• 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

kjel said:
The USDA has adequate emergency funding available to float SNAP in November. There’s significant overlap between the households that receive SNAP/WIC and are covered by Medicaid, Medicaid expansion, or receive subsidies to make their ACA plan affordable. This isn’t just about SNAP.
Click to expand...

I agree that this is more than just SNAP. I used that as a reference because it is of the most discussion in my household. There are a lot of families, who don't have health insurance, that my wife still sees at her hospital. The part that gets her the most frustrated is these single mothers can't bring home their new born children because they don't have the financial ability to feed them, so the hospital won't release them.

As noted, 10,000 times before, I am not a fan of Trump and I have never voted for him. The Republicans are out of their minds with the regular budget requests, but the Democrats are holding vulnerable populations hostage for political gain by not approving the CR (first round included the continuation of several of those programs for a duration as well, but it only received 2 D votes.)

At this point I really don't care if people agree with me or not. It is the truth and more and more people are recognizing it each day.
 
I am gleefully reading the NY Times story on the sandwich thrower trial.

The government's lawyers are losing all credibility, which cred will be lost for a long time.
 
Bubba said:
Possibly the worst national political campaign ever - she just assumed she was going to win because of her last name.
Click to expand...
A lot of campaign consultants on that one that should never work in the political industry ever again. Kamala was delt a shit sandwich, but Hillary had quite literally every significant tactical advantage and found a way to lose.
 
1762360002165.png
 
Suburb Repairman said:
A lot of campaign consultants on that one that should never work in the political industry ever again. Kamala was delt a shit sandwich, but Hillary had quite literally every significant tactical advantage and found a way to lose.
Click to expand...

I agree that Clinton's campaign sucked - she just didn't bring excitement. To be fair though, the 2016 election was strange and broke from many norms - the approach Trump took would not have worked for anyone else.
 
I am very relieved by the election results in the NJ gov’s race. It was decisive rout with Sherrill winning 56.3% of the vote compared to Ciattarelli’s 43.2%. Over 3M votes were cast which hasn’t happened in non-presidential election for a long time.
 
kjel said:
I am very relieved by the election results in the NJ gov’s race. It was decisive rout with Sherrill winning 56.3% of the vote compared to Ciattarelli’s 43.2%. Over 3M votes were cast which hasn’t happened in non-presidential election for a long time.
Click to expand...
Dems swept the off-year elections. The races in NJ and VA in particular were viewed as being bellwether races anticipating national trends ahead of the 2026 elections.
 
Maister said:
Dems swept the off-year elections. The races in NJ and VA in particular were viewed as being bellwether races anticipating national trends ahead of the 2026 elections.
Click to expand...

Can you not use "Dems" as some might find it offensive. :handovermouth:

I think you are correct that 2026 will go well for the GOP (I am sure that too is offensive term to some), as long as they follow Trump's lead.

The question that I have is in regards to 2028 and is there anyone in either party that is more of a centrist who can unify the nation who might actually have a chance at the White House? My oldest will be able to vote by then and I think about his interests and right now he has zero interest in DC because he thinks they all suck. We were talking about the different races and he made some comments about this candidate or that, and I asked him where he heard that info because while I agreed, I was curious what his influences were. He explained that he went directly to their websites to look stuff up. He heard others talking about it, but he is finally starting to understand that you should take that crap with a grain of salt and to rely on the data and not the gossip.
 
All of the cities with Top 40 airports also have a significant blue lean. But that's a product of bigger cities as a rule leaning that way, and those areas typically having significant economic gravity. The question is how the state overall that is home to the airport is considered in that. For example, Dallas, Austin and Houston are all pretty bright blue.
 
Suburb Repairman said:
All of the cities with Top 40 airports also have a significant blue lean. But that's a product of bigger cities as a rule leaning that way, and those areas typically having significant economic gravity. The question is how the state overall that is home to the airport is considered in that. For example, Dallas, Austin and Houston are all pretty bright blue.
Click to expand...

I think that dichotomy of blue areas in red states might play into it. I am sure governors of red states are not going to want impacts to their air travel. The other side of the coin is air travel is always multiple locations and the odds of a departure in a red state, like TX or TN, might land in blue state, like MI.
 
michaelskis said:
What do you think the odds are that the 40 airports required to reduce flights by 10% will be in blue states or areas?
Click to expand...

Taking the reductions on a partisan basis would be chaos. You have key destinations that are more popular routes that drives part of the airline needs, as well as their individual hub locations, and then you're also dealing with landing fees could impact ticket costs as you navigate through all of this.
 
michaelskis said:
What do you think the odds are that the 40 airports required to reduce flights by 10% will be in blue states or areas?
Click to expand...
100% because it’s about punishing the pinko commie lib states don’t you know?

I live in the middle of EWR, JFK, LGA, and PHL which is the busiest airspace in the country. It’s not just people either, we’re major hubs for mail and package shipping and imported goods.
 
michaelskis said:
What do you think the odds are that the 40 airports required to reduce flights by 10% will be in blue states or areas?
Click to expand...
So you do a lot of work directly with the FAA that gives you this insight, do you? FAA ATO is my primary client (that's a long story)...maybe you should occasionally take a minute before you hit the "post reply" button.
 
Bubba said:
So you do a lot of work directly with the FAA that gives you this insight, do you? FAA ATO is my primary client (that's a long story)...maybe you should occasionally take a minute before you hit the "post reply" button.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should look at how vindictive the guy who resides in the White House is. Before you hit the reply button. Trump does not give a rip about the FAA ATO and their thoughts if there is an opportunity to stick it to the Democrats.

Besides, I asked for perceptions on this questions. Personally, I do think that the Trump administration will try to play politics with this, but it will still be spread out just based on where the busiest airports in the US are located.
 
michaelskis said:
Maybe you should look at how vindictive the guy who resides in the White House is. Before you hit the reply button. Trump does not give a rip about the FAA ATO and their thoughts if there is an opportunity to stick it to the Democrats.

Besides, I asked for perceptions on this questions. Personally, I do think that the Trump administration will try to play politics with this, but it will still be spread out just based on where the busiest airports in the US are located.
Click to expand...
So you have no clue how air traffic operations and control work - got it. You could have just said your were posting politicized BS and spared everyone the time spent responding to you.
 
Near as I can tell, the 10% reduction has taken the form of prescribing the reduction to the airlines and having them figure it out. That's at least how it seems to have played out at the Austin airport with Delta.
 
Bubba said:
So you have no clue how air traffic operations and control work - got it. You could have just said your were posting politicized BS and spared everyone the time spent responding to you.
Click to expand...
You are correct. I have very limited understanding of Air Traffic Operations outside of FAA regulations pertaining to Land Use Plans and the movie Pushing Tin.

Given this is the "Political" thread, the history of this administration, and the crap that is going on with the shut down, yea, my comments will be political in nature. You might think it is BS, but I encourage everyone to look beyond their political affiliation at what is really going on. You don't have to like or agree with them, and that is OK. I just hope people stop thinking with an R or D and make judgements based on what is really going on.

Likewise, I still firmly believe that the CRs were not approved because the Democrats are playing political games. The new budget isn't approved because of a combination of new spending and new program cuts put forth by the Republicans. To me, this isn't R or D. There are people who don't agree with me with those, and that too is ok.

But that is the way I see it from an independent perspective.
 
All I know if Atlanta and Phoenix are on the list because my wife's cousin is trying to figure out airfare and my wife is going crazy on if she will show up or not. I say nothing because we're probably talking 1 or 2 flights between the two cities not all the flights.

Also Phoenix is more of a purple city. We have a dem mayor and most of the council, but a lot of the voters are red.
 
And so it continues...

CNN said:
Senate Democrats signaled they were prepared to block GOP plans to force a Friday vote to reopen the government — until they got more commitments on dealing with rising health care costs.
Click to expand...
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-n...faa-11-6-25?post-id=cmhny95nh00053b6qr277rnkj

Fox News said:
Senate Republicans had planned to put the House-passed bill to reopen the government on the floor for a vote again on Friday, but after Senate Democrats signaled that they were willing to hold out longer, that course of action is likely to change.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., opted to keep the chamber in session for a rare Friday vote, with the idea being to put the House-passed continuing resolution (CR) on the floor for a 15th time.

However, after Senate Democrats met behind closed doors on Thursday and exited their meeting with a renewed sense of unity, Thune raised the concern that, "We’ve got to get the Democrats back and engaged."
Click to expand...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/thune-says-wheels-came-off-republicans-mull-next-shutdown-move (Thune says 'wheels came off' as Republicans mull next shutdown move)
 
I've somewhat wondered if Democrats want Republicans to burn the filibuster, so then Republicans get blamed for that but then Democrats can then take advantage of it in the future.

Note: I've been on board with burning the filibuster for quite a while (like a decade+).
 
Back
Top