Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:33 am Not making a pure comparison but I recall being put off by that comment, at the time I felt like Obama was a neophyte with limited experience and lacking substance but excellent at the modern media management (right FFG, in other words an empty suit, "tan" that is ) and was concerned his tune would change a lot once he had the seat.
JUST the Stolen Documents/Mar-A-Lago/"Judge" Cannon Trial
Re: The Politics of National Security
-
- Posts: 23812
- Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 10:53 am
Re: The Politics of National Security
Not an empty suit, but I think he’s partly responsible for why the Democratic Party has gone harder to the right. Talked about anti war concepts then used drones, never closed Guantanamo, cash for clunkers is going to cost us dearly in 18-30mo I can almost guarantee. Think it’s more he said what he believed and also managed perception the way a current pro athlete does combined with lacking enough experience but didn’t want to go back to his base and explain that some of the ideals he pitched weren’t feasible on a technocratic level. Like some of Warren and sanders proposals, well intentioned but not practically implementable in a way which would get the output their promising.
Obama isn’t a bad guy and understands things in this country a lot better than the current president. Every time we have a technocratic heavy administration we want idealogues then when the rubber meets the road and the idealogues can’t deliver, and none of them really can for the people, we go back to wanting technocrats.
Obama isn’t a bad guy and understands things in this country a lot better than the current president. Every time we have a technocratic heavy administration we want idealogues then when the rubber meets the road and the idealogues can’t deliver, and none of them really can for the people, we go back to wanting technocrats.
Now I love those cowboys, I love their gold
Love my uncle, God rest his soul
Taught me good, Lord, taught me all I know
Taught me so well, that I grabbed that gold
I left his dead ass there by the side of the road, yeah
Love my uncle, God rest his soul
Taught me good, Lord, taught me all I know
Taught me so well, that I grabbed that gold
I left his dead ass there by the side of the road, yeah
Re: The Politics of National Security
Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:47 amI don’t disagree. Part of the reason why I hope rational minds prevail is that we could get someone worse than Trump. He has proven that customs and norms are almost meaningless. On the verge of being Kingdom like.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:33 am Not making a pure comparison but I recall being put off by that comment, at the time I felt like Obama was a neophyte with limited experience and lacking substance but excellent at the modern media management and was concerned his tune would change a lot once he had the seat. Didn’t dislike the guy but was still in the camp of McCain understanding why with the crisis the country was tired of republicans in the WH. Think his BB game is overrated too, but not in the same camp.
But just like the nuclear option to jam through ACA, people need to be aware that it’ll all come back around on them and at that point it should be understood that t was coming and eat it. (Not to defend this president either)
I would add the rule of law and the Constitution to your list.He has proven that customs and norms are almost meaningless.
-
- Posts: 34057
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: The Politics of National Security
+1000. It’s amazing to watch how quickly we have become Botswana.wahoomurf wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:32 amTypical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:47 amI don’t disagree. Part of the reason why I hope rational minds prevail is that we could get someone worse than Trump. He has proven that customs and norms are almost meaningless. On the verge of being Kingdom like.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:33 am Not making a pure comparison but I recall being put off by that comment, at the time I felt like Obama was a neophyte with limited experience and lacking substance but excellent at the modern media management and was concerned his tune would change a lot once he had the seat. Didn’t dislike the guy but was still in the camp of McCain understanding why with the crisis the country was tired of republicans in the WH. Think his BB game is overrated too, but not in the same camp.
But just like the nuclear option to jam through ACA, people need to be aware that it’ll all come back around on them and at that point it should be understood that t was coming and eat it. (Not to defend this president either)I would add the rule of law and the Constitution to your list.He has proven that customs and norms are almost meaningless.
“I wish you would!”
Re: The Politics of National Security
Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:26 am Not an empty suit, but I think he’s partly responsible for why the Democratic Party has gone harder to the right. Talked about anti war concepts then used drones (one of the very few things I agreed with him on – 9/11 pi$$ed me off to my core), never closed Guantanamo (good), cash for clunkers is going to cost us dearly in 18-30mo I can almost guarantee. Think it’s more he said what he believed and also managed perception the way a current pro athlete does combined with lacking enough experience but didn’t want to go back to his base and explain that some of the ideals he pitched weren’t feasible on a technocratic level. Like some of Warren and sanders proposals, well intentioned but not practically implementable in a way which would get the output their promising.
Obama isn’t a bad guy and understands things in this country a lot better than the current president. Every time we have a technocratic heavy administration we want idealogues then when the rubber meets the road and the idealogues can’t deliver, and none of them really can for the people, we go back to wanting technocrats. Personally I think it has been more economy driven than anything else. Election of Trump is certainly an anomaly, a rejection of business-as-usual in Wash, and certainly a rejection of all things Clinton and the continuation of the so-called Obama legacy.
Last edited by tech37 on Sun Oct 20, 2019 10:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: The Politics of National Security
Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:58 am+1000. It’s amazing to watch how quickly we have become Botswana.wahoomurf wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 11:32 amTypical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:47 amI don’t disagree. Part of the reason why I hope rational minds prevail is that we could get someone worse than Trump. He has proven that customs and norms are almost meaningless. On the verge of being Kingdom like.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 9:33 am Not making a pure comparison but I recall being put off by that comment, at the time I felt like Obama was a neophyte with limited experience and lacking substance but excellent at the modern media management and was concerned his tune would change a lot once he had the seat. Didn’t dislike the guy but was still in the camp of McCain understanding why with the crisis the country was tired of republicans in the WH. Think his BB game is overrated too, but not in the same camp.
But just like the nuclear option to jam through ACA, people need to be aware that it’ll all come back around on them and at that point it should be understood that t was coming and eat it. (Not to defend this president either)I would add the rule of law and the Constitution to your list.He has proven that customs and norms are almost meaningless.
Re: The Politics of National Security
I don't see it that way at all. Trump only made it through the primaries because there were so many candidates splitting the vote combined with the winner-take all setup many states have for their R primary. So even though 60-70% of Republicans didn't want him in the first few rounds of primaries, the whole party got stuck with him.
Secondly, Clinton got a few million more votes than Trump, so clearly the nation as a whole wasn't rejecting all things Clinton and the Obama legacy. We're not talking about some kind of FDR or Nixon-like landslide victory.
Re: The Politics of National Security
People keep saying this, and I don't get why.
Every single complaint about DC---corruption, nepotism, choosing winners and losers, not getting anything done, spending too much, borrowing too much------has gotten exponentially worse.
And yet Trump fans are cheering.
I don't know what other proof is needed to prove that nope, that's not why Trump was elected. It was obviously a different reason.
Re: The Politics of National Security
holmes, another Electoral College denier, can't fathom that HRC didn't get the needed votes, in the needed states, to actually win.holmes435 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:25 pmI don't see it that way at all. Trump only made it through the primaries because there were so many candidates splitting the vote combined with the winner-take all setup many states have for their R primary. So even though 60-70% of Republicans didn't want him in the first few rounds of primaries, the whole party got stuck with him.
Secondly, Clinton got a few million more votes than Trump, so clearly the nation as a whole wasn't rejecting all things Clinton and the Obama legacy. We're not talking about some kind of FDR or Nixon-like landslide victory.
Re: The Politics of National Security
You're being short-sighted. What Trump campaigned on and what has/is ultimately happening are two different things. The election was three years ago.a fan wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 1:13 pmPeople keep saying this, and I don't get why.
Every single complaint about DC---corruption, nepotism, choosing winners and losers, not getting anything done, spending too much, borrowing too much------has gotten exponentially worse.
And yet Trump fans are cheering.
I don't know what other proof is needed to prove that nope, that's not why Trump was elected. It was obviously a different reason.
But, any Trump loyalty at this point is a backlash against the "resistance" more than anything else. Some of us keep warning that this will make Trump a lock for 2020. Keep on impeaching...
Re: The Politics of National Security
If Trump approval ratings went down as a result of what he's actually doing, I'd agree with you. But since his approval ratings have been rock solid among these voters, It's obvious that TrumpFans are just fine with business as usual in DC, and they support and supported Trump for entirely different reasons than "they were sick of business as usual".
If that's true, we're a nation of morons. Supporting a politician who affects your family directly, even though you don't like what he's doing....with the idea that that will "stick it to the libs" is bottom of the barrel dumb.
But ok.
Personally, I think Trump will win because Corporate Dems didn't learn their lesson when they nominated Hillary....and they'll make us choose between the lesser of two evils again.
One year out, I have to say that I'll be surprised if Trump loses.
-
- Posts: 34057
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: The Politics of National Security
These guys need to get their panties out of a bunch and get over it..... Trump won.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syri ... SKBN1X00ZO
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syri ... SKBN1X00ZO
“I wish you would!”
Re: The Politics of National Security
Your newfound concern about the plight of the Kurds & your sudden interest in our mission in Syria is most impressive.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:04 pm These guys need to get their panties out of a bunch and get over it..... Trump won.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syri ... SKBN1X00ZO
-
- Posts: 34057
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: The Politics of National Security
My concern is with the decision making of the POTUS. You think those guys just need to get over it? They are mad that Hillary lost too.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:15 pmYour newfound concern about the plight of the Kurds & your sudden interest in our mission in Syria is most impressive.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:04 pm These guys need to get their panties out of a bunch and get over it..... Trump won.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syri ... SKBN1X00ZO
“I wish you would!”
-
- Posts: 3219
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:21 pm
Re: The Politics of National Security
It's easier to make fun of those who see the failure of Trump's actions, then to actually condemn what he did - which is bail on the Kurds.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:23 pmMy concern is with the decision making of the POTUS. You think those guys just need to get over it? They are mad that Hillary lost too.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:15 pmYour newfound concern about the plight of the Kurds & your sudden interest in our mission in Syria is most impressive.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:04 pm These guys need to get their panties out of a bunch and get over it..... Trump won.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syri ... SKBN1X00ZO
Of course Trump acts like he and his bone spurs were the real heroes.
"get over it" is now the new "whatever"....
Re: The Politics of National Security
Where did I say anything about the Electoral College? We're talking about what voters wanted in the R primary and in the general election, try to keep up.tech37 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 2:09 pmholmes, another Electoral College denier, can't fathom that HRC didn't get the needed votes, in the needed states, to actually win.holmes435 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 12:25 pmI don't see it that way at all. Trump only made it through the primaries because there were so many candidates splitting the vote combined with the winner-take all setup many states have for their R primary. So even though 60-70% of Republicans didn't want him in the first few rounds of primaries, the whole party got stuck with him.
Secondly, Clinton got a few million more votes than Trump, so clearly the nation as a whole wasn't rejecting all things Clinton and the Obama legacy. We're not talking about some kind of FDR or Nixon-like landslide victory.
What you can't fathom is the fact that Clinton won the popular vote and more people wanted her in office than Trump. The election wasn't a rejection of Clinton and Obama policies - the voters did actually want them.
Re: The Politics of National Security
Nah, lesser of two evils holmes. Some voters thought Clinton was lesser of two evils and other voters Trump the lesser of two evils. Bottom line, two awful choices
Last edited by tech37 on Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: The Politics of National Security
Sorry a fan, just read your post above. I wasn't lifting your "two evils" idea replying to holmes... we both thought the same thing ... for once
Last edited by tech37 on Mon Oct 21, 2019 11:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- MDlaxfan76
- Posts: 27066
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm
Re: The Politics of National Security
I sure thought it was two awful choices.
But you do keep skirting the fundamental point that more voters chose Clinton than Trump.
Unless you buy Trump's BS that that those millions more voters weren't actually Americans...
Re: The Politics of National Security
No problemo, tech.