 1000%."

Finally, someone who speaks on Trump's level.
 
Maister said:
Here is the whistleblower's complaint:
Click to expand...

These are some heavy allegations, wow. Of particular interest to me is that senior officials literally tried to delete or otherwise limit access to the phone call transcriptions.

On the flip side of it, I'd like to see an official unbiased investigation into the claims that Biden pressured the previous Ukrainian president to do his own bidding while serving as VP. I think that's just as important as Trump's meddling because realistically Biden will most likely be the nominee.
 
I think if you are Devin Nunes and you publicly say:

"I want to congratulate the Democrats on the rollout of their latest information warfare operation against the President and their extraordinary ability to once again enlist the mainstream media in their campaign," he said in his opening statements at today's hearing."

You should be fired. You can say it is partisan, but look at the transcripts. This looks bad. It is certainly a lot of smoke. There is still a bit to go before the fire is found, but honestly if you don't think there is smoke right now, you are so far lost in the "Trump is my God" world, that you should be fired.

I agree on the Biden review. I think all politicians should be held accountable. This isn't (or shouldn't be) a partisan issue. Spending tons of money looking into Hillary Clinton and Bengazi was political, but (at least at first) it was necessary to clear her. The second, third, twenty-seventh, etc. review may have been too much.

If the D's started going down the path of re-reviewing the Mueller stuff, I would disagree with them. This is a new allegation, and it is something that needs to be looked at. President's generally don't get impeachment proceedings started on them, because they aren't doing things that even remotely make the other side think they can impeach them. Trump has continued to walk a line (and in many cases just jump across it) that puts him in a position to be looked at.

If you just followed the political and Presidential norms, you don't get impeached. If you bring up your political rival in a phone call with a foreign leader for any reason it is odd. The whistleblower certain has laid out a pretty solid reason for his/her concern. The R's need to just agree that this was bad, and help the D's look into it. If it is nothing, then so be it, but it doesn't look like nothing.
 
Just a thought...this looks like the gravy on top of the Mueller Report.

IMHO, I also think it validates the Mueller Report as well.



tRump thought impeachment was a dead issue and he can do whatever he wants and get away with it. I think Pelosi was trying to keep impeachment down and if tRump won in 2020 (with electoral college support) and the Senate changed, then pursue it. However this looks like something she (well her party house members) could not ignore. I hope it drags through the election, but other distractions and talking points will supplant the narrative.
 
What Biden and/or his son may have done in Ukraine is a complete red herring.

The fact is that the sitting U.S. President used the power of his office to withhold Congressionally appropriated funds to a foreign country and then further requested that the leader of that foreign country work with his personal lawyer and the AG to launch an investigation into a political rival during an election cycle, something that would personally benefit the President.

The President and the AG further tried to block the statually mandated release of the whistleblower complaint from the DNI to the Senate Intelligence Committee.


As I've recently heard it said, "You can't fool all of the people all of the time, but if you can fool 42% of the electorate and 34 out of 53 Republican Senators, than you can abuse your office all of the time."
 
Planit said:
I think Pelosi was trying to keep impeachment down and if tRump won in 2020 (with electoral college support) and the Senate changed, then pursue it. However this looks like something she (well her party house members) could not ignore. I hope it drags through the election, but other distractions and talking points will supplant the narrative.
Click to expand...

In general I don't care for Pelosi either, but she managed to hold everything together just long enough for a strong case to develop.

WSU MUP Student said:
What Biden and/or his son may have done in Ukraine is a complete red herring.
Click to expand...

That's definitely true, but just because it's a distraction doesn't mean it shouldn't warrant a similar investigation. In fact, I think the Democrats absolutely HAVE to initiate one themselves. It would be incredibly hypocritical to ignore the allegation and pursue the presidents actions when essentially the two did the same thing.
 
He's not the real whistleblower! tRump is! The other guy is a saboteur!

New R talking point. Thank you Giuliani and the rest...
 
JNA said:
Civil War if he is impeached ?
Click to expand...
No. Just a bunch of super grumbling.

Though, if Trump is impeached, we get Pence. I would assume many Repubs/conservatives would be just fine with that.

Any opinions on Pence's executive leadership skills? Looking at you, Indiana residents? ;)
 
Last edited:
Maister said:
Here's a novel idea: how about you prove you possess the capability to operate in a governing role from the ground up. You know, invest in developing candidates to first serve as state legislators, secretary of state, county commissioners, mayors, etc. then once you've proven you can handle governance on a smaller scale move up the food chain. Build your freakin' party instead of treating the Chief Executive as some sort of entry level position.
Click to expand...

This, this, this, a million times this. In 2012 and 2016, Jill Stein got a higher percentage of votes in the community where I live than anywhere else in the country. However, I've never seen a Green Party candidate on the ballot for a town board, city council, or even school board office. Yes, NYS has active third parties, but it also has fusion voting, and most Democratic or Republican candidates are also on the ballot for the Working Families Party, Conservative Party, and so on. These third parties seldom run a candidate just on their ballot line.

Anyhow, if the Greens had candidates for local offices around here, they'd probably have a NIMBY platform. They'd also get a lot of votes.
 
Another example of why I say my political orientation is a "Bill Maher liberal."

 
JNA said:
Can you keep up with all the stories ?
Click to expand...
Yes, but I fear the public at large will not. The White House is praying the public will become confused/fatigued with all the three-card-Monte shit and multiple counter-narratives they're probably going to be throwing out en masse during the following weeks. I hope their misdirection fails. In the end this case is very very simple: a sitting POTUS solicited a foreign government's assistance to influence the 2020 election and we've already seen that with our very own eyes in the call summary document Trump provided. Period. The House will vote to impeach him from office. If the sitting GOP senators want to set the precedent that henceforth it's okay for American political parties to enlist aid from foreign governments in getting folks elected/re-elected, then by all means they should acquit Trump.
 
I got a chuckle from the official Twitter account for Ukraine, taking advantage of the current situation to point out that it is "Ukraine" not "the Ukraine" (as TrumptyDumpty has called it repeatedly) and to ask people to begin spelling their capital "Kyiv" not "Kiev".

I noted that the whistle-blower spelled it "Kyiv" in their written report. Just observing.
 
Gedunker said:
I got a chuckle from the official Twitter account for Ukraine, taking advantage of the current situation to point out that it is "Ukraine" not "the Ukraine" (as TrumptyDumpty has called it repeatedly) and to ask people to begin spelling their capital "Kyiv" not "Kiev".

I noted that the whistle-blower spelled it "Kyiv" in their written report. Just observing.
Click to expand...

In other news, THE Ohio State has sued Ukraine for their use of the word "THE". The fact that they lost their trademark case be damned!
 
Dan said:
This, this, this, a million times this. In 2012 and 2016, Jill Stein got a higher percentage of votes in the community where I live than anywhere else in the country. However, I've never seen a Green Party candidate on the ballot for a town board, city council, or even school board office. Yes, NYS has active third parties, but it also has fusion voting, and most Democratic or Republican candidates are also on the ballot for the Working Families Party, Conservative Party, and so on. These third parties seldom run a candidate just on their ballot line.

Anyhow, if the Greens had candidates for local offices around here, they'd probably have a NIMBY platform. They'd also get a lot of votes.
Click to expand...
Search term: Dan Savage "reanimated corpse of Ralph Nader'
Resulting article contains many cuss words
 
Talk about medieval old school - a wall with a moat filled with alligators.

Given today's Dilbert cartoon

why not "sharks have laser beams attached to their heads"
 
Last edited:
Although the gators might survive okay in the Rio Grande, it might become more difficult as you cross over to New Mexico and Arizona. I don't think the gators will like the heat that much. Besides, once you hit California all you might be able to get is vegetarian piranha.
 
DVD said:
Although the gators might survive okay in the Rio Grande, it might become more difficult as you cross over to New Mexico and Arizona. I don't think the gators will like the heat that much. Besides, once you hit California all you might be able to get is vegetarian piranha.
Click to expand...
Which everyone knows is the WORST kind of piranha.... that would be a bigly mistake.
 
Back
Top