Jump to content

ROMAD1

Directions and Objectives For A Future Mainstream Party

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, ewsieg said:

You don't think there isn't any validity to the belief that maybe Trump doesn't trust the official resources?  Not saying you don't trust them, but that Trump doesn't trust them.

Almost worth looking this up to see the responses.  I imagine 33% saying he wasn't a real conservative anyway, 33% raving about him being so strong to step out for 'truth', and 33% saying the fact it took him this long to switch proves how horrible of a person he really is.

You mean the secretary of state, attorney general, FBI director etc that Trump hand picked? I don't trust them either. Makes sense to use your personal lawyer who doesn't appear to have any other clients run a shadow state department.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

You mean the secretary of state, attorney general, FBI director etc that Trump hand picked? I don't trust them either. Makes sense to use your personal lawyer who doesn't appear to have any other clients run a shadow state department.

I'm not saying it's smart or right.  What I am saying is Trump still has issues with the FBI, rather he trusts the director or not, he definitely doesn't trust those under him.  The recent IG report, while critical of the FBI, also was clearly not what Barr purported it to be, so while he might trust Barr, I still don't think he trusts the rest of the justice department.  

There is a 'deep state' in Washington, it's just not entirely a bad thing like it's made out to be, but rather a bunch of long standing civil servants that try to do the best job possible, regardless of who is in charge.  There are some bad things related to this which I understand Trump not liking, but there are some good things to it as well, which means that regardless who is in charge, they better work within the law.  Trump doesn't like those people because he wants people loyal to him only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

There is a 'deep state' in Washington, it's just not entirely a bad thing like it's made out to be, but rather a bunch of long standing civil servants that try to do the best job possible, regardless of who is in charge.  There are some bad things related to this which I understand Trump not liking, but there are some good things to it as well, which means that regardless who is in charge, they better work within the law.  Trump doesn't like those people because he wants people loyal to him only.

I would say that the deep state as you describe it is more good than bad.  Those long standing civil servants are crucial to keeping the government running.  In many cases, they care more our country than any of the agenda driven leaders.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2019 at 9:38 AM, Motown Bombers said:

LOL if Trump wanted a true investigation, he wouldn't send his private lawyer to act as some sort of shadow state department. He has all kinds of official resources at his disposal and used none of them. 

5 hours ago, ewsieg said:

You don't think there isn't any validity to the belief that maybe Trump doesn't trust the official resources?  Not saying you don't trust them, but that Trump doesn't trust them.

No, and even if Trump didn't trust the people *he* put in charge, it does not in any way justify sending his private lawyer to do the negotiations.  That simply isn't how state business is conducted, and you know it.

Talk about pretzel logic to somehow come up with a strained justification.

Honestly, what has Donald J Trump ever done to merit anything approaching that level of the benefit of the doubt?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, let's be real.

To the extent Donald didn't trust the people he went around, he didn't trust them because they rightly told him it was unethical and wrong to try to pressure Ukraine into an investigation into Hunter Biden.

Had they agreed with him, he would have trusted and used them.

Essentially his version of trust = getting what he wants.  His version of trust is fundamentally different than most people's.

Not to overstate it, but everything is transactional with Donald.  I don't know if it is possible for him to be more transparent with regards to this.  He literally tells us daily he didn't trust or like or whatever someone because they either disagree with, or deny him, something.

How this isn't obvious is frankly beyond me. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Also, let's be real.

To the extent Donald didn't trust the people he went around, he didn't trust them because they rightly told him it was unethical and wrong to try to pressure Ukraine into an investigation into Hunter Biden.

Had they agreed with him, he would have trusted and used them.

Essentially his version of trust = getting what he wants.  His version of trust is fundamentally different than most people's.

Not to overstate it, but everything is transactional with Donald.  I don't know if it is possible for him to be more transparent with regards to this.  He literally tells us daily he didn't trust or like or whatever someone because they either disagree with, or deny him, something.

How this isn't obvious is frankly beyond me. 

By your explanation, any bad thought you can think Trump is thinking, must to assumed to be correct.  I can't go there, even if I dislike him.   I'm not even saying you're wrong, i'm just saying I see a few possible different interpretations.  Honestly it's beyond me how you couldn't think of several different possibilities for anything Trump does as he's been so erratic even on the same issue.

I do agree that Trump equates trust with doing what he wants, nothing I said contradicts that either.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

By your explanation, any bad thought you can think Trump is thinking, must to assumed to be correct.  I can't go there, even if I dislike him.   I'm not even saying you're wrong, i'm just saying I see a few possible different interpretations.  Honestly it's beyond me how you couldn't think of several different possibilities for anything Trump does as he's been so erratic even on the same issue.

I do agree that Trump equates trust with doing what he wants, nothing I said contradicts that either.  

I think there is only one possibility for everything Trump says or does: It benefits Trump in terms of wealth, status or popularity.  Whether or not he thinks something will benefit him may change from time to time, but that is his only consideration.

I think part of the disagreement here is you are thinking of Trump as a rational thinking person whereas other view him as a sociopath.  It's hard to come to any agreement given the different baselines.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, what I am saying is:

a. the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior,

b. he has never earned the benefit of the doubt,

c. there is no shortage of testimony and actions that support the notion he pressured Ukraine into announcing an investigation into Hunter Biden, and

d. even if using his personal lawyer to work out the details was bore solely out of concern over the nebulous deep state, which is a very favorable interpretation of what happened for him and doesn't make much sense anyway, it still is completely inappropriate and inexcusable.

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean it is perfectly logical that the POTUS, despite the massive demands on his time, takes such a personal interest in rooting out corruption and is so concerned about the deep state that rather than having it handled through the accepted channels he sent out his personal lawyer to negotiate with a foreign power to announce the investigation of one Hunter Biden, an individual who only coincidentally is the son of his likely political rival in the 2020 election.

Suggesting otherwise is simply too cynical to be fair to the POTUS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I mean it is perfectly logical that the POTUS, despite the massive demands on his time, takes such a personal interest in rooting out corruption and is so concerned about the deep state that rather than having it handled through the accepted channels he sent out his personal lawyer to negotiate with a foreign power to announce the investigation of one Hunter Biden, an individual who only coincidentally is the son of his likely political rival in the 2020 election.

Suggesting otherwise is simply too cynical to be fair to the POTUS.

All i'm saying is that maybe everything you have stated is exactly what he thought AND he thought there might be something to it as well.  Or are we past the point when the VP's son making 50k a month, for a foreign company with corruption ties, and said VP is the point person for to root out corruption for said country even allows a person to question it?

Share this post


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

All i'm saying is that maybe everything you have stated is exactly what he thought AND he thought there might be something to it as well.  Or are we past the point when the VP's son making 50k a month, for a foreign company with corruption ties, and said VP is the point person for to root out corruption for said country even allows a person to question it?

Do you think Mr Fake University and Fake Charities would have cared what Biden's son was doing in Ukraine if Biden was not a political rival?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You simply don't use your personal lawyer to negotiate state business.

Also, the explanation simply doesn't pass the smell test no matter how badly you want it to.

And Hunter earning $50k is a red herring.  It isn't necessarily an either/or proposition.  I can think both parties are in the wrong.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

Do you think Mr Fake University and Fake Charities would have cared what Biden's son was doing in Ukraine if Biden was not a political rival?

Absolutely not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2019 at 12:41 PM, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Honestly, what has Donald J Trump ever done to merit anything approaching that level of the benefit of the doubt?

Somehow, this question never gets answered....

At the end of the day, a lot of these arguments boil down to this idea that everyone must, at all times, despite all the evidence to the contrary, treat the President as if he is an earnest figure and that he should always get the benefit of the doubt with his actions.

And the reality is that it's not the default position for a lot of folks because, as you alluded to, his actions have had consequences.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2019 at 1:05 PM, tiger337 said:

I keep going further left as I age, but I am odd.

Trump losing in embarrassing fashion in a time of decent economy and relative peace has been my hope since he was elected.  Losing because he's a douchebag and not getting credit for anything would be the best.  

 

Are you actively moving left as you age, or are you staying the same while the landscape shifts rightward, with you ending up more left against it? Because that's basically where I am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Are you actively moving left as you age, or are you staying the same while the landscape shifts rightward, with you ending up more left against it? Because that's basically where I am.

No, I think I am actively moving more left.  Part of it is probably my job.  Also, as I have aged, I have learned that people have less control over their circumstances than I realized when I was younger.  Hard work helps, but luck plays a big role and sometimes doing the right thing makes your life more difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Are you actively moving left as you age, or are you staying the same while the landscape shifts rightward, with you ending up more left against it? Because that's basically where I am.

I think I've been moving right as I age. I was a self proclaimed socialist before Bernie Sanders made it chic. I'm the most conservative in my family because I drive gas guzzling vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2019 at 11:30 AM, ewsieg said:

There is a 'deep state' in Washington, it's just not entirely a bad thing like it's made out to be, but rather a bunch of long standing civil servants that try to do the best job possible, regardless of who is in charge.  There are some bad things related to this which I understand Trump not liking, but there are some good things to it as well, which means that regardless who is in charge, they better work within the law.  Trump doesn't like those people because he wants people loyal to him only.

You say the "deep state" is not entirely a bad thing, "but rather a bunch of long standing civil servants that try to do the best job possible, regardless of who is in charge". By using the word "entirely", you're suggesting that the existence of such people is, at least in part, a bad thing.

Which part of a corps of long standing civil servants that try to do the best job possible, regardless of who is in charge, is a bad thing? And by bad I mean actively criminal or corrupt, which is the underlying charge against them?

  • Haha 1

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
      96,685
    • Total Posts
      2,986,185
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

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