2020 Presidential Election

[ewen21]

 

I can accept that fake families are a thing, but they are not such a thing as to justify family separation.  I'm little tired of hearing about our immigration problem from you without you acknowledging how the Trump administration and homeland security has completely bungled the crisis.  Why should we trust these people to handle the situation humanely when they have shown they cannot do it?

Where I have I justified family separation?  And NO he has not bungled the crisis.  If anything he is TRYING to address this issue and DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS has been resistant to anything used to address the crisis beyond rhetoric.  Where are their solutions?  Did you even watch the Bernie Sanders town hall yet?  You are supposed to be a Bernie guy.  What the heck is his solution?  

[ewen21]

 

So Trump admits to willingly accepting foreign help, which is illegal, and this is your response? And you wonder why people are reluctant to engage with you?

 

1.  He was speaking hypothetically

2.  What he said wasn't smart

3.  I don't defend it

4.  He has since attempted to clarify

 

People are reluctant to engage mostly because they have trouble with certain facts I present.  I do not wonder at all.  It is very much evident in heart of hearts and you know it.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Where I have I justified family separation?  And NO he has not bungled the crisis.  If anything he is TRYING to address this issue and DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS has been resistant to anything used to address the crisis beyond rhetoric.  Where are their solutions?  Did you even watch the Bernie Sanders town hall yet?  You are supposed to be a Bernie guy.  What the heck is his solution?  

Trump had a full two years of a GOP White House, a GOP Senate, and a GOP House.

 

Why wasn't something done during those 24 months of single-party control of our government?

 

By comparison, the Democrats have held control of ONE chamber of ONE branch of government for all of five months now.

[ewen21]

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

 

Back in March I was pretty adamant that there was a problem at the border and gunnathor and others seemed to brush it off as some fabrication by Trump and his team to pursue policy.  On March 19th alone almost 4,000 people were detained at the border.  Would you people prefer these undocumented asylum seekers simply were absorbed into our population no questions asked?  And why, pray tell, don't African and Asian immigrants get the same good fortune?  Why do they have to adhere to the process while these folks don't?  I guess it's the luck of geography.

I swear almost no one made sense when I tried to talk about this issue in the spring and now no one wants to talk about because I was actually correct.

 

Which leads me to this.....

Maybe Trump was ahead of the curve on this one?  Maybe he should get credit for realizing with the existing conditions at the border there was potential for it to become and issue again as it was during the Bush administration.  Maybe this little corner of the world doesn't have everything right when it comes to understand the world?  Maybe certain biases on the part of the left is holding them back?

 

Imagine that

[ewen21]

 

Trump had a full two years of a GOP White House, a GOP Senate, and a GOP House.

 

Why wasn't something done during those 24 months of single-party control of our government?

 

By comparison, the Democrats have held control of ONE chamber of ONE branch of government for all of five months now.

HOw many senators and "congresspeople" do the democrats have on the ticket for president?  How many of them have presented ANYHTING addressing this issue?

 

Please wake up and smell the coffee.  The country needs solutions not rhetoric 

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

HOw many senators and "congresspeople" do the democrats have on the ticket for president?  How many of them have presented ANYHTING addressing this issue?

 

Please wake up and smell the coffee.  The country needs solutions not rhetoric

 

Yeah but he’s right. Republicans controlled government completely, for two years. All three branches. If Republicans really wanted to “do something” about this issue, they would have. But they don’t.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Yeah but he’s right. Republicans controlled government completely, for two years. All three branches. If Republicans really wanted to “do something” about this issue, they would have. But they don’t.

Bingo. Ewen can blame "rhetoric" on the Democrats all he wants but the GOP appears to be the party that wants to spout rhetoric and do nothing. They had all the opportunity in the world to pass whatever legislation they pleased to fix this situation, yet we got all of nothing done about it.

 

By the way, I don't include Trump in this statement. As much as I dislike the man and his policy on this issue, I believe he's a "do-er" and wants to accomplish goals.

 

The rest of the GOP? Nah, not so much. Their primary goal seems to be, ya know... rhetoric. Enflame the masses with righteous indignation, and keep stoking that fire while accomplishing absolutely nothing.

[Craig Arko]

Like other organized crime syndicates, the GOP realizes actual change is bad for business.

[Badsmerf]

Ewen, nobody argued the border wasn't a problem. At the time, Trump was using the national emergency clause to get what he wanted, and that is wrong. I hope to God democrats use it to fight climate change the next time around, see how your facts check out then.

 

We all want solutions that work at the border, and a wall is a big waste of money. We need man power. We need better technology. We need an expedited asylum process. We need a lot of things, and there was a bipartisan proposal brought to Trump he shot down. This crises was made worse by him (and his administration, that ultimately follows his orders). There is no twisting out of this fact.

[ewen21]

 

Yeah but he’s right. Republicans controlled government completely, for two years. All three branches. If Republicans really wanted to “do something” about this issue, they would have. But they don’t.

He is and yet he isn't at the same time.  I said that Trump was possibly ahead of the curve on immigration and that would include being ahead of the curve with many republicans.  Witness this example:

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/17/18304940/trump-immigration-congress-fail

I am no cheerleader for the republican party.  I am not affiliated with them.

The bill won't work because the republicans aren't in lock step on this issue.  The democrats will oppose it simply because Trump wrote it

 

The democrats sicken me.  People Maxine Waters, Ilhan Omar, Ocasio-Cotrez, Beto, etc....The conversations some of these people have about immigration are stunning.  Beto possibly being the most ignorant.  It is as though they think the crisis at the border is some sort of propaganda and this attitude is born out of ignorance.

 

 

[Badsmerf]

He is and yet he isn't at the same time. I said that Trump was possibly ahead of the curve on immigration and that would include being ahead of the curve with many republicans. Witness this example:

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/17/18304940/trump-immigration-congress-fail

I am no cheerleader for the republican party. I am not affiliated with them.

The bill won't work because the republicans aren't in lock step on this issue. The democrats will oppose it simply because Trump wrote it

 

The democrats sicken me. People Maxine Waters, Ilhan Omar, Ocasio-Cotrez, Beto, etc....The conversations some of these people have about immigration are stunning. Beto possibly being the most ignorant. It is as though they think the crisis at the border is some sort of propaganda and this attitude is born out of ignorance.

Beto being more ignorant than you on the border is laughable. The guy represented El Paso, and likely is pretty plugged into the border crises. Also, citing Maxine Waters is like everyone believing Steve King stands for the GOP. However, the democrat leaders reel their own back in and speak out publicly against them. The media amplifies those voices on both sides.

[PseudoSABR]

 

HOw many senators and "congresspeople" do the democrats have on the ticket for president?  How many of them have presented ANYHTING addressing this issue?

 

Please wake up and smell the coffee.  The country needs solutions not rhetoric 

This post is indicative of why people don't engage.  1) someone points out something you said is unsupported (democrats in congress have done nothing on immigration) and you shift the goal posts (what about the democratic candidates).  2) you insult the intelligence of others for not accepting your stance ("wake up and smell the coffee"). 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

He is and yet he isn't at the same time.  I said that Trump was possibly ahead of the curve on immigration and that would include being ahead of the curve with many republicans.  Witness this example:

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/17/18304940/trump-immigration-congress-fail

I am no cheerleader for the republican party.  I am not affiliated with them.

The bill won't work because the republicans aren't in lock step on this issue.  The democrats will oppose it simply because Trump wrote it

 

The democrats sicken me.  People Maxine Waters, Ilhan Omar, Ocasio-Cotrez, Beto, etc....The conversations some of these people have about immigration are stunning.  Beto possibly being the most ignorant.  It is as though they think the crisis at the border is some sort of propaganda and this attitude is born out of ignorance.

Much of what you say is true. Trump is an outsider, and a doer, and probably assumed other Republicans wanted to do something about immigration. Dems will oppose Trump, and many still cannot grapple with the idea that he is president. To be honest I don’t know what some of these other Democrats are saying about this issue. Personally I am looking for humane fair treatment of immigrants and refugees, above all else. I have no idea where Beto stands on this issue. But like the above poster said, I bet Beto has credibility on this that others don’t. I have no idea what Ilhan Omar has to say about southern immigration, she has bigger things to worry about. Maxine Waters, hard pass.

[Squirrel]

MODERATOR WARNING:

I'm tired of hiding posts that refer to one side as nutjobs and the other as toxic idiots, and I'm sure I haven't caught them all because I don't read here that thoroughly anymore. But if you can't make your points of dislike for someone without resorting to name-calling and disrespectful characterizations ... whether you agree with them or not, find them humourous or not, is besides the point ... you will find yourself pointed into lengthy time outs.

 

And if you can't take disagreement without getting defensive and disrespectful toward another, maybe this isn't the best forum for you.

[howeda7]

 

This post is indicative of why people don't engage.  1) someone points out something you said is unsupported (democrats in congress have done nothing on immigration) and you shift the goal posts (what about the democratic candidates).  2) you insult the intelligence of others for not accepting your stance ("wake up and smell the coffee"). 

I love how these types are always "not republicans" and don't support them. Yeah...OK.

[Vanimal46]

Re: Early Polls

 

I stumbled upon the CNN docuseries "The 2000s" on Netflix yesterday.

 

A friendly reminder that Hillary was leading Obama by 30 points as they went to the Iowa caucus... We all know how that turned out. Lots of game left for a Dem candidate to overtake Joe Biden for the top polling candidate.

 

Watching that documentary also reminded me of the cheap play McCain played after Hillary was defeated... Using Sarah Palin as the woman who could break through the "glass ceiling."

[biggentleben]

 

Re: Early Polls

I stumbled upon the CNN docuseries "The 2000s" on Netflix yesterday.

A friendly reminder that Hillary was leading Obama by 30 points as they went to the Iowa caucus... We all know how that turned out. Lots of game left for a Dem candidate to overtake Joe Biden for the top polling candidate.

Watching that documentary also reminded me of the cheap play McCain played after Hillary was defeated... Using Sarah Palin as the woman who could break through the "glass ceiling."

 

I think that significantly mischaracterizes what happened with the McCain campaign. If he had his personal preference, his running mate would have been Joe Lieberman. No way Republicans elect a guy who is seen to be friendly with a Democrat, though, no matter how conservative Lieberman is considered to be.

 

His campaign and the Republican National Committee really pushed McCain on him. By the end of the campaign, he and Palin were not on speaking terms.

[PseudoSABR]

Lot's of reasons why I'll be supporting Warren can be found in this video Q&A from the NYT.

[PseudoSABR]

538: Bulletpoint: Is Electability A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?

 

Interesting article on electability v. ideal candidate.  Warren narrow leads in terms of the ideal candidate...

[Badsmerf]

Warren is going to crush in the debates me thinks. I also think Mayor Pete is going to do well. I don't know much though, because I thought Trump was a fool in every debate he participated in.

[biggentleben]

 

Warren is going to crush in the debates me thinks. I also think Mayor Pete is going to do well. I don't know much though, because I thought Trump was a fool in every debate he participated in.

 

One thing going through political Twitter now is the way Mayor Pete's city has divided after he became mayor. Has to be something Trump would use against him.

[Badsmerf]

One thing going through political Twitter now is the way Mayor Pete's city has divided after he became mayor. Has to be something Trump would use against him.

I find that a huge stretch to blame a mayor for that. Also, blaming him for any kind of police violence is dumb. In the debates it is going to be policy and delivery that matter. Maybe somebody new will catch everyone's attention.

[biggentleben]

 

I find that a huge stretch to blame a mayor for that. Also, blaming him for any kind of police violence is dumb. In the debates it is going to be policy and delivery that matter. Maybe somebody new will catch everyone's attention.

 

Completely agree. I'm just saying...

[LaBombo]

 

I find that a huge stretch to blame a mayor for that. Also, blaming him for any kind of police violence is dumb. In the debates it is going to be policy and delivery that matter. Maybe somebody new will catch everyone's attention.

 

One thing going through political Twitter now is the way Mayor Pete's city has divided after he became mayor. Has to be something Trump would use against him.

 

His decision to visit the front, as it were, is in keeping with his image as former military. Beyond that, it's a bit of a no-win, Kobayashi Maru scenario, with detractors able to claim either that he's ducking the issue or playing up the inevitable rebukes by upset citizens.

 

But if you're flexible, you can take his decision as a positive, for either him or the country.

 

If it was mostly political calculation for him to jump into the fray, then it's a sign that his camp believes the country will largely see good in his not shirking his day job, which is a good sign that belief in work ethic is stil a thing among most Americans.

 

And if it's not political calculation, and he decided that it was just the right thing to do regardless of the inevitable negative video clips, then it's a good indication that he's got at least one thing you want in a president, which is character.

[ewen21]

Elizabeth Warren is now considering reparations for gay couples.  

[gunnarthor]

 

Elizabeth Warren is now considering reparations for gay couples.  

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/20/sen-elizabeth-warren-floats-law-to-speed-same-sex-couple-tax-refunds.html

 

The proposed law would allow married same-sex couples to amend their tax returns for the years where the government refused to recognize their rights. Married couples had to file as single despite being married. That could have significant impact on a tax return. The IRS permitted people to amend their taxes for three years, which doesn't cover all of the years the govt didn't recognize same sex marriages. This bill, which has sponsers in the house as well, would extend the period to amend to when your state recongized your marriage.

 

I didn't march in the pride parade this year but I have many times and it always bothered me how many basic rights same sex couples were denied. Frankly, this seems like a good bill.

 

[PseudoSABR]

 

Elizabeth Warren is now considering reparations for gay couples.  

Where did you hear it put that way? What are your sources? That is a gross mischaracterization. 

[ewen21]

 

Where did you hear it put that way? What are your sources? That is a gross mischaracterization. 

 

I don't know.  I came across a great number of articles just researching Warren.

 

Do a Google search.  

"Elizabeth Warren gay reparations"

 

I didn't write the articles so don't get mad at me.  

 

[Squirrel]

I don't know. I came across a great number of articles just researching Warren.

 

Do a Google search.

"Elizabeth Warren gay reparations"

 

I didn't write the articles so don't get mad at me.

I did that ... and the hits that came up on the first page were mostly from ultra-conservative online blogs and news sites. (I wasn't familiar with ZeroHedge so I don't know what that is and wasn't about to click on it. But I do know RedState, TheBlaze, ADFLegal, etc ... not sources I trust. And to be clear, I don't take my news from Occupy Democrats, either.) The two hits that came up that weren't conservative blogs/news sites were Elizabeth Warren's twitter statement (at least one of them) where she talks about tax equality, but never once mentions this as reparations. That came in the comments from someone else. And then there was the opinion piece from the NYT, 'The Case for Gay Reparations', in which Elizabeth Warren wasn't mentioned. So ... I'm wondering ... who coined the phrase 'gay reparations' in response to Warren's bill for gay, married couples to amend their tax statements further back than just 3 years? That was more of a rhetorical question.

 

Oh, and when I googled 'gay reparations', I came up with mostly the same hits, except no twitter hits for Elizabeth Warren, and nothing she wrote or stated.

[ewen21]

 

I did that ... and the hits that came up on the first page were mostly from ultra-conservative online blogs and news sites. 

Carole, what's the problem?  Are the words "gay" and "reparations" some verboten toxic blend?

 

The New York Times used that term:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/14/opinion/gay-reparation-stonewall.html

 

 

We had this enormous hurdle in the immigration discussion when I referred to "illegals" even though they were, in fact, illegally crossing the border.  Now we have this.  

 

What exactly are you trying to insinuate?  That I am uniformed?  You honestly have no idea if you think that.  I actually have a transgender nephew whom I love and would protect like he is my own.''

 

Fly off the handle if you have to, but these reactions to words really stunts the discussion.

REPARATIONS FOR GAYS?  Is that better?

What should we call it.  You tell me.

 

Sheesh