Orange Duce

[Farfromgeneva]

Disclaimer: This isn't exhaustively researched. Just off the top of my head.


What I liked:

How he treated Israel. Far and away this was my favorite aspect of Trump in the White House.

Straight shooter. He said what he said and didn't mince words. Whether he was right or wrong--he wasn't afraid to say what he thought.

Following through with his campaign promise of building a wall on the border. (Obviously he didn't finish it but, at least he started it.)



What I disliked:

The casual/imprudent, unwise (stupid) way he handled Covid.

His diarrhea of the mouth via Twitter

Condoning the Jew-hating racists at Charlottesville by not ripping and condemning them when given the opportunity.

His embarrassing performance during the first debate with Biden.



With all that said, when I look back on my 60 plus years on this earth, my growing conviction is that it doesn't really matter who's in the White House. My life hasn't really been affected much regardless of who the president was. I'm just a (barely) high school educated blue-collar Beantown scrub. I have always been able to buy food, have a relatively comfortable place to live, go where I want, do what I want, etc. Being compelled to buy health insurance affected my life a little but not too much. Jimmy Carter's talk of the Draft gave me mild anguish for a while. But apart from those two things, I can't think of anything that any administration has done to really truly affect my lower/middle class blue-collar life.

DMac was so right on when he wrote this yesterday: Ds, Rs, libs, conservatives, they're all phukked up, it just depends on what side you're on that determines where you're going to shoot your arrows. That's what I've come to believe. It doesn't ultimately matter who's in the White House. There exists in the each of the four designees D mentioned deceit and greed and corruption and hypocrisy. ALL of them. Folks thinking there are real and lasting solutions via politics are deluded and letting themselves in for chronic disappointment, especially in this day and age.

Just some thoughts. Probably plenty of deficiencies in my logic and presentation but I'm not a well educated man. It's obvious at times reading on this particular board how many of you are highly intelligent, well-read and educated. Much of what gets written here goes way over my head. But I'm curious in some respects. Plus lacrosse season is still a little over two months away.

You and I could be kindred spirits. I'm also not a well educated person. I make up for my lack of college education by having been gifted with something most of the super smart people don't possess nor even understand. It's called common sense. I take everything I read here with a grain of salt. You learn to take what you need and leave the rest. I always get a kick out of folks who need a 20 paragraph dissertation to make a point that could be made in one paragraph. The concept of keeping it simple isn't a tool in their tool chest.

Where’s dmac about your bragging arrogance now? About something totally unprovable but also wildly unbelievable based on everyone’s reading of your work here? Keep it simple - you can’t tell the difference between the axiom (which I’m sure you conflate with “law”) of Occams Razor and being sadly reductive.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KzUKcXxbU4U

[Farfromgeneva]

Big fan of simple, try not to deal in absolutes, own my F'ups & try not to be too big of a jerk. Have come up short but keep on trying.

My limited experience with you has been pristine for what little unsolicited value you take from that. I literally sometimes wonder why I don’t see you around here more. Maybe I know my answer by virtue of my first sentence. Or more likely it’s because you wrote: have come up short but keep trying which is exactly how I feel every day. There’s some here I’ve half written for because it’s clear they aren’t trying anymore and the trees, planet and future lives don’t appreciate that.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Doesn’t like people likes dogs better (and calls others misanthropes-brilliant!)

How would you know ? I like people just fine.

There are mean dogs too that have been trained that way or mirror their owner.

A friend’s dog was just mean. Wasn’t trained that way….born that way. The breed is generally friendly to people. This one wasn’t. Was eventually eaten by a coyote.

What breed ? ...maybe he was picking up on your pheromones.
Maybe he was traumatized as a puppy, similar to child abuse &/or neglect.
What was a mean dog doing running loose, to encounter a coyote ?

Havanese. You are wrong. Just one of those things. Probably genetically inclined. A bad seed. We bought from the same breeder along with 4 other families in town. Encountered a coyote in the back yard which abutted a wooded area. All of these dogs are now 15+ and still active. This wasn’t some puppy that was akin to a Russian orphan from a orphanage outside Chernobyl that you may be thinking of.

[DMac]

Where’s dmac about your bragging arrogance now?

W*T*F are you talking about??? I never said anything about anyone's bragging arrogance, try to keep up for chrissakes. I criticized another poster's use of a word which I saw as having connotations/insinuations of being a little on the pervy side which was completely wrong and unwarranted.
This is like your other recent post about me, it appears as if the point of the discussion went completely over your head. It's not about age group, my fellow poster, it's about numbers of posters. There are few here and the ones who dominate mostly lean the same way. In the past there were much bigger numbers which included some very bright people, all of whom didn't see things the same way which made for some very interesting (and much more civil) discussions. That was the point.
POOF, I disappear? Fact of the matter is I just don't find you much worth engaging with.

[PizzaSnake]

Only the best people…

He doesn’t even get the benefit of the doubt due to brain immaturity — he’s 27!! Little d-bag.

Real question is, why was she his girlfriend? Her judgement scuks.

“The co-founder of Students for Trump, a supporters group formed ahead of the 2016 election, was arrested last week on domestic violence charges in North Carolina, court documents show.

Ryan Fournier, 27, was detained last Tuesday and accused of assaulting a woman, later identified as his girlfriend, by “grabbing her right arm and striking her in the forehead” with a handgun, according to an order issued by a magistrate in Johnston county.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... est-charge

[Farfromgeneva]

Where’s dmac about your bragging arrogance now?

W*T*F are you talking about??? I never said anything about anyone's bragging arrogance, try to keep up for chrissakes. I criticized another poster's use of a word which I saw as having connotations/insinuations of being a little on the pervy side which was completely wrong and unwarranted.
This is like your other recent post about me, it appears as if the point of the discussion went completely over your head. It's not about age group, my fellow poster, it's about numbers of posters. There are few here and the ones who dominate mostly lean the same way. In the past there were much bigger numbers which included some very bright people, all of whom didn't see things the same way which made for some very interesting (and much more civil) discussions. That was the point.
POOF, I disappear? Fact of the matter is I just don't find you much worth engaging with.

Taking about when you bugged out as a third person not in a exchange between myself and Cradle. Forget that already?

You are the one who isn’t following along. Your argument about how I speak of older generations as if I’m some bulky why they a age is 20yrs older than me from folsk with limited skin in the game these days.

You want to have more on one side to be “fair” then don’t see a problem with every older person whining about anytime I post about boomers? So it’s cool if I ran a bunch of 30-50yr olds through here and we just took over from all the older. Cats then? You really aren’t getting the point but that’s ok I don’t find anything you think of much value I can’t get from family in WNY anyways. All even observed and understood before.

And the poof disappear is based on your bitching I didn’t respond to you once on your schedule because you didn’t see a twosomes when you wanted to. Dumb s**t like that which you threw out as evidence of you being right.

You’d int want to engage then don’t step it is. Two person exchange to take a shot which is exactly what you did. Like a little biyach. Clearly see why you swing from certain nuts because I’ve seen that behavior before here.

[DMac]

Just another example of your rambling horseschidt that makes you not worth engaging with to me.
POOF.

[Farfromgeneva]

Just another example of your rambling horseschidt that makes you not worth engaging with to me.
POOF.

Then go fuxk off.

You stepped into it. Now you want out then run.

[MDlaxfan76]

Disclaimer: This isn't exhaustively researched. Just off the top of my head.


What I liked:

How he treated Israel. Far and away this was my favorite aspect of Trump in the White House.

Straight shooter. He said what he said and didn't mince words. Whether he was right or wrong--he wasn't afraid to say what he thought.

Following through with his campaign promise of building a wall on the border. (Obviously he didn't finish it but, at least he started it.)



What I disliked:

The casual/imprudent, unwise (stupid) way he handled Covid.

His diarrhea of the mouth via Twitter

Condoning the Jew-hating racists at Charlottesville by not ripping and condemning them when given the opportunity.

His embarrassing performance during the first debate with Biden.



With all that said, when I look back on my 60 plus years on this earth, my growing conviction is that it doesn't really matter who's in the White House. My life hasn't really been affected much regardless of who the president was. I'm just a (barely) high school educated blue-collar Beantown scrub. I have always been able to buy food, have a relatively comfortable place to live, go where I want, do what I want, etc. Being compelled to buy health insurance affected my life a little but not too much. Jimmy Carter's talk of the Draft gave me mild anguish for a while. But apart from those two things, I can't think of anything that any administration has done to really truly affect my lower/middle class blue-collar life.

DMac was so right on when he wrote this yesterday: Ds, Rs, libs, conservatives, they're all phukked up, it just depends on what side you're on that determines where you're going to shoot your arrows. That's what I've come to believe. It doesn't ultimately matter who's in the White House. There exists in the each of the four designees D mentioned deceit and greed and corruption and hypocrisy. ALL of them. Folks thinking there are real and lasting solutions via politics are deluded and letting themselves in for chronic disappointment, especially in this day and age.

Just some thoughts. Probably plenty of deficiencies in my logic and presentation but I'm not a well educated man. It's obvious at times reading on this particular board how many of you are highly intelligent, well-read and educated. Much of what gets written here goes way over my head. But I'm curious in some respects. Plus lacrosse season is still a little over two months away.

I've generally agreed with the proposition that one party or another, one person or another, in control for 4 or 8 years of the White House or leading the Senate or House for some period is unlikely to make a big difference to most of our lives, unless there's a particular policy or decision that directly impacts, like sending your kid to war. Otherwise, the ebb and flow of control tends to even out, to "muddle through".

But while you and many others feel that politicians are ALL (whatever pejorative), I don't expect perfection in our political process. It's messy, it's frustrating, people are imperfect, but that's the nature of constitutional democracy, IMO the most effective system of governance ever devised.

So, though I thought electing Bill Clinton would be a terrible message to send to the populace, especially young people, about integrity, it was not a world threatening cost. Smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion. And though I voted for McCain and Romney, I wasn't upset about Obama winning the WH. Again, smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion.

But I felt in 2015 and '16 that Trump could be terribly damaging to the country, a terrible message about personal morality, a 'leader' who inspired the worst impulses within a large part of the population vulnerable to such appeals. No way I'd vote for him. (though I didn't like or vote for the alternative in '16...in heavily blue state didn't matter).

Guys like Salty said not to worry, that he'd be surrounded by people who would put guard rails up that would minimize the damage. And I'll readily admit that he was half right. On the one hand, a whole lot of people who surrounded him proved to be corrupt, often stupidly corrupt. No Administration has had so many people at high levels turnover in some sort of scandal or disgrace. Crazy high numbers. On the other hand, a whole bunch of folks stood up when push came to shove, though it was way, way too close a call.

My concern now is that Trump and his deepest MAGA supporters have learned that "loyalty" to the Leader is the highest priority and that those "guard rails" will be eliminated from the outset. That's what they are promising, out loud and clear.

As to your list of positives and negatives, agreed on the negatives. I could list more, but certainly agree with those.

On Israel, I'm not sure he did anything other than support Netanyahu and his strategy of eliminating the 2 state proposition, supporting the ghettoization of Palestinians, and the aggressive encroachment of Palestinian lands through far right wing settlements. I thought all that was a tragic mistake being made by Israel, though my sentiments were certainly with the peaceful Israelis who wanted to build the most successful and safe state possible for themselves. Moving the embassy was a signal of approval of the Netanyahu policy of eliminating hope of a two state answer. It served no other purpose.

"straight shooter"?? I see this quite differently. It wasn't simply "casual diarrhea of the mouth", it was the rampant, knowing lies, often intended to excite and inspire the worst instincts among others or to protect himself, harm "enemies". He began with birtherism...Just a constant disregard for truth followed. And appeals to bigotry...so, I don't see that as "straight shooter". Calculated lies aren't "straight".

Border wall paid for by Mexico? Because of the rapists coming over?
Again, not only were his promises enormously exaggerated (LIES), they were really only about bigotry, not credible solutions to a very real problem. Should some wall be built where helpful? sure. And especially technology and manpower, etc. Always agreed with that, but not remotely sufficient to actually deal with the challenge of uncontrolled, undocumented immigration, nor even smuggling etc though better for that problem (which I care more about).

In my lifetime, various Presidents have made tragic, even catastrophic mistakes. Significant impact on many people, though from my position of relative access to privilege and some good luck in timing, not directly negative personally. But I don't think that the danger that Trump represents is in the same league.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

made mistakes

Yes, you have. One of which was making sleazy, uncalled-for remarks about me yesterday with no apology in the aftermath, though DMac gave you ample opportunity to offer one. Maybe go riff off someone else's posts with your self-important palaver. Y'ain't got no ear here, junior.

[Farfromgeneva]

Disclaimer: This isn't exhaustively researched. Just off the top of my head.


What I liked:

How he treated Israel. Far and away this was my favorite aspect of Trump in the White House.

Straight shooter. He said what he said and didn't mince words. Whether he was right or wrong--he wasn't afraid to say what he thought.

Following through with his campaign promise of building a wall on the border. (Obviously he didn't finish it but, at least he started it.)



What I disliked:

The casual/imprudent, unwise (stupid) way he handled Covid.

His diarrhea of the mouth via Twitter

Condoning the Jew-hating racists at Charlottesville by not ripping and condemning them when given the opportunity.

His embarrassing performance during the first debate with Biden.



With all that said, when I look back on my 60 plus years on this earth, my growing conviction is that it doesn't really matter who's in the White House. My life hasn't really been affected much regardless of who the president was. I'm just a (barely) high school educated blue-collar Beantown scrub. I have always been able to buy food, have a relatively comfortable place to live, go where I want, do what I want, etc. Being compelled to buy health insurance affected my life a little but not too much. Jimmy Carter's talk of the Draft gave me mild anguish for a while. But apart from those two things, I can't think of anything that any administration has done to really truly affect my lower/middle class blue-collar life.

DMac was so right on when he wrote this yesterday: Ds, Rs, libs, conservatives, they're all phukked up, it just depends on what side you're on that determines where you're going to shoot your arrows. That's what I've come to believe. It doesn't ultimately matter who's in the White House. There exists in the each of the four designees D mentioned deceit and greed and corruption and hypocrisy. ALL of them. Folks thinking there are real and lasting solutions via politics are deluded and letting themselves in for chronic disappointment, especially in this day and age.

Just some thoughts. Probably plenty of deficiencies in my logic and presentation but I'm not a well educated man. It's obvious at times reading on this particular board how many of you are highly intelligent, well-read and educated. Much of what gets written here goes way over my head. But I'm curious in some respects. Plus lacrosse season is still a little over two months away.

I've generally agreed with the proposition that one party or another, one person or another, in control for 4 or 8 years of the White House or leading the Senate or House for some period is unlikely to make a big difference to most of our lives, unless there's a particular policy or decision that directly impacts, like sending your kid to war. Otherwise, the ebb and flow of control tends to even out, to "muddle through".

But while you and many others feel that politicians are ALL (whatever pejorative), I don't expect perfection in our political process. It's messy, it's frustrating, people are imperfect, but that's the nature of constitutional democracy, IMO the most effective system of governance ever devised.

So, though I thought electing Bill Clinton would be a terrible message to send to the populace, especially young people, about integrity, it was not a world threatening cost. Smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion. And though I voted for McCain and Romney, I wasn't upset about Obama winning the WH. Again, smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion.

But I felt in 2015 and '16 that Trump could be terribly damaging to the country, a terrible message about personal morality, a 'leader' who inspired the worst impulses within a large part of the population vulnerable to such appeals. No way I'd vote for him. (though I didn't like or vote for the alternative in '16...in heavily blue state didn't matter).

Guys like Salty said not to worry, that he'd be surrounded by people who would put guard rails up that would minimize the damage. And I'll readily admit that he was half right. On the one hand, a whole lot of people who surrounded him proved to be corrupt, often stupidly corrupt. No Administration has had so many people at high levels turnover in some sort of scandal or disgrace. Crazy high numbers. On the other hand, a whole bunch of folks stood up when push came to shove, though it was way, way too close a call.

My concern now is that Trump and his deepest MAGA supporters have learned that "loyalty" to the Leader is the highest priority and that those "guard rails" will be eliminated from the outset. That's what they are promising, out loud and clear.

As to your list of positives and negatives, agreed on the negatives. I could list more, but certainly agree with those.

On Israel, I'm not sure he did anything other than support Netanyahu and his strategy of eliminating the 2 state proposition, supporting the ghettoization of Palestinians, and the aggressive encroachment of Palestinian lands through far right wing settlements. I thought all that was a tragic mistake being made by Israel, though my sentiments were certainly with the peaceful Israelis who wanted to build the most successful and safe state possible for themselves. Moving the embassy was a signal of approval of the Netanyahu policy of eliminating hope of a two state answer. It served no other purpose.

"straight shooter"?? I see this quite differently. It wasn't simply "casual diarrhea of the mouth", it was the rampant, knowing lies, often intended to excite and inspire the worst instincts among others or to protect himself, harm "enemies". He began with birtherism...Just a constant disregard for truth followed. And appeals to bigotry...so, I don't see that as "straight shooter". Calculated lies aren't "straight".

Border wall paid for by Mexico? Because of the rapists coming over?
Again, not only were his promises enormously exaggerated (LIES), they were really only about bigotry, not credible solutions to a very real problem. Should some wall be built where helpful? sure. And especially technology and manpower, etc. Always agreed with that, but not remotely sufficient to actually deal with the challenge of uncontrolled, undocumented immigration, nor even smuggling etc though better for that problem (which I care more about).

In my lifetime, various Presidents have made tragic, even catastrophic mistakes. Significant impact on many people, though from my position of relative access to privilege and some good luck in timing, not directly negative personally. But I don't think that the danger that Trump represents is in the same league.

Not perfection but relatively balanced equilibrium is critical. I don’t trust two extreme countervailing forces to produce that unfortunately so the more we barbell the bigger the risk.

Blending the wings to get to a arithmetic average is far different form dispersed datapoints across the plot chart and not in a positive way.

Look at the multiple people whining for more bodies or sheer numbers on their side (and their conclusion as to why they are gone is specious and speculative at best) rather than making the case and “outrunning the competition” and this is all a marketplace of ideas like Socrates posited so same dynamics - heading towards winner take all. See our oligopolies in so so many industries.

[MDlaxfan76]

made mistakes

Yes, you have. One of which was making sleazy, uncalled-for remarks about me yesterday with no apology in the aftermath, though DMac gave you ample opportunity to offer one. Maybe go riff off someone else's posts with your self-important palaver. Y'ain't got no ear here, junior.

Nope, you've prolifically posted on the women's lax forum, many such posts I called "fawning", and which definition I stand by. DMac thought I was also calling that "pervy" which would be well beyond what I said and meant. Others on those threads, whose opinions DMac dismisses as just parents of girls who play the sport, (as compared to those with no females in their family who played or are playing the sport) may well call your posts "pervy" but I did not. So, no apology for calling you "pervy". Take it up with those parent types who call you out, I didn't go there. Just "fawning".

You taking exception to "fawning"???
Would you prefer the word "admiring"?

"self-important"?? I haven't created a thread named for myself...but you have...

And "junior", who you calling junior?
I was born in '57, how much older than me are you?
And why would you play some ageism game?

Last, if you want to post on the politics discussion threads, expect posters to respond with actual discussion on topic. You don't have to respond to critique if you don't want, but count on that being noticed as well.

[PizzaSnake]

Disclaimer: This isn't exhaustively researched. Just off the top of my head.


What I liked:

How he treated Israel. Far and away this was my favorite aspect of Trump in the White House.

Straight shooter. He said what he said and didn't mince words. Whether he was right or wrong--he wasn't afraid to say what he thought.

Following through with his campaign promise of building a wall on the border. (Obviously he didn't finish it but, at least he started it.)



What I disliked:

The casual/imprudent, unwise (stupid) way he handled Covid.

His diarrhea of the mouth via Twitter

Condoning the Jew-hating racists at Charlottesville by not ripping and condemning them when given the opportunity.

His embarrassing performance during the first debate with Biden.



With all that said, when I look back on my 60 plus years on this earth, my growing conviction is that it doesn't really matter who's in the White House. My life hasn't really been affected much regardless of who the president was. I'm just a (barely) high school educated blue-collar Beantown scrub. I have always been able to buy food, have a relatively comfortable place to live, go where I want, do what I want, etc. Being compelled to buy health insurance affected my life a little but not too much. Jimmy Carter's talk of the Draft gave me mild anguish for a while. But apart from those two things, I can't think of anything that any administration has done to really truly affect my lower/middle class blue-collar life.

DMac was so right on when he wrote this yesterday: Ds, Rs, libs, conservatives, they're all phukked up, it just depends on what side you're on that determines where you're going to shoot your arrows. That's what I've come to believe. It doesn't ultimately matter who's in the White House. There exists in the each of the four designees D mentioned deceit and greed and corruption and hypocrisy. ALL of them. Folks thinking there are real and lasting solutions via politics are deluded and letting themselves in for chronic disappointment, especially in this day and age.

Just some thoughts. Probably plenty of deficiencies in my logic and presentation but I'm not a well educated man. It's obvious at times reading on this particular board how many of you are highly intelligent, well-read and educated. Much of what gets written here goes way over my head. But I'm curious in some respects. Plus lacrosse season is still a little over two months away.

I've generally agreed with the proposition that one party or another, one person or another, in control for 4 or 8 years of the White House or leading the Senate or House for some period is unlikely to make a big difference to most of our lives, unless there's a particular policy or decision that directly impacts, like sending your kid to war. Otherwise, the ebb and flow of control tends to even out, to "muddle through".

But while you and many others feel that politicians are ALL (whatever pejorative), I don't expect perfection in our political process. It's messy, it's frustrating, people are imperfect, but that's the nature of constitutional democracy, IMO the most effective system of governance ever devised.

So, though I thought electing Bill Clinton would be a terrible message to send to the populace, especially young people, about integrity, it was not a world threatening cost. Smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion. And though I voted for McCain and Romney, I wasn't upset about Obama winning the WH. Again, smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion.

But I felt in 2015 and '16 that Trump could be terribly damaging to the country, a terrible message about personal morality, a 'leader' who inspired the worst impulses within a large part of the population vulnerable to such appeals. No way I'd vote for him. (though I didn't like or vote for the alternative in '16...in heavily blue state didn't matter).

Guys like Salty said not to worry, that he'd be surrounded by people who would put guard rails up that would minimize the damage. And I'll readily admit that he was half right. On the one hand, a whole lot of people who surrounded him proved to be corrupt, often stupidly corrupt. No Administration has had so many people at high levels turnover in some sort of scandal or disgrace. Crazy high numbers. On the other hand, a whole bunch of folks stood up when push came to shove, though it was way, way too close a call.

My concern now is that Trump and his deepest MAGA supporters have learned that "loyalty" to the Leader is the highest priority and that those "guard rails" will be eliminated from the outset. That's what they are promising, out loud and clear.

As to your list of positives and negatives, agreed on the negatives. I could list more, but certainly agree with those.

On Israel, I'm not sure he did anything other than support Netanyahu and his strategy of eliminating the 2 state proposition, supporting the ghettoization of Palestinians, and the aggressive encroachment of Palestinian lands through far right wing settlements. I thought all that was a tragic mistake being made by Israel, though my sentiments were certainly with the peaceful Israelis who wanted to build the most successful and safe state possible for themselves. Moving the embassy was a signal of approval of the Netanyahu policy of eliminating hope of a two state answer. It served no other purpose.

"straight shooter"?? I see this quite differently. It wasn't simply "casual diarrhea of the mouth", it was the rampant, knowing lies, often intended to excite and inspire the worst instincts among others or to protect himself, harm "enemies". He began with birtherism...Just a constant disregard for truth followed. And appeals to bigotry...so, I don't see that as "straight shooter". Calculated lies aren't "straight".

Border wall paid for by Mexico? Because of the rapists coming over?
Again, not only were his promises enormously exaggerated (LIES), they were really only about bigotry, not credible solutions to a very real problem. Should some wall be built where helpful? sure. And especially technology and manpower, etc. Always agreed with that, but not remotely sufficient to actually deal with the challenge of uncontrolled, undocumented immigration, nor even smuggling etc though better for that problem (which I care more about).

In my lifetime, various Presidents have made tragic, even catastrophic mistakes. Significant impact on many people, though from my position of relative access to privilege and some good luck in timing, not directly negative personally. But I don't think that the danger that Trump represents is in the same league.

“ not credible solutions to a very real problem. Should some wall be built where helpful? sure. And especially technology and manpower, etc.”

I presume you are speaking of “illegal” immigration here. I emphasize illegal because of the complication of asylum.

Perhaps we could re-label it as “hard to regulate” effectively” migration.

So, what solutions are on the table? A physical barrier only addresses terrestrial border crossing. How about the very common, but largely unremarked upon visa “overstays?”

Besides those mechanical issues, how about, shall we say, the “human capital” angle? Given our slavish adherence to a growth economy -baked in by large debt and requisite service of same, we need more workers. Or are you banking on some Futuyama-esque post-history utopia where AI has reduced need for human labor?

In either case, what do you propose for detection and processing of violators of migrant policy? In the event of large spikes, edge-cases, if you will, what then?

If you countenance a wall, would a virtual autonomous drone wall be acceptable? Would a permanent immobility of the offender be acceptable? Once we start down this path things will get complicated, fast.

What concessions of your personal morals are you willing to trade for a promised solution?

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Last

[old salt]

Doesn’t like people likes dogs better (and calls others misanthropes-brilliant!)

How would you know ? I like people just fine.

There are mean dogs too that have been trained that way or mirror their owner.

A friend’s dog was just mean. Wasn’t trained that way….born that way. The breed is generally friendly to people. This one wasn’t. Was eventually eaten by a coyote.

What breed ? ...maybe he was picking up on your pheromones.
Maybe he was traumatized as a puppy, similar to child abuse &/or neglect.
What was a mean dog doing running loose, to encounter a coyote ?

Havanese. You are wrong. Just one of those things. Probably genetically inclined. A bad seed. We bought from the same breeder along with 4 other families in town. Encountered a coyote in the back yard which abutted a wooded area. All of these dogs are now 15+ and still active. This wasn’t some puppy that was akin to a Russian orphan from a orphanage outside Chernobyl that you may be thinking of.

Small breeds can be a challenge.

https://wagwalking.com/training/not-bite-5

[Farfromgeneva]

Last

Do you want to fight him bc it got real aggressive real fast?

And did you really create a thread about yourself? That’s some stellar work. If so I can see the logic in using a Brad Pitt gif.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Do you want to fight him bc it got real aggressive real fast?

And did you really create a thread about yourself? That’s some stellar work. If so I can see the logic in using a Brad Pitt gif.

I have no interest in fighting him, or anyone else for that matter.

As I get older I appreciate getting along with folks much more than fighting with them, though it doesn't always work out that way.

I didn't create a topic about myself so much as for myself due to (legitimate) complaints of my bountiful postings. However--All are welcome to post, participate, congregate and interact here.

viewtopic.php?f=129&t=3714

[MDlaxfan76]

Disclaimer: This isn't exhaustively researched. Just off the top of my head.


What I liked:

How he treated Israel. Far and away this was my favorite aspect of Trump in the White House.

Straight shooter. He said what he said and didn't mince words. Whether he was right or wrong--he wasn't afraid to say what he thought.

Following through with his campaign promise of building a wall on the border. (Obviously he didn't finish it but, at least he started it.)



What I disliked:

The casual/imprudent, unwise (stupid) way he handled Covid.

His diarrhea of the mouth via Twitter

Condoning the Jew-hating racists at Charlottesville by not ripping and condemning them when given the opportunity.

His embarrassing performance during the first debate with Biden.



With all that said, when I look back on my 60 plus years on this earth, my growing conviction is that it doesn't really matter who's in the White House. My life hasn't really been affected much regardless of who the president was. I'm just a (barely) high school educated blue-collar Beantown scrub. I have always been able to buy food, have a relatively comfortable place to live, go where I want, do what I want, etc. Being compelled to buy health insurance affected my life a little but not too much. Jimmy Carter's talk of the Draft gave me mild anguish for a while. But apart from those two things, I can't think of anything that any administration has done to really truly affect my lower/middle class blue-collar life.

DMac was so right on when he wrote this yesterday: Ds, Rs, libs, conservatives, they're all phukked up, it just depends on what side you're on that determines where you're going to shoot your arrows. That's what I've come to believe. It doesn't ultimately matter who's in the White House. There exists in the each of the four designees D mentioned deceit and greed and corruption and hypocrisy. ALL of them. Folks thinking there are real and lasting solutions via politics are deluded and letting themselves in for chronic disappointment, especially in this day and age.

Just some thoughts. Probably plenty of deficiencies in my logic and presentation but I'm not a well educated man. It's obvious at times reading on this particular board how many of you are highly intelligent, well-read and educated. Much of what gets written here goes way over my head. But I'm curious in some respects. Plus lacrosse season is still a little over two months away.

I've generally agreed with the proposition that one party or another, one person or another, in control for 4 or 8 years of the White House or leading the Senate or House for some period is unlikely to make a big difference to most of our lives, unless there's a particular policy or decision that directly impacts, like sending your kid to war. Otherwise, the ebb and flow of control tends to even out, to "muddle through".

But while you and many others feel that politicians are ALL (whatever pejorative), I don't expect perfection in our political process. It's messy, it's frustrating, people are imperfect, but that's the nature of constitutional democracy, IMO the most effective system of governance ever devised.

So, though I thought electing Bill Clinton would be a terrible message to send to the populace, especially young people, about integrity, it was not a world threatening cost. Smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion. And though I voted for McCain and Romney, I wasn't upset about Obama winning the WH. Again, smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion.

But I felt in 2015 and '16 that Trump could be terribly damaging to the country, a terrible message about personal morality, a 'leader' who inspired the worst impulses within a large part of the population vulnerable to such appeals. No way I'd vote for him. (though I didn't like or vote for the alternative in '16...in heavily blue state didn't matter).

Guys like Salty said not to worry, that he'd be surrounded by people who would put guard rails up that would minimize the damage. And I'll readily admit that he was half right. On the one hand, a whole lot of people who surrounded him proved to be corrupt, often stupidly corrupt. No Administration has had so many people at high levels turnover in some sort of scandal or disgrace. Crazy high numbers. On the other hand, a whole bunch of folks stood up when push came to shove, though it was way, way too close a call.

My concern now is that Trump and his deepest MAGA supporters have learned that "loyalty" to the Leader is the highest priority and that those "guard rails" will be eliminated from the outset. That's what they are promising, out loud and clear.

As to your list of positives and negatives, agreed on the negatives. I could list more, but certainly agree with those.

On Israel, I'm not sure he did anything other than support Netanyahu and his strategy of eliminating the 2 state proposition, supporting the ghettoization of Palestinians, and the aggressive encroachment of Palestinian lands through far right wing settlements. I thought all that was a tragic mistake being made by Israel, though my sentiments were certainly with the peaceful Israelis who wanted to build the most successful and safe state possible for themselves. Moving the embassy was a signal of approval of the Netanyahu policy of eliminating hope of a two state answer. It served no other purpose.

"straight shooter"?? I see this quite differently. It wasn't simply "casual diarrhea of the mouth", it was the rampant, knowing lies, often intended to excite and inspire the worst instincts among others or to protect himself, harm "enemies". He began with birtherism...Just a constant disregard for truth followed. And appeals to bigotry...so, I don't see that as "straight shooter". Calculated lies aren't "straight".

Border wall paid for by Mexico? Because of the rapists coming over?
Again, not only were his promises enormously exaggerated (LIES), they were really only about bigotry, not credible solutions to a very real problem. Should some wall be built where helpful? sure. And especially technology and manpower, etc. Always agreed with that, but not remotely sufficient to actually deal with the challenge of uncontrolled, undocumented immigration, nor even smuggling etc though better for that problem (which I care more about).

In my lifetime, various Presidents have made tragic, even catastrophic mistakes. Significant impact on many people, though from my position of relative access to privilege and some good luck in timing, not directly negative personally. But I don't think that the danger that Trump represents is in the same league.

“ not credible solutions to a very real problem. Should some wall be built where helpful? sure. And especially technology and manpower, etc.”

I presume you are speaking of “illegal” immigration here. I emphasize illegal because of the complication of asylum.

Perhaps we could re-label it as “hard to regulate” effectively” migration.

So, what solutions are on the table? A physical barrier only addresses terrestrial border crossing. How about the very common, but largely unremarked upon visa “overstays?”

Besides those mechanical issues, how about, shall we say, the “human capital” angle? Given our slavish adherence to a growth economy -baked in by large debt and requisite service of same, we need more workers. Or are you banking on some Futuyama-esque post-history utopia where AI has reduced need for human labor?

In either case, what do you propose for detection and processing of violators of migrant policy? In the event of large spikes, edge-cases, if you will, what then?

If you countenance a wall, would a virtual autonomous drone wall be acceptable? Would a permanent immobility of the offender be acceptable? Once we start down this path things will get complicated, fast.

What concessions of your personal morals are you willing to trade for a promised solution?

Sound questions.
I think it belongs in the immigration thread, right?

You've highlighted a number of reasons why I don't think a barrier is a sufficient answer to controlling immigration. I do think it (physical barrier, technology, and manpower) can help with smuggling issues, but there are numerous access points, so it's not as simple as just building a 'wall".

For immigration, I quite agree that much of the problem with undocumented immigration is over staying visas, asylum management, all sorts of things just a barrier doesn't address.

I'm in favor of more legal immigration, not less, with asylum being a reasonable component, but with cases adjudicated more swiftly. I think we benefit from immigration that gets documented, where people seek the responsibilities and benefits of citizenship, and don't get stuck in the dark, in the black market economy. I think it should be challenging to achieve that citizenship, taking time and effort, but providing real hope.

Do I think AI will eventually reduce the need for labor? Possibly, but I wouldn't count on it, moreover, that means that the productivity of the hours we do spend working is far higher...and that's ok with me, immigration doesn't change that.

[cradleandshoot]

Disclaimer: This isn't exhaustively researched. Just off the top of my head.


What I liked:

How he treated Israel. Far and away this was my favorite aspect of Trump in the White House.

Straight shooter. He said what he said and didn't mince words. Whether he was right or wrong--he wasn't afraid to say what he thought.

Following through with his campaign promise of building a wall on the border. (Obviously he didn't finish it but, at least he started it.)



What I disliked:

The casual/imprudent, unwise (stupid) way he handled Covid.

His diarrhea of the mouth via Twitter

Condoning the Jew-hating racists at Charlottesville by not ripping and condemning them when given the opportunity.

His embarrassing performance during the first debate with Biden.



With all that said, when I look back on my 60 plus years on this earth, my growing conviction is that it doesn't really matter who's in the White House. My life hasn't really been affected much regardless of who the president was. I'm just a (barely) high school educated blue-collar Beantown scrub. I have always been able to buy food, have a relatively comfortable place to live, go where I want, do what I want, etc. Being compelled to buy health insurance affected my life a little but not too much. Jimmy Carter's talk of the Draft gave me mild anguish for a while. But apart from those two things, I can't think of anything that any administration has done to really truly affect my lower/middle class blue-collar life.

DMac was so right on when he wrote this yesterday: Ds, Rs, libs, conservatives, they're all phukked up, it just depends on what side you're on that determines where you're going to shoot your arrows. That's what I've come to believe. It doesn't ultimately matter who's in the White House. There exists in the each of the four designees D mentioned deceit and greed and corruption and hypocrisy. ALL of them. Folks thinking there are real and lasting solutions via politics are deluded and letting themselves in for chronic disappointment, especially in this day and age.

Just some thoughts. Probably plenty of deficiencies in my logic and presentation but I'm not a well educated man. It's obvious at times reading on this particular board how many of you are highly intelligent, well-read and educated. Much of what gets written here goes way over my head. But I'm curious in some respects. Plus lacrosse season is still a little over two months away.

I've generally agreed with the proposition that one party or another, one person or another, in control for 4 or 8 years of the White House or leading the Senate or House for some period is unlikely to make a big difference to most of our lives, unless there's a particular policy or decision that directly impacts, like sending your kid to war. Otherwise, the ebb and flow of control tends to even out, to "muddle through".

But while you and many others feel that politicians are ALL (whatever pejorative), I don't expect perfection in our political process. It's messy, it's frustrating, people are imperfect, but that's the nature of constitutional democracy, IMO the most effective system of governance ever devised.

So, though I thought electing Bill Clinton would be a terrible message to send to the populace, especially young people, about integrity, it was not a world threatening cost. Smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion. And though I voted for McCain and Romney, I wasn't upset about Obama winning the WH. Again, smart guy who governed by consensus and persuasion.

But I felt in 2015 and '16 that Trump could be terribly damaging to the country, a terrible message about personal morality, a 'leader' who inspired the worst impulses within a large part of the population vulnerable to such appeals. No way I'd vote for him. (though I didn't like or vote for the alternative in '16...in heavily blue state didn't matter).

Guys like Salty said not to worry, that he'd be surrounded by people who would put guard rails up that would minimize the damage. And I'll readily admit that he was half right. On the one hand, a whole lot of people who surrounded him proved to be corrupt, often stupidly corrupt. No Administration has had so many people at high levels turnover in some sort of scandal or disgrace. Crazy high numbers. On the other hand, a whole bunch of folks stood up when push came to shove, though it was way, way too close a call.

My concern now is that Trump and his deepest MAGA supporters have learned that "loyalty" to the Leader is the highest priority and that those "guard rails" will be eliminated from the outset. That's what they are promising, out loud and clear.

As to your list of positives and negatives, agreed on the negatives. I could list more, but certainly agree with those.

On Israel, I'm not sure he did anything other than support Netanyahu and his strategy of eliminating the 2 state proposition, supporting the ghettoization of Palestinians, and the aggressive encroachment of Palestinian lands through far right wing settlements. I thought all that was a tragic mistake being made by Israel, though my sentiments were certainly with the peaceful Israelis who wanted to build the most successful and safe state possible for themselves. Moving the embassy was a signal of approval of the Netanyahu policy of eliminating hope of a two state answer. It served no other purpose.

"straight shooter"?? I see this quite differently. It wasn't simply "casual diarrhea of the mouth", it was the rampant, knowing lies, often intended to excite and inspire the worst instincts among others or to protect himself, harm "enemies". He began with birtherism...Just a constant disregard for truth followed. And appeals to bigotry...so, I don't see that as "straight shooter". Calculated lies aren't "straight".

Border wall paid for by Mexico? Because of the rapists coming over?
Again, not only were his promises enormously exaggerated (LIES), they were really only about bigotry, not credible solutions to a very real problem. Should some wall be built where helpful? sure. And especially technology and manpower, etc. Always agreed with that, but not remotely sufficient to actually deal with the challenge of uncontrolled, undocumented immigration, nor even smuggling etc though better for that problem (which I care more about).

In my lifetime, various Presidents have made tragic, even catastrophic mistakes. Significant impact on many people, though from my position of relative access to privilege and some good luck in timing, not directly negative personally. But I don't think that the danger that Trump represents is in the same league.

“ not credible solutions to a very real problem. Should some wall be built where helpful? sure. And especially technology and manpower, etc.”

I presume you are speaking of “illegal” immigration here. I emphasize illegal because of the complication of asylum.

Perhaps we could re-label it as “hard to regulate” effectively” migration.

So, what solutions are on the table? A physical barrier only addresses terrestrial border crossing. How about the very common, but largely unremarked upon visa “overstays?”

Besides those mechanical issues, how about, shall we say, the “human capital” angle? Given our slavish adherence to a growth economy -baked in by large debt and requisite service of same, we need more workers. Or are you banking on some Futuyama-esque post-history utopia where AI has reduced need for human labor?

In either case, what do you propose for detection and processing of violators of migrant policy? In the event of large spikes, edge-cases, if you will, what then?

If you countenance a wall, would a virtual autonomous drone wall be acceptable? Would a permanent immobility of the offender be acceptable? Once we start down this path things will get complicated, fast.

What concessions of your personal morals are you willing to trade for a promised solution?

Sound questions.
I think it belongs in the immigration thread, right?

You've highlighted a number of reasons why I don't think a barrier is a sufficient answer to controlling immigration. I do think it (physical barrier, technology, and manpower) can help with smuggling issues, but there are numerous access points, so it's not as simple as just building a 'wall".

For immigration, I quite agree that much of the problem with undocumented immigration is over staying visas, asylum management, all sorts of things just a barrier doesn't address.

I'm in favor of more legal immigration, not less, with asylum being a reasonable component, but with cases adjudicated more swiftly. I think we benefit from immigration that gets documented, where people seek the responsibilities and benefits of citizenship, and don't get stuck in the dark, in the black market economy. I think it should be challenging to achieve that citizenship, taking time and effort, but providing real hope.

Do I think AI will eventually reduce the need for labor? Possibly, but I wouldn't count on it, moreover, that means that the productivity of the hours we do spend working is far higher...and that's ok with me, immigration doesn't change that.

Do you have a time frame for how cases should be adjudicated quickly??? I don't believe any time frame exists currently.

[MDlaxfan76]

Do you want to fight him bc it got real aggressive real fast?

And did you really create a thread about yourself? That’s some stellar work. If so I can see the logic in using a Brad Pitt gif.

I have no interest in fighting him, or anyone else for that matter.

As I get older I appreciate getting along with folks much more than fighting with them, though it doesn't always work out that way.

I didn't create a topic about myself so much as for myself due to (legitimate) complaints of my bountiful postings. However--All are welcome to post, participate, congregate and interact here.

viewtopic.php?f=129&t=3714

To be clear, I had no interest in "fighting" at all.
But you landed into an ongoing discussion contributing only personal insults.

Did the same thing a couple of days earlier in the Israel and Zionism thread.

If you're going to be in the Politics threads expect push back on whatever opinion you throw out. Preferably on the substance of the actual thread. Which is what I turned to when you decided to express an opinion on topic (Orange Duce) instead of personal insults.

What I've observed is that you don't like to engage with anyone who actually addresses substance, disagreeing with your opinion civill, whether in toto or in part, adding nuance.

You want to "get along"? Don't drop in with personal insults.
Engage civilly when there's disagreement on the substance of the discussion. Actually engage.