(07-15-2019 02:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think because you are seemingly wanting to call out everybody who doesn't bash Trump and lump them together with his few fringe supporters . . .

Two recent experiences:
- a hard-leftist that I know called me "Trump-loving";
- a moderate leftist that I know lumped me in as a "Trump admirer".

I can't think of any occasion in which I have expressed either love or admiration for Donald Trump, but to those bent on labeling, pesky facts don't seem to matter.

Trump deserves a great deal of criticism. In my day-to-day experience, he gets it in torrents, "far above my poor power to add or detract" (to adapt Lincoln's phrase). I'm not sure I could say anything original in that regard, and I certainly couldn't say it with the profanity that seems to be the fashion.

On the other hand, I believe (perhaps vainly, in both senses of "vain") that I can offer a useful challenge to leftist notions that also deserve criticism. And I've had some mild success; for example, one dyed-in-the-wool liberal that I know went from reviling the Citizens United decision to embracing it, entirely because of the force of my argument. But on the whole, the personal cost has far outweighed the success -- as I think you all have seen, and as a wiser person might have predicted.

FYI, my definition of "base" would be people that are very likely (90%+) to vote for a given person or party no matter what.

They are the people I have called STDs (straight ticket democrats). STRs would fit too.


I believe in certain things, and have predicated my support/votes on them for decades. Trump is the first to both promise and deliver. i Have little patience for the hysterical mob that has been attacking him for years. Bunch of conspiracy theorists who cannot let go. but they are the same ones attacking him for the same stuff they do. doesn't sway me.

(07-15-2019 03:10 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Why are you lying? I VERY clearly stated the opposite of that, many, many, many times.

Not exactly. Maybe it would be more correct to say that you blur any distinction between the base and the larger pool of Trump supporters or voters. Otherwise why are you trying to argue the point?

"So in your mind, there is a very small area of overlap between people who will support Trump, no matter what he says and does, without being critical of anything he does, and people who make up the base of support, who also support everything he says and does and will not be critical of him."

Quote:Again, why are you lying?

Because I'm not.

Quote:I very clearly say that I know who I would put in the base, but I don't know how many people are in his base. You even quote the comment where I say I have a clear idea of whom I would categorize as his base.
You seem to be trying to paint me as saying everyone who supports Trump is part of his base so you can attack me. That's your right, but you're wrong and it's getting tiresome.

No, what you are saying is not that everyone who supports Trump is in his radical base, but rather that there is no difference between the two.

Here's how I see it. There's a radical right base. Some members of that base are racists, but not all, and not nearly as many as the left likes to rail about. There is a radical left base. Some members of that base are collectivists/socialists/communists. I happen to think that's a majority of that base. But how much of either base is racist or collectivist/socialist/communist is not the real issue here.

The real issue is how the rest are viewed. Some of us see Trump as a lesser evil than the democrats, and you feel free to paint all with the racist/extremist brush. No matter how much we deny it, that's not good enough.

On the other side are people whom I generally regard as decent and intelligent people whole left. What I don't understand is that since Obama, what I used to call the rational left has gone hook, line, and sinker for the collectivist/socialist/communist of the radical left base, absolutely without batting a critical eye. I find that both mystifying and deeply troubling.

So to clarify what I am saying, I don't say that you accuse every Trump supporter as being of the radical right base, but you seem to want to paint them all with the same brush. At the same time you refuse to call out the radical left for what they are.

(07-15-2019 03:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 03:10 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Why are you lying? I VERY clearly stated the opposite of that, many, many, many times.

Not exactly. Maybe it would be more correct to say that you blur any distinction between the base and the larger pool of Trump supporters or voters. Otherwise why are you trying to argue the point?

"So in your mind, there is a very small area of overlap between people who will support Trump, no matter what he says and does, without being critical of anything he does, and people who make up the base of support, who also support everything he says and does and will not be critical of him."

Quote:Again, why are you lying?

Because I'm not.

Quote:I very clearly say that I know who I would put in the base, but I don't know how many people are in his base. You even quote the comment where I say I have a clear idea of whom I would categorize as his base.
You seem to be trying to paint me as saying everyone who supports Trump is part of his base so you can attack me. That's your right, but you're wrong and it's getting tiresome.

No, what you are saying is not that everyone who supports Trump is in his radical base, but rather that there is no difference between the two.

Here's how I see it. There's a radical right base. Some members of that base are racists, but not all, and not nearly as many as the left likes to rail about. There is a radical left base. Some members of that base are collectivists/socialists/communists. I happen to think that's a majority of that base. But how much of either base is racist or collectivist/socialist/communist is not the real issue here.

The real issue is how the rest are viewed. Some of us see Trump as a lesser evil than the democrats, and you feel free to paint all with the racist/extremist brush. No matter how much we deny it, that's not good enough.

On the other side are people whom I generally regard as decent and intelligent people whole left. What I don't understand is that since Obama, what I used to call the rational left has gone hook, line, and sinker for the collectivist/socialist/communist of the radical left base, absolutely without batting a critical eye. I find that both mystifying and deeply troubling.

So to clarify what I am saying, I don't say that you accuse every Trump supporter as being of the radical right base, but you seem to want to paint them all with the same brush. At the same time you refuse to call out the radical left for what they are.

I've never once said, in this discussion, that there is no difference between the base and people who supported him. If you look at the quote of mine you cite at the top, you'll see they say literally the same thing. I just added the word "base" before one of the descriptions.

You're arguing against a boogeyman, as opposed to what I am actually saying. We both agree about the base that supports Trump, yet you keep trying to extend my comment further.

I understand why people held their nose and supported Trump, and why they might again, and that decision does not mean they're part of the base I'm calling out. I disagree with their decision to do that, and I think they shouldn't, but I don't see where I called those people racist or extremist. Can you point that out to me?

I very intentionally focused on Trump's base when talking about the response to the "go back to your country" comment, yet you keep telling me that I'm talking about more people than I am...

OK, fine, have it your way, I've got better things to do than pursue this argument.

But don't go calling out people for not calling out Trump unless to are willing to call out the collectivist/socialst/communist extremist on the left.

(07-15-2019 04:17 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 03:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 03:10 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Why are you lying? I VERY clearly stated the opposite of that, many, many, many times.

Not exactly. Maybe it would be more correct to say that you blur any distinction between the base and the larger pool of Trump supporters or voters. Otherwise why are you trying to argue the point?

"So in your mind, there is a very small area of overlap between people who will support Trump, no matter what he says and does, without being critical of anything he does, and people who make up the base of support, who also support everything he says and does and will not be critical of him."

Quote:Again, why are you lying?

Because I'm not.

Quote:I very clearly say that I know who I would put in the base, but I don't know how many people are in his base. You even quote the comment where I say I have a clear idea of whom I would categorize as his base.
You seem to be trying to paint me as saying everyone who supports Trump is part of his base so you can attack me. That's your right, but you're wrong and it's getting tiresome.

No, what you are saying is not that everyone who supports Trump is in his radical base, but rather that there is no difference between the two.

Here's how I see it. There's a radical right base. Some members of that base are racists, but not all, and not nearly as many as the left likes to rail about. There is a radical left base. Some members of that base are collectivists/socialists/communists. I happen to think that's a majority of that base. But how much of either base is racist or collectivist/socialist/communist is not the real issue here.

The real issue is how the rest are viewed. Some of us see Trump as a lesser evil than the democrats, and you feel free to paint all with the racist/extremist brush. No matter how much we deny it, that's not good enough.

On the other side are people whom I generally regard as decent and intelligent people whole left. What I don't understand is that since Obama, what I used to call the rational left has gone hook, line, and sinker for the collectivist/socialist/communist of the radical left base, absolutely without batting a critical eye. I find that both mystifying and deeply troubling.

So to clarify what I am saying, I don't say that you accuse every Trump supporter as being of the radical right base, but you seem to want to paint them all with the same brush. At the same time you refuse to call out the radical left for what they are.

I've never once said, in this discussion, that there is no difference between the base and people who supported him. If you look at the quote of mine you cite at the top, you'll see they say literally the same thing. I just added the word "base" before one of the descriptions.

You're arguing against a boogeyman, as opposed to what I am actually saying. We both agree about the base that supports Trump, yet you keep trying to extend my comment further.

I understand why people held their nose and supported Trump, and why they might again, and that decision does not mean they're part of the base I'm calling out. I disagree with their decision to do that, and I think they shouldn't, but I don't see where I called those people racist or extremist. Can you point that out to me?

I very intentionally focused on Trump's base when talking about the response to the "go back to your country" comment, yet you keep telling me that I'm talking about more people than I am...

While you wail and gnash about the "go back to your country", you should really hear Ilhan Omar in her new conference right now. Would love to hear your counterpoint 'wail and gnash' about her point of view right now (even if you can stop the cringing as she thrashes about on the word 'inalienable').

What are your thoughts on the Omar/OAC 'base' in this point in time?

Centrist? Representative of actually appreciating America? In touch with middle America? In touch with the Democratic party? Representative of modern progressivism?

Oh boy OAC now follows, the more I listen to this troika the more I realize that the comments I put in series previously as a jest is not so jovial.

I think this one lands right in center mass as listen to this trio:

Quote:they should think about not having three of the most prominent immigrants in their party be people who make immigrants look like ungrateful pricks.

What is your thought on how their base is taking to this lad? 93? Are they lapping it up?

The really funny thing is that the Trump comments have now thrust this shithole trio straight to the top of whom to identify with as the current left. I think Roger Stone's best political dirty trick ever is to get these three elected.

The *really* funny thing is that the Democratic candidate (whomever he/she/xhe) is will have to embrace these shrill monsters as the poster children of their movement, because god forbid they take Pelosi's side in the screech fest, since that is the side that also houses the Orange Bad Monster.

(07-15-2019 04:17 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 03:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 03:10 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Why are you lying? I VERY clearly stated the opposite of that, many, many, many times.

Not exactly. Maybe it would be more correct to say that you blur any distinction between the base and the larger pool of Trump supporters or voters. Otherwise why are you trying to argue the point?

"So in your mind, there is a very small area of overlap between people who will support Trump, no matter what he says and does, without being critical of anything he does, and people who make up the base of support, who also support everything he says and does and will not be critical of him."

Quote:Again, why are you lying?

Because I'm not.

Quote:I very clearly say that I know who I would put in the base, but I don't know how many people are in his base. You even quote the comment where I say I have a clear idea of whom I would categorize as his base.
You seem to be trying to paint me as saying everyone who supports Trump is part of his base so you can attack me. That's your right, but you're wrong and it's getting tiresome.

No, what you are saying is not that everyone who supports Trump is in his radical base, but rather that there is no difference between the two.

Here's how I see it. There's a radical right base. Some members of that base are racists, but not all, and not nearly as many as the left likes to rail about. There is a radical left base. Some members of that base are collectivists/socialists/communists. I happen to think that's a majority of that base. But how much of either base is racist or collectivist/socialist/communist is not the real issue here.

The real issue is how the rest are viewed. Some of us see Trump as a lesser evil than the democrats, and you feel free to paint all with the racist/extremist brush. No matter how much we deny it, that's not good enough.

On the other side are people whom I generally regard as decent and intelligent people whole left. What I don't understand is that since Obama, what I used to call the rational left has gone hook, line, and sinker for the collectivist/socialist/communist of the radical left base, absolutely without batting a critical eye. I find that both mystifying and deeply troubling.

So to clarify what I am saying, I don't say that you accuse every Trump supporter as being of the radical right base, but you seem to want to paint them all with the same brush. At the same time you refuse to call out the radical left for what they are.

I've never once said, in this discussion, that there is no difference between the base and people who supported him. If you look at the quote of mine you cite at the top, you'll see they say literally the same thing. I just added the word "base" before one of the descriptions.

You're arguing against a boogeyman, as opposed to what I am actually saying. We both agree about the base that supports Trump, yet you keep trying to extend my comment further.

I understand why people held their nose and supported Trump, and why they might again, and that decision does not mean they're part of the base I'm calling out. I disagree with their decision to do that, and I think they shouldn't, but I don't see where I called those people racist or extremist. Can you point that out to me?

I very intentionally focused on Trump's base when talking about the response to the "go back to your country" comment, yet you keep telling me that I'm talking about more people than I am...

I won't be holding my nose. I will be voting FOR Trump, not against the Democrat.

If anybody will be holding their nose, it will be some of the STDs.

(07-15-2019 10:59 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 09:48 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Lad and 93 are throwing around the word's "his base". I would like to hear them each define who is Trump's base?
I would guess they would think I am part of Trump's base, since I intend to vote for him in 2020 (I did not vote for him in 2016).
So in listing people who are are part of Trump's base, I would start with people who are happy with the direction of of this country economically.
Add those happy we finally have a "stand up to them" leader on foreign policy.
Add those who cannot find anything in the Democrats that they think is important and feasible.
Note, please the list does not include anybody yet who cheers when he tweets.
Now, Lad and 93, please feel free to fill out the list with your own descriptors.

I’ve already defined his base partially - it’s not solely composed of people who voted for him in 2016 or people in the Republican Party.
I wouldn’t define his base how you do - I would define his base as those who support Trump and what he does, without a critical eye. Those that support the person over the policies and platform. I wouldn’t consider anyone on this board, despite the very regular defenses of the man, part of his base.

So would you define anyone who supports the collectivist/socialist/communist policies of the extreme left, without batting an eye, as part of the extreme left base?

(07-15-2019 04:33 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 04:17 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 03:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 03:10 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Why are you lying? I VERY clearly stated the opposite of that, many, many, many times.

Not exactly. Maybe it would be more correct to say that you blur any distinction between the base and the larger pool of Trump supporters or voters. Otherwise why are you trying to argue the point?

"So in your mind, there is a very small area of overlap between people who will support Trump, no matter what he says and does, without being critical of anything he does, and people who make up the base of support, who also support everything he says and does and will not be critical of him."

Quote:Again, why are you lying?

Because I'm not.

Quote:I very clearly say that I know who I would put in the base, but I don't know how many people are in his base. You even quote the comment where I say I have a clear idea of whom I would categorize as his base.
You seem to be trying to paint me as saying everyone who supports Trump is part of his base so you can attack me. That's your right, but you're wrong and it's getting tiresome.

No, what you are saying is not that everyone who supports Trump is in his radical base, but rather that there is no difference between the two.

Here's how I see it. There's a radical right base. Some members of that base are racists, but not all, and not nearly as many as the left likes to rail about. There is a radical left base. Some members of that base are collectivists/socialists/communists. I happen to think that's a majority of that base. But how much of either base is racist or collectivist/socialist/communist is not the real issue here.

The real issue is how the rest are viewed. Some of us see Trump as a lesser evil than the democrats, and you feel free to paint all with the racist/extremist brush. No matter how much we deny it, that's not good enough.

On the other side are people whom I generally regard as decent and intelligent people whole left. What I don't understand is that since Obama, what I used to call the rational left has gone hook, line, and sinker for the collectivist/socialist/communist of the radical left base, absolutely without batting a critical eye. I find that both mystifying and deeply troubling.

So to clarify what I am saying, I don't say that you accuse every Trump supporter as being of the radical right base, but you seem to want to paint them all with the same brush. At the same time you refuse to call out the radical left for what they are.

I've never once said, in this discussion, that there is no difference between the base and people who supported him. If you look at the quote of mine you cite at the top, you'll see they say literally the same thing. I just added the word "base" before one of the descriptions.

You're arguing against a boogeyman, as opposed to what I am actually saying. We both agree about the base that supports Trump, yet you keep trying to extend my comment further.

I understand why people held their nose and supported Trump, and why they might again, and that decision does not mean they're part of the base I'm calling out. I disagree with their decision to do that, and I think they shouldn't, but I don't see where I called those people racist or extremist. Can you point that out to me?

I very intentionally focused on Trump's base when talking about the response to the "go back to your country" comment, yet you keep telling me that I'm talking about more people than I am...

While you wail and gnash about the "go back to your country", you should really hear Ilhan Omar in her new conference right now. Would love to hear your counterpoint 'wail and gnash' about her point of view right now (even if you can stop the cringing as she thrashes about on the word 'inalienable').

What are your thoughts on the Omar/OAC 'base' in this point in time?

Centrist? Representative of actually appreciating America? In touch with middle America? In touch with the Democratic party? Representative of modern progressivism?

Oh boy OAC now follows, the more I listen to this troika the more I realize that the comments I put in series previously as a jest is not so jovial.

I think this one lands right in center mass as listen to this trio:

Quote:they should think about not having three of the most prominent immigrants in their party be people who make immigrants look like ungrateful pricks.

What is your thought on how their base is taking to this lad? 93? Are they lapping it up?

The really funny thing is that the Trump comments have now thrust this shithole trio straight to the top of whom to identify with as the current left. I think Roger Stone's best political dirty trick ever is to get these three elected.

The *really* funny thing is that the Democratic candidate (whomever he/she/xhe) is will have to embrace these shrill monsters as the poster children of their movement, because god forbid they take Pelosi's side in the screech fest, since that is the side that also houses the Orange Bad Monster.

So my thoughts on the "AOC base" as you call it. I think that AOC is rather interesting - I view her as a Tea Partier of the left. She definitely is not a centrist, but ironically has agreed with Ted Cruz about a few issues and both shared that agreement via Twitter (whether that will ever turn into something concrete is another story). She certainly falls on the left side of the spectrum and advocates for a progressive platform that gets her base fired up.

Do I think she appreciates America? Yes - if she didn't, why would she have run for office? Someone wanting to change things, be critical of an administration, or even a country, doesn't mean they don't appreciate America. She is definitely representative of modern progressivism, and is in touch with some parts of the Democratic party (remember, she supported Pelosi's bid as Speaker when a lot of moderate liberals were not).

I find your quote interesting - is it referring to AOC? If so, you may want to look up where AOC was born. If you think it's a shithole, well, you must not appreciate America either...

I think there are a lot of people in the progressive base lapping up the constant fire that AOC and her cohorts are throwing at Trump. Talking crap about Trump works, and the base gets real fired up with that.

One thing I appreciate about AOC is her background and work ethic. She is unquestionably smart (she went to the international science fair in high school and graduated *** laude from BU) and worked a physically demanding job prior to pursuing a career in politics. She worked hard in high school, college, and after college and is proof positive that you can become successful in American politics because of your merits, not just your name.

Can answer some more questions if you have specifics.

(07-15-2019 04:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 10:59 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 09:48 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Lad and 93 are throwing around the word's "his base". I would like to hear them each define who is Trump's base?
I would guess they would think I am part of Trump's base, since I intend to vote for him in 2020 (I did not vote for him in 2016).
So in listing people who are are part of Trump's base, I would start with people who are happy with the direction of of this country economically.
Add those happy we finally have a "stand up to them" leader on foreign policy.
Add those who cannot find anything in the Democrats that they think is important and feasible.
Note, please the list does not include anybody yet who cheers when he tweets.
Now, Lad and 93, please feel free to fill out the list with your own descriptors.

I’ve already defined his base partially - it’s not solely composed of people who voted for him in 2016 or people in the Republican Party.
I wouldn’t define his base how you do - I would define his base as those who support Trump and what he does, without a critical eye. Those that support the person over the policies and platform. I wouldn’t consider anyone on this board, despite the very regular defenses of the man, part of his base.

So would you define anyone who supports the collectivist/socialist/communist policies of the extreme left, without batting an eye, as part of the extreme left base?

I guess? That's kind of weird because you're asking about is people who have a certain political belief support a political belief.

It would be better if you asked if people who support Bernie without batting an eye at criticisms of him are part of his base. Even better would Obama - there are plenty of people who will ignore any issues associated with some of his decisions, be it the ACA, his use of drones oversees, whistle blower prosecution...

(07-15-2019 05:13 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I think that AOC is rather interesting
. . . .
She is definitely representative of modern progressivism, . . .

Congratulations: that may be the most succinct warning of the danger posed by "progressivism" that I've ever seen. It is, to borrow Jefferson's memorable phrase,"like a fire bell in the night."

I only hope it is not, as stated in his very next sentence, "the knell of the Union."

(07-15-2019 05:24 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 05:13 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I think that AOC is rather interesting
. . . .
She is definitely representative of modern progressivism, . . .

Congratulations: that may be the most succinct warning of the danger posed by "progressivism" that I've ever seen. It is, to borrow Jefferson's memorable phrase,"like a fire bell in the night."

I only hope it is not, as stated in his very next sentence, "the knell of the Union."

What makes you say that regarding AOC?

(07-15-2019 05:33 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 05:24 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 05:13 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I think that AOC is rather interesting
. . . .
She is definitely representative of modern progressivism, . . .

Congratulations: that may be the most succinct warning of the danger posed by "progressivism" that I've ever seen. It is, to borrow Jefferson's memorable phrase,"like a fire bell in the night."

I only hope it is not, as stated in his very next sentence, "the knell of the Union."

What makes you say that regarding AOC?

Wow! If you're really that blind, no one can help you; if you're just pretending to be that blind, no one should bother.

Dude, your little crush is kinda creepy!

(07-15-2019 05:13 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  She is unquestionably smart (she went to the international science fair in high school and graduated *** laude from BU)...

You can take one look at her policy positions and retract that statement. She may be educated, but there are lots of educated people who aren't smart. The ideas she espouses are the ideas of a stupid person.

(07-15-2019 05:13 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  ... and is proof positive that you can become successful in American politics because of your merits, not just your name.

Actually she is proof positive of the opposite: her electoral success springs far more from her first and last names than from any objective "merits".

(07-15-2019 05:36 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 05:33 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 05:24 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-15-2019 05:13 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I think that AOC is rather interesting
. . . .
She is definitely representative of modern progressivism, . . .

Congratulations: that may be the most succinct warning of the danger posed by "progressivism" that I've ever seen. It is, to borrow Jefferson's memorable phrase,"like a fire bell in the night."

I only hope it is not, as stated in his very next sentence, "the knell of the Union."

What makes you say that regarding AOC?

Wow! If you're really that blind, no one can help you; if you're just pretending to be that blind, no one should bother.

Wow! Just asking for your perspective about what positions AOC has that make you think she is the death knell of the Union.

I assumed that since you had that position, you'd be able to explain to me why you think the progressives she represents are the death of the country. I don't see her with nearly the same sort of doom and gloom, so I'm looking for a different perspective.

That AOC graduated *** laude in economics from BC diminishes BC in my eyes. The GND is NOT the creation of somebody who understands finance.

I think of AOC as a starry eyed idealist.

Tlaib and Omar are just racists.

Don't know enough about about the fourth one.

(07-15-2019 05:45 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  That AOC graduated *** laude in economics from BC diminishes BC in my eyes. The GND is NOT the creation of somebody who understands finance.

I think of AOC as a starry eyed idealist.

Tlaib and Omar are just racists.

Don't know enough about about the fourth one.

Careful -- you inadvertently libeled Boston College!

Boston University is apparently the real culprit.

Quote:I find your quote interesting - is it referring to AOC? If so, you may want to look up where AOC was born. If you think it's a shithole, well, you must not appreciate America either...

As I posted earlier, I realize she is 1st gen. And yes, I consider Puerto Rico to be a shithole. All the disadvantages of US wealth, Caribbean commercial base, and third world graft all rolled into one cute nice pile.

I also think certain portions of Louisiana, Mississippi, South Texas, and New Jersey to be corresponding shitholes --- but none of those to the extent of PR as a whole. Not nearly enough graft, and dependence on plaintiff's attorneys in those states even come close to matching PR, nor nearly near the PR level re: cavalier attitude about the legal system in the states either.

Some ex-colleagues noted that doing a commercial deal 'cleanly' and efficiently was easier in the PRC than PR.

What are your thoughts on your travels to and interactions with Puerto Rico? I would be interested to hear.

It also refers to the Palestinian homeland (another home base for a 1st generation-er in the mix), and to Mogadishu (another home base for the direct immigrant in the group).

The are really only two advantages I see in PR over those two. The first is there is almost no chance of an RPG round coming into one's living room in PR. The second is, and it while it takes one a number of steps, a semblance of non-payola justice is available from PR; albeit one has to wait to get to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals to really encounter the traditional notions of 'rule of law'.

Please do tell about your extensive interactions with PR that lead to your 'as good as the mainland US' POV. I am all ears. I think one very telling statistic is to look up the numbers of Puerto Ricans living in the mainland US and compare that to number living on the island. Even pre-hurricane those numbers tell a story all their own should you decide to do so.

Yes, Puerto Rico offers its citizens the unique ability to have US citizenship -- a definite plus. But, when you actually decide to interact with and engage in activities in PR, you would soon realize that your pithy comment doesnt have much grounding in fact.

(07-15-2019 05:45 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  That AOC graduated *** laude in economics from BC diminishes BC in my eyes. The GND is NOT the creation of somebody who understands finance.

I think of AOC as a starry eyed idealist.

Tlaib and Omar are just racists.

Don't know enough about about the fourth one.

Can you run through the policy proposals in the Green New Deal and why those specific proposals aren’t things that someone who understand finance would propose?

I’ll definitely agree with your comment about the starry eyed idealist.

(07-15-2019 05:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

Quote:I find your quote interesting - is it referring to AOC? If so, you may want to look up where AOC was born. If you think it's a shithole, well, you must not appreciate America either...

As I posted earlier, I realize she is 1st gen. And yes, I consider Puerto Rico to be a shithole. All the disadvantages of US wealth, Caribbean commercial base, and third world graft all rolled into one cute nice pile.

What are your thoughts on your travels to and interactions with Puerto Rico? I would be interested to hear.

It also refers to the Palestinian homeland (another home base for a 1st generation-er in the mix), and to Mogadishu (another home base for the direct immigrant in the group).

The are really only two advantages I see in PR over those two. The first is there is almost no chance of an RPG round coming into one's living room in PR. The second is, and it while it takes one a number of steps, a semblance of non-payola justice is available from PR; albeit one has to wait to get to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals to really encounter the traditional notions of 'rule of law'.

Please do tell about your extensive interactions with PR that lead to your 'as good as the mainland US' POV. I am all ears. I think one very telling statistic is to look up the numbers of Puerto Ricans living in the mainland US and compare that to number living on the island. Even pre-hurricane those numbers tell a story all their own should you decide to do so.

Yes, Puerto Rico offers its citizens the unique ability to have US citizenship -- a definite plus. But, when you actually decide to interact with and engage in activities in PR, you would soon realize that your pithy comment doesnt have much grounding in fact.

Where did you post that she’s 1st gen? In the post I responded to, you referenced her as an immigrant, which is why I made my comment. You obviously knew what I was getting at (by stating that you said she was 1st gen), so why the long diatribe about PR? You spent a lot of time typing up that response to try and get me - sorry, you just wasted your time. I never tried to say PR was a prestige country without problems - I’ve been there a number of times over the years, primarily in San Juan..

I was only saying that AOC isn’t an immigrant, because your post lacked that obvious fact. I was being a smartass about how I said it.