Jump to content

ewsieg

MotownSports Fan
  • Content Count

    8,672
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

45 Excellent

About ewsieg

  • Rank
    MotownSports Fan
  • Birthday 03/26/1976

Converted

  • Location
    Warren, MI

Converted

  • Interests
    Sports, Beer, Chips

Converted

  • Occupation
    Network Eng

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just like Ned, there was no way Jon could succeed in the GOT world. It felt anti-climatic, but at the same time, I liked it. You got some good moments (Sansa becoming queen, Jon petting Ghost), but ultimately, the guy we've been rooting for the better part of this series slogged his way to where he began.
  2. There definitely could be an argument that in order to be true to the series, it shouldn't be pleasing.
  3. Don't worry, I think i'm done for awhile. I liked this forum for a long time because of the debate and ran out of time to visit. Came back and the funny thing is, I think i'm aligned politically more with the left now, but i'm definitely right around the center. Unfortunately doesn't look like there is room for me now. Guess both sides better hope they secured enough followers as they alienate everyone else.
  4. I'm not going to try and find one. In part because as I've stated before, there are lots of variables. If I go and try and find one that I think it a good example, a quick google search will definitely identify some 'con' points that go against it. I provided a few articles/trackers which identifies some and gives some information regarding them.
  5. Oh man, be very careful. You might get a free pass from others, but one more admission that there could even be 'some' truth to what I said will put you on the other side with Screwball, me...and apparently Stan. Before you know it, you'll have to start out posts like "Guys, believe me I really don't like Trump, but on this, I think he's only really wrong, not stupidly, how the #$#@ wrong" and it still won't matter.
  6. I think you can find cases of good regulation and good deregulation and companies on all sides arguing different aspects. My understanding with the emissions standards / mpg standards is that the major companies already invested a ton of money to meet the regulation and by removing it, you put companies that weren't doing their work the ability to continue to compete. As a whole, I continue to stand by my comment, or maybe I should amend it to state that the specific regulations Republicans would look to deregulate are the type that corporate industry would prefer to see gone, meaning as a whole, more economic development (even at potential long term risk). To say it in a way where I don't have to research anything else today, pretend i'm one of the liberals on the forum that says "Of course Trump is going to deregulate everything, probably will just use Executive Orders so no one can stop him as he wants to be a dictator. Then of course he's going to use his billionaire economic advisors to just go talk to the richest CEO's in the world to ask them what regulations they want changed. Then corporations will be able to run free, making huge profits at the expense of the people. Profiting off of the dumb hicks/rednecks that stupidly elected him....idiots. Oh...and collusion!"
  7. Person says 'Trumps deregulation policies have had severe consequences on the environment' and it's accepted as truth. (not saying it was brought up here, but i've heard it so many times) Another person that says the president is so bad he shouldn't be elevated to the same standard as other presidents or candidates in terms of his speech, but that person has defended something Trump has done before....well just prove it! I can't prove anything yet. That's part of the issue with regulations/deregulation/economic policy. Often, you can't truly define the outcome of such things and their unintended consequences until much later and even then, lots of variables are involved. Maybe I perceived this wrongly, but I thought it was commonly accepted that less regulation was preferred by corporations in most instances and tended to lead to increased capital spending but the age old argument was just because the economy might be better (in the short run), what are the long term consequences. Example, deregulation of finance industry brought a great economy....and then a recession only topped by The Great Depression As for deregulation, Trumps actions showed he was ambitious when it came to deregulation and while many haven't panned out, many have or like I said, he used EO's to delay others previously implemented. https://www.brookings.edu/interactives/tracking-deregulation-in-the-trump-era/ https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/regulations-trump-2019/
  8. that's not entirely true. Additionally he has used executive orders to delay implementation of regulations from the administration before him.
  9. Well, this response will certainly send people off of the rails, but I think the economy is doing better in part to many of the regulation changes within the Trump administration (Long term effects are yet to be seen and concede we don't know how it'll play out). Still, for me, that doesn't give him a pass due to all the bull**** that's come with him on the social side of government.
  10. I think most of you folks believe that since I am saying he should be held to a different standard, i'm saying he gets a pass. I'm not saying that. If we went with that standard than I think there would be an argument which Euph alluded to that since the economy is doing great, he gets a pass. That is a legitimate standard that has been afforded to many presidents before him. If you had a brother that stole from you, stole from other family members, lied and cheated whenever he could to get what he wants, even though he was raised by the same parents and has the same family 'position' as another brother you have that's always been there for you, would you really hold each to the same standard? Would each get a key to your home and would you allow both to watch your house when your on vacation? Even lets say the lying brother says he has changed, are you just going to take his word? Even if you start to wonder that maybe he has grown up, you think you might try and verify some of the things he's claiming he's doing in his bid to turnaround? If anything I think the media should be even more investigative on Trump. All i'm saying is they need to look at his actions, not his words or at least, not just his words.
  11. This is the #1 reason why he shouldn't be president IMO.
  12. I really should walk away from this, but I'm so completely shocked that because I won't blindly blame Trump for everything, that even when I say he's such a bad person/president, that it's not fair to other presidents/candidates to compare them equally, you fight me. My standard for presidents and other high respected positions is that while I may not agree with them and they may only provide half truths, they are presenting me with their point of view. The fact that I no longer allow Trump to remain in that standard does not elevate him, it lowers him. Just as if someone in my personal life lied to me consistently, I would no longer give them the benefit of the doubt that I would with people that have not done that. Because of what Trump says, I can't take anything at face value. It is worthless to me. This does not excuse the behavior.
  13. Good God people, you make my point and don't even realize it. I'm not saying I apply a different standard because Trump is awesome and shouldn't have the same standard as worthless democrats or other pleebs. I am also not saying that Trump SHOULD have a different standard, I'm saying he doesn't deserve the same standard. I'm saying he's not worth that standard DUE TO HIS OWN WORDS AND SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS. It's not my fault that I can't trust Trump, it's his.
  14. I would like to hope and believe that going forward, I will never feel the need to ignore the words of the leader of the free world. At this point though, and I don't care to debate on the reasons why (is he just trolling, is he that much of a despot, is he mentally that deficient now) his words are worthless. If Biden steps in and says a few things off-kilter, I will admit that i'd hold him to it. I think that has less to do with any partisanship and more to do with the fact that I wouldn't expect it from Biden and would question the motives as I wouldn't expect it.
  15. OK, I apologize on my comment on Trump and war. It's obvious he's a war-hawk. Wish we could go back to the good-old days of Obama when we didn't have any troops in harms way. I was wrong in saying he's not waging war, but can you tell me what foreign operations has Trump started since he took office versus ones he has only continued? I would just like folks to judge him on his actions and not his words, which by now everyone should know they mean nothing. Judging him on his actions alone should justify a new president, the media doesn't have to make up more reasons. That's all i'm trying to say. Every day, some new 'constitutional crises' is thrown out there, it's been old to me for quite some time, my concern all along is it'll get old to others as well and it'll result in 4 more years of him.
×
×
  • Create New...