+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: AACbbs (/forum-460.html)
+---- Forum: Members (/forum-401.html)
+----- Forum: Rice (/forum-444.html)
+------ Forum: Rice Archives (/forum-640.html)
+------ Thread: Trump Administration (/thread-797972.html)
Pages: 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 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 12-15-2019 06:34 PM
I think "base" in regard to any candidate or party, is those who support and/or likely to vote for the given candidate/party.
Hard for me to figure out who is in Buttigieg's base - I think it is people saying A democrat, but preferably none of the leaders.
But I just take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments of who is in Trump's base and why.
RE: Trump Administration - RiceLad15 - 12-15-2019 06:42 PM
(12-15-2019 06:34 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: I think "base" in regard to any candidate or party, is those who support and/or likely to vote for the given candidate/party.
Hard for me to figure out who is in Buttigieg's base - I think it is people saying A democrat, but preferably none of the leaders.
But I just take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments of who is in Trump's base and why.
I take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments made by Trump of various women, people with disabilities, immigrants, Congresswomen, etc.
Yet his base still fervently supports him, as opposed to an alternative Republican candidate.
RE: Trump Administration - tanqtonic - 12-15-2019 06:42 PM
But thank you, nonetheless, for your adamant, forceful, and continued demonstration of what *you* think about those whom 'loyally support' Trump. I guess the more 'loyal' that support is (now your new definition de jour) of Trump, the more you hold that view of them.
Funny, I thought you were complaining about blind ignorance. Your standard is apparently now 'the more loyal one is to Trump the more they fit into the ignorant pile'.
What level in the lad world ignorance scale does that standard engender, lad? A free pass to the 'paradigm of openness' level, perhaps?
RE: Trump Administration - RiceLad15 - 12-15-2019 06:47 PM
(12-15-2019 06:20 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Lad -- I am pointing out that *you* simply redefined 'base' to whatever small group *you*, in your oh so cute way, wish and want it to be.
And when called out on that redefinition proceed down some garbage semantic patented lad dance.
Cry some more, lad.
And the funny thing, lad, is that *your* redefinition and (continued die hard last man) defense of it is a defense of a concept that is, on its surface and easily understood to be, fairly abjectly as ignorant (if taken at your face value) as that of the people that you complain about.
Yes, you saying that 'his most loyal' would be less fing ignorant; debatable -- but absolutely less ignorant than what you are maddy poo abut being called out on.
Absolutely fing rich!
And in light of OOs example of the issue to you, in which you could have backed down and said 'let me rephrase', simply told him 'cute' -- and then *again* doubled down on with yet *another* crapola redefinition.
Doubly rich!
I think you need some more castanets in todays version of your cha cha cha.....
Wait, you’re saying that when asked what I consider someone’s base I, shocking, defined who I thought the definition was? STOP THE *** **** PRESSES.
Yes, it is me who is crying in this situation, not the person who can’t handle a difference of opinion.
Bye Felicia.
RE: Trump Administration - tanqtonic - 12-15-2019 06:51 PM
(12-15-2019 06:42 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:(12-15-2019 06:34 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: I think "base" in regard to any candidate or party, is those who support and/or likely to vote for the given candidate/party.
Hard for me to figure out who is in Buttigieg's base - I think it is people saying A democrat, but preferably none of the leaders.
But I just take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments of who is in Trump's base and why.
I take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments made by Trump of various women, people with disabilities, immigrants, Congresswomen, etc.
Yet his base still fervently supports him, as opposed to an alternative Republican candidate.
I take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments made by progressives of various people who deign to make a profit, anyone who has more than x dollars of net assets, anyone who questions climate change, anyone who questions the level of illegal immigration, Republicans in general, etc.
Yet their base still fervently supports them, as opposed to any alternative candidates.
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 12-15-2019 06:53 PM
(12-15-2019 06:42 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:(12-15-2019 06:34 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: I think "base" in regard to any candidate or party, is those who support and/or likely to vote for the given candidate/party.
Hard for me to figure out who is in Buttigieg's base - I think it is people saying A democrat, but preferably none of the leaders.
But I just take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments of who is in Trump's base and why.
I take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments made by Trump of various women, people with disabilities, immigrants, Congresswomen, etc.
Yet his base still fervently supports him, as opposed to an alternative Republican candidate.
Well, we don't need a perfect person, like the your side does. We just want somebody who will get good things done for the country. I didn't vote for him in 2016 for many of the reasons you cite. But now there is a track record, one I like and hope continues.
In any case, supporting him does not mean we applaud and cheer everything he does. Personally, I wince whenever he does some of those things. But nothing he does makes me yearn for a Democrat.
I just hate the implication, like in your statement (and in Fountains), that we support him because we like those things you mention.
We had our chance to oppose him in 2016, and I did. But now he is the incumbent, doing a good job even against the mighty headwind of Democratic obstruction and conspiracy theories, and there is no real alternative in the Republican party and no alternative at all in the Democrats. It is either Trump or somebody worse. I opt for the ill-mannered guy doing well for us, rather than a Ms. Manners who will bring us down. If you want to choose the other way, that is your right as an American.
RE: Trump Administration - tanqtonic - 12-15-2019 07:03 PM
(12-15-2019 06:47 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:(12-15-2019 06:20 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Lad -- I am pointing out that *you* simply redefined 'base' to whatever small group *you*, in your oh so cute way, wish and want it to be.
And when called out on that redefinition proceed down some garbage semantic patented lad dance.
Cry some more, lad.
And the funny thing, lad, is that *your* redefinition and (continued die hard last man) defense of it is a defense of a concept that is, on its surface and easily understood to be, fairly abjectly as ignorant (if taken at your face value) as that of the people that you complain about.
Yes, you saying that 'his most loyal' would be less fing ignorant; debatable -- but absolutely less ignorant than what you are maddy poo abut being called out on.
Absolutely fing rich!
And in light of OOs example of the issue to you, in which you could have backed down and said 'let me rephrase', simply told him 'cute' -- and then *again* doubled down on with yet *another* crapola redefinition.
Doubly rich!
I think you need some more castanets in todays version of your cha cha cha.....
Wait, you’re saying that when asked what I consider someone’s base I, shocking, defined who I thought the definition was?
Funny you forget you simply responded with a simple general slur about that group. How *did* you overlook that fact?
Quote:Yes, it is me who is crying in this situation, not the person who can’t handle a difference of opinion.
Bye Felicia.
I find it absolutely mind boggling that, when asked, you simply respond with a 'deplorables' level comment.
Kind of like:
Q: what do you consider trump's base.
A: pretty much deplorables.
I mean, the above is pretty much an accurate paraphrase of your position, mind you.
Funny you dont fing clue in to your own answer.
Doubly funny that you dont clue in the inherent ignorance in that answer, all the while about seemingly complaining about such ignorants.
Triply funny that you dont clue in to that after OO spoon feeds you the issue.
Quadruply funny is your snide answer back to OO after your failure to clue in to the issue.
But please keep it up.
RE: Trump Administration - Owl 69/70/75 - 12-15-2019 08:18 PM
(12-15-2019 06:53 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:(12-15-2019 06:42 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:Well, we don't need a perfect person, like the your side does. We just want somebody who will get good things done for the country. I didn't vote for him in 2016 for many of the reasons you cite. But now there is a track record, one I like and hope continues.(12-15-2019 06:34 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: I think "base" in regard to any candidate or party, is those who support and/or likely to vote for the given candidate/party.I take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments made by Trump of various women, people with disabilities, immigrants, Congresswomen, etc.
Hard for me to figure out who is in Buttigieg's base - I think it is people saying A democrat, but preferably none of the leaders.
But I just take issue with some of the more mean-spirited assessments of who is in Trump's base and why.
Yet his base still fervently supports him, as opposed to an alternative Republican candidate.
In any case, supporting him does not mean we applaud and cheer everything he does. Personally, I wince whenever he does some of those things. But nothing he does makes me yearn for a Democrat.
I just hate the implication, like in your statement (and in Fountains), that we support him because we like those things you mention.
We had our chance to oppose him in 2016, and I did. But now he is the incumbent, doing a good job even against the mighty headwind of Democratic obstruction and conspiracy theories, and there is no real alternative in the Republican party and no alternative at all in the Democrats. It is either Trump or somebody worse. I opt for the ill-mannered guy doing well for us, rather than a Ms. Manners who will bring us down. If you want to choose the other way, that is your right as an American.
Wish I'd said that. Spot on. +3
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 12-15-2019 10:07 PM
Medicare for all in Iowa
“There are some voices in the Democratic primary right now who are calling for a policy that would eliminate the job of every single American working at every single insurance company in the country"
"Economists say the jobs impact of any shift away from private health care would be felt nationwide by hundreds of thousands of Americans. It’s not just jobs at private insurance companies that could be affected; those working on processing insurance claims at hospitals and other administrative health care jobs could be reduced as well."
" Economists at the University of Michigan found in an analysis of Sanders’ Medicare for All bill that the jobs of nearly 747,000 health insurance industry workers, and an additional 1.06 million health insurance administrative staffers, would no longer be needed if Medicare for All became law."
Full disclosure: My son works for Principal Mutual in Des Moines.
RE: Trump Administration - Owl 69/70/75 - 12-15-2019 10:11 PM
(12-15-2019 10:07 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: Medicare for all in Iowa
If government controls your health care and takes away your guns, you are--for all intents and purposes--slaves.
RE: Trump Administration - Fountains of Wayne Graham - 12-16-2019 11:01 AM
Indeed. Felons on Medicare in Nebraska are slaves.
RE: Trump Administration - mrbig - 12-16-2019 11:06 AM
(12-14-2019 04:31 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: You had a mental picture of "his base" when you wrote the words. At least Lad is hiding out in semi-honorable silence, not this mealy-mouthed crap. Be a man and tell us what you think when the words "Trump base" are uttered. Own it.
And everybody, right and left, is invited to give his thoughts on what constitutes Trump's "base". FBO, AE, JAAO, Big, any lurkers. Come one come all.
I didn't check this cesspool yesterday and didn't really feel like weighing in because discussing politics with you all doesn't make my life or attitude any better (like I have written before, discussing policy is more interesting). But how about defining "Trump's base" as the 53% of Republicans in a recent poll who said he was a better president than Lincoln?
RE: Trump Administration - Owl 69/70/75 - 12-16-2019 11:23 AM
(12-16-2019 11:01 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote: Indeed. Felons on Medicare in Nebraska are slaves.
Way to pick an extreme, outlandish example.
But maybe not so extreme or outlandish. If government controls our healthcare and takes away our guns, felons in Nebraska would pretty much describe our lives.
RE: Trump Administration - RiceLad15 - 12-16-2019 12:06 PM
(12-16-2019 11:23 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:(12-16-2019 11:01 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote: Indeed. Felons on Medicare in Nebraska are slaves.
Way to pick an extreme, outlandish example.
But maybe not so extreme or outlandish. If government controls our healthcare and takes away our guns, felons in Nebraska would pretty much describe our lives.
Yeah, but you said that the government taking away guns and controlling your healthcare means "you are--for all intents and purposes--slaves."
So how is it outlandish to identify a group who meets those requirements (felons can't own weapons and being on Medicare means the government controls your healthcare) as slaves?
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 12-16-2019 12:15 PM
(12-16-2019 11:06 AM)mrbig Wrote:(12-14-2019 04:31 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: You had a mental picture of "his base" when you wrote the words. At least Lad is hiding out in semi-honorable silence, not this mealy-mouthed crap. Be a man and tell us what you think when the words "Trump base" are uttered. Own it.
And everybody, right and left, is invited to give his thoughts on what constitutes Trump's "base". FBO, AE, JAAO, Big, any lurkers. Come one come all.
I didn't check this cesspool yesterday and didn't really feel like weighing in because discussing politics with you all doesn't make my life or attitude any better (like I have written before, discussing policy is more interesting). But how about defining "Trump's base" as the 53% of Republicans in a recent poll who said he was a better president than Lincoln?
I guess there are different perspectives on Lincoln, as there are on all public figures. At least Trump has not led us into war...yet. I am sure you are coming from the perspective of "Lincoln freed the slaves, so that's all that matters". Can you name any other thing Lincoln did? Trade agreements, economic measures? I can think of the draft and the suspension of Habeas Corpus.
Of course, Lincoln did not run for office on the platform of freeing slaves, nor was it an objective of his. When he did free slaves, it was only in the 11 CSA states - the ones in the Union states were not freed, and only because the CSA states din not meet his ultimatum. If any had, they could have retained their slaves. Maybe you need to read up on Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation.
Lincoln's letter to Greeley
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery." - Lincoln
In any case, I think if we were to run the election of 1860 again, most of the Democrat base would vote for Stephen Douglas, and against Lincoln, just as they did in 1860.
I will repeat, I think the core of Trump's base are working men and small business people, augmented by people enjoying some economic success for the first time ever. The same people who the Democrats SAY they work for, but who have seen little to prove it over the years. I don't think you can define his base by how they react to his boorish behavior or how great they think Lincoln was.
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 12-16-2019 12:19 PM
(12-16-2019 12:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:(12-16-2019 11:23 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:(12-16-2019 11:01 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote: Indeed. Felons on Medicare in Nebraska are slaves.
Way to pick an extreme, outlandish example.
But maybe not so extreme or outlandish. If government controls our healthcare and takes away our guns, felons in Nebraska would pretty much describe our lives.
Yeah, but you said that the government taking away guns and controlling your healthcare means "you are--for all intents and purposes--slaves."
So how is it outlandish to identify a group who meets those requirements (felons can't own weapons and being on Medicare means the government controls your healthcare) as slaves?
Another group that meets those criteria are the citizens of North Korea. Is it your position that they are free?
RE: Trump Administration - mrbig - 12-16-2019 12:25 PM
(12-15-2019 10:11 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: If government controls your health care and takes away your guns, you are--for all intents and purposes--slaves.
(12-16-2019 11:23 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:(12-16-2019 11:01 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote: Indeed. Felons on Medicare in Nebraska are slaves.
Way to pick an extreme, outlandish example.
But maybe not so extreme or outlandish. If government controls our healthcare and takes away our guns, felons in Nebraska would pretty much describe our lives.
The statement is, of course, a little silly since no serious democratic presidential candidate is advocating that the government take all guns and I'm not sure any active candidates are advocating a take-back for "assault weapons". And I'm not sure what you mean by "control your health care" since even Medicare for All still has private hospitals, clinics, doctors, etc. even though the funding mechanism becomes largely public.
That said, if the government controlled my healthcare and took away my guns, my life would ... not be very different. And i'm pretty sure I'm not a slave for any intents or any purposes.
Right now my healthcare is partially controlled by GEHA, a private corporation. Not sure how switching that control to the government would make things any better or worse. Based on my experience working for the government, there are some great employees and some terrible ones, which I imagine is the same as at GEHA. Most polls I have seen show higher approval ratings for people who actually have public plans like Medicare, Medicaid, and the military than the approval rating for private plans for people who actually have those private plans. But I have been OK with my private plans over the years. I have also been fortunate enough that both myself and my immediate family have stayed pretty healthy so I've never had to challenge a denial of coverage.
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 12-16-2019 12:30 PM
(12-16-2019 12:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: So how is it outlandish to identify a group who meets those requirements (felons can't own weapons and being on Medicare means the government controls your healthcare) as slaves?
Well, don't change what he said. He said "for all intents and purposes".
I have known a lot of felons, been related to a couple. To a man (or woman) what they want is a job - a way to support themselves that enables them to walk the straight and narrow. They will trade their right to vote in a heartbeat for a job. Trump's economy offers many of them that chance for a job.
Edit: I think some felons can own weapons. I called the Sheriff to ask about my ex's second husband - he said it depends.
RE: Trump Administration - RiceLad15 - 12-16-2019 12:42 PM
(12-16-2019 12:19 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:(12-16-2019 12:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:(12-16-2019 11:23 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:(12-16-2019 11:01 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote: Indeed. Felons on Medicare in Nebraska are slaves.
Way to pick an extreme, outlandish example.
But maybe not so extreme or outlandish. If government controls our healthcare and takes away our guns, felons in Nebraska would pretty much describe our lives.
Yeah, but you said that the government taking away guns and controlling your healthcare means "you are--for all intents and purposes--slaves."
So how is it outlandish to identify a group who meets those requirements (felons can't own weapons and being on Medicare means the government controls your healthcare) as slaves?
Another group that meets those criteria are the citizens of North Korea. Is it your position that they are free?
To be abundantly clear - I do not in any way, shape, or form agree with Owl#s “all intents and purposes” regarding slavery. That’s a major leap.
RE: Trump Administration - Owl 69/70/75 - 12-16-2019 12:42 PM
(12-16-2019 12:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:(12-16-2019 11:23 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:Yeah, but you said that the government taking away guns and controlling your healthcare means "you are--for all intents and purposes--slaves."(12-16-2019 11:01 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote: Indeed. Felons on Medicare in Nebraska are slaves.Way to pick an extreme, outlandish example.
But maybe not so extreme or outlandish. If government controls our healthcare and takes away our guns, felons in Nebraska would pretty much describe our lives.
So how is it outlandish to identify a group who meets those requirements (felons can't own weapons and being on Medicare means the government controls your healthcare) as slaves?
A felon in Nebraska on Medicare pretty much is a slave. He/She certainly has lost control of a significant potion of his/her life. It's not an existence that I would want. You can argue over where the dividing line between slave and not slave lies, but that is way too close to slavery to suit me.