Jump to content

chasfh

The Presidency of Donald J. Trump

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I really dislike the Presidency and the President, and hate what I think it says about America and Americans for having elected him.

But I live a charmed life despite that and would not go back 30 years if offered the choice.

and 1989 was a crap year for the Tigers.  

I had just returned from two years in Germany in September 1989 and my German friends had told me in August that there was no way that Germany would ever reunify.  The events of Nov 1989 seemed like the impossible.  Hard to explain how euphoric that was. 

You do want to experience that again in your lifetime.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/9/2019 at 5:14 AM, smr-nj said:

You’re correct.  These excusers are the problem. 

Shame on her.  I hope when she attempts to run again for any office, her opponent slams this interview in her face.

No worries if that happens, she will easily find a high paying job from the corporations the GOP has given welfare to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, 313DetroitCity said:

No worries if that happens, she will easily find a high paying job from the corporations the GOP has given welfare to.

No doubt.

But in fairness, just about ALL of them (D & R) leave DC and walk into a lobbyist type position.  

We really could use legislation that doesn’t allow these jobs until you’re out of office for at least 3 to 4 years.  Of course, that will never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, screwball said:

Laws don't mean squat.

Those with the money make the rules.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, this could have all been avoidable if all these pols didn't sacrifice their dignity at the alter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Nikki thinks the cultists will support her post doofus, she really has not been paying attention 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ROMAD1 said:

 

That's really the one big hope I have had about this whole nightmare phenomenon: that the latching onto Trump is more personality driven than ideologically driven, and that the red hats don't just latch onto the next guy who touts the same policies but with far less "charm" and "personality". Honestly, I would like to see red hats disengage politically and just go on to whatever other pop culture phenomenon suits them at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Oblong said:

I think it's about the man.... 

 

I'm somewhere in the middle on that. I think that the GOP isn't going to snap back away from Trump-style populism once he leaves, but at the same time we have seen evidence that the Trump show doesn't necessarily work for other folks.

The national folks, IMO, got a little over their skis in their read of the Kentucky Gubernatorial Election, but one thing that it did show is that there are limits to how non-Trump candidates can run as a Trump-style populist and the limits to what Trump's surrogacy can provide at the ballot box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

The national folks, IMO, got a little over their skis in their read of the Kentucky Gubernatorial Election, but one thing that it did show is that there are limits to how non-Trump candidates can run as a Trump-style populist and the limits to what Trump's surrogacy can provide at the ballot box.

Trump also had a 30 year head start in creating his brand and image.  Random unknown politicians who decide to emulate Trump in election bids come across as being disingenuous and phony more often than not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I'm somewhere in the middle on that. I think that the GOP isn't going to snap back away from Trump-style populism once he leaves, but at the same time we have seen evidence that the Trump show doesn't necessarily work for other folks.

The national folks, IMO, got a little over their skis in their read of the Kentucky Gubernatorial Election, but one thing that it did show is that there are limits to how non-Trump candidates can run as a Trump-style populist and the limits to what Trump's surrogacy can provide at the ballot box.

Mitch had a feud with Bevin.  Mitch is Saruman in all this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I'm somewhere in the middle on that. I think that the GOP isn't going to snap back away from Trump-style populism once he leaves, but at the same time we have seen evidence that the Trump show doesn't necessarily work for other folks.

The national folks, IMO, got a little over their skis in their read of the Kentucky Gubernatorial Election, but one thing that it did show is that there are limits to how non-Trump candidates can run as a Trump-style populist and the limits to what Trump's surrogacy can provide at the ballot box.

THere's always been that segment of the GOP but they were quiet and often didn't vote, that's why Romney didn't win in 08. I think they're older and without Trump they will get bored and move on.

But just as the dems have to deal with their extremists the GOP will have to always deal with them.

Haley could have been a bridge but her comments the last few days are too far for me...   without mixing threads it could require a conviction by the senate GOP to repudiate Trump once and for all and give the cover needed for certain Senators to carry on the mantle of what's left of the GOP.  Spread the invective among 20 rather than a single individual.  PUt enough distance between impeachment and the election, and nominate someone other than Pence and the GOP might have a shot in '20 if they run a younger person who's not crazy.  It's a longshot but the only shot besides Trump slugging along.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ROMAD1 said:

Mitch had a feud with Bevin.  Mitch is Saruman in all this.

Since Election Day, sure.... but he campaigned with him in Lexington before EDay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Oblong said:

Haley could have been a bridge but her comments the last few days are too far for me...   without mixing threads it could require a conviction by the senate GOP to repudiate Trump once and for all and give the cover needed for certain Senators to carry on the mantle of what's left of the GOP.  Spread the invective among 20 rather than a single individual.  PUt enough distance between impeachment and the election, and nominate someone other than Pence and the GOP might have a shot in '20 if they run a younger person who's not crazy.  It's a longshot but the only shot besides Trump slugging along.

The issue for the GOP is that if one posits that Trumpism will fall out of favor and revert to the norm, almost all Republican politicians (except for Mitt Romney, Adam Kinzinger, and maybe a couple of others) are so far in the tank that it's going to be hard for them to separate themselves from him once he is gone. The video and the votes will always be there....

I suppose at that point they'll be counting on the people forgetting the past association (which, frankly, is possible or even probable for most people)....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mtutiger said:

The issue for the GOP is that if one posits that Trumpism will fall out of favor and revert to the norm, almost all Republican politicians (except for Mitt Romney, Adam Kinzinger, and maybe a couple of others) are so far in the tank that it's going to be hard for them to separate themselves from him once he is gone. The video and the votes will always be there....

I suppose at that point they'll be counting on the people forgetting the past association (which, frankly, is possible or even probable for most people)....

The problem for the non-Trump GOP is the same one that led to Trump in the first place - they have no answers for the problems facing society (e.g. damage to the planet, health care, economic inequality, privacy protection, race relations, employment stability. The GOP has zero to offer across the board). That is why none of the 12 guys up there with Trump in 2016 could best him. And not one thing has changed in that basic equation.

This is the paradox of true conservatism - it is by nature a reactionary philosophy, and it can have no more life or relevance than the value of its debate with that other side - the un-conservative, impatient, imprudent, damn the torpedoes full speed ahead forces of rash and chaotic change. Conservatism is moribund in the US exactly because progressivism has been outright dead since Bill Clinton. We have had no real socio-economic political debates in this country in  almost 30 yrs, only the ongoing consolidation of power by monied interests on both sides of the traditional political aisles.  It has only been the health care and LGBT issues which have begun to generate the seeds of some grass root resurgence of progressivism in the Democratic party since 2008, but so far the "conservative" responses have come mostly from within the Democratic party itself. Progressivism has to at least be fully born on one side before the conservative side can have any Yang to be the Yin for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

The problem for the non-Trump GOP is the same one that led to Trump in the first place - they have no answers for the problems facing society (e.g. damage to the planet, health care, economic inequality, privacy protection, race relations, employment stability. The GOP has zero to offer across the board). That is why none of the 12 guys up there with Trump in 2016 could best him. And not one thing has changed in that basic equation.

This is the paradox of true conservatism - it is by nature a reactionary philosophy, and it can have no more life or relevance than the value of its debate with that other side - the un-conservative, impatient, imprudent, damn the torpedoes full speed ahead forces of rash and chaotic change. Conservatism is moribund in the US exactly because progressivism has been outright dead since Bill Clinton. We have had no real socio-economic political debates in this country in  almost 30 yrs, only the ongoing consolidation of power by monied interests on both sides of the traditional political aisles.  It has only been the health care and LGBT issues which have begun to generate the seeds of some grass root resurgence of progressivism in the Democratic party since 2008, but so far the "conservative" responses have come mostly from within the Democratic party itself. Progressivism has to at least be fully born on one side before the conservative side can have any Yang to be the Yin for.

rolls eyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

The problem for the non-Trump GOP is the same one that led to Trump in the first place - they have no answers for the problems facing society (e.g. damage to the planet, health care, economic inequality, privacy protection, race relations, employment stability. The GOP has zero to offer across the board). That is why none of the 12 guys up there with Trump in 2016 could best him. And not one thing has changed in that basic equation.

This is the paradox of true conservatism - it is by nature a reactionary philosophy, and it can have no more life or relevance than the value of its debate with that other side - the un-conservative, impatient, imprudent, damn the torpedoes full speed ahead forces of rash and chaotic change. Conservatism is moribund in the US exactly because progressivism has been outright dead since Bill Clinton. We have had no real socio-economic political debates in this country in  almost 30 yrs, only the ongoing consolidation of power by monied interests on both sides of the traditional political aisles.  It has only been the health care and LGBT issues which have begun to generate the seeds of some grass root resurgence of progressivism in the Democratic party since 2008, but so far the "conservative" responses have come mostly from within the Democratic party itself. Progressivism has to at least be fully born on one side before the conservative side can have any Yang to be the Yin for.

Hillary Clinton also had no answers.  The only Democrat that proposed any solutions answers was Sanders and even Warren wouldn't back him.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ROMAD1 said:

rolls eyes

you may roll you eyes, but what is your counter argument? What 'inspires' a conservative? Preservation of what is working correctly. A conservative is never so valuable as when what is indeed valuable is under attack, which is exactly the measure of how bankrupt conservatism is today - as the supposedly conservative party is the primary enabler of a major attack on the nation's governing institutions. Amash has it right, but he is a pretty lonely voice among those who actually have a vote to cast in DC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,730
    • Total Posts
      2,933,334
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...