What would it take?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by punch it in

Not possible when the other side is Trump. This is not your normal right vs left. Not even close.
My solution is impeachment.

Then why waste your hot air debating with people on the interwebs?

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Then why waste your hot air debating with people on the interwebs?

I figured a thread about Trump was a good place to speak of such things. I keep it out of all other threads, as much as I wanted to pile on Metals trump post and mattys follow up to it in the boob thread.
The eternal hope in me is that one of these Trumpers is going to cave and admit he is terribly out of his league.
You have not exactly been silent in this thread.
What has me going this afternoon is how you can put a positive twist on his comments about Frederick Douglass. Chico thinks Spicer needs to be fired for basically echoing Trumps statement yet Trump is free from criticism?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by punch it in

I figured a thread about Trump was a good place to speak of such things. I keep it out of all other threads, as much as I wanted to pile on Metals trump post and mattys follow up to it in the boob thread.
The eternal hope in me is that one of these Trumpers is going to cave and admit he is terribly out of his league.
You have not exactly been silent in this thread.
What has me going this afternoon is how you can put a positive twist on his comments about Frederick Douglass. Chico thinks Spicer needs to be fired for basically echoing Trumps statement yet Trump is free from criticism?

No spicer needs to go because he's not good at his job...it's pretty obvious.

I haven't really been arguing as an advocate for trump...

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

We should have a rule. For every point you want to make, you have to pick a point where the other side is right, and acknowledge it.

You are right.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

We should have a rule. For every point you want to make, you have to pick a point where the other side is right, and acknowledge it.

Or you have to post in the boobs thread for every post here. Sounds fair to me.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by MTK

Or you have to post in the boobs thread for every post here. Sounds fair to me.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by MTK

Or you have to post in the boobs thread for every post here. Sounds fair to me.

Hopefully not a retro rule or me n Cred are going to spend the whole weekend posting boobs.
Actually maybe retro is a good idea?

[Schneed10]

Yeah I like to debate politics as much as the next guy - but I really liked the original tone of this thread, which is basically asking you to consider and identify the things that could possibly win you over. In other words, asking you to be open to considering other views.

I get frustrated when debating people who don't listen or acknowledge the other side, and that is DEFINITELY going on in here right now (sorry NC Skins you're the worst about it). So I bounced.

The whole point of debating is not to be right. That accomplishes absolutely nothing. The point is to listen to the views of the opposing side, and if they're smart and convincing, maybe cause you to see something you didn't before. And if all sides do it, then before you know it there's common ground.

And lo and behold, you could actually govern this way! At least then there's a purpose to it all.

[punch it in]

I completely agree Schneed. I try never to be rude or make it personal. Just good old fashioned ball busting.
To speak to the original point of this thread there is absolutely nothing to make me feel good about him yet. Every day this guy says or signs or does something that just pushes me further away. I suppose I could just stay out of the thread period in the spirit of honoring its original question, but that would make for an awful one sided thread. I think with Trumps ego that he will go , and is going, out of his way to battle with his doubters instead of trying to appease them. He is actually the poster child for what you do not like about the direction of this thread. Lil ironic. Lol.

[Schneed10]

Also sticking with the thread...

I voted for Hillary. First time I've voted D in a presidential election in my life. I'm particularly troubled that Steve Bannon is being permitted in the room for National Security Council discussions, and the Joint Chiefs are not. I don't understand that at all and it concerns me greatly. That concern is so great that it overshadows all other concerns by a mile.

That said, sticking with the theme of the thread, I'll hand it to Trump in the following regard:

- Thumbs up on his pick for Supreme Court

- I'm a free trade guy, but I get economic protectionism in an era of increasing automation. Automation is going to continue, and as long as it does we're going to have oodles and oodles of people out of work. My first inclination as a free trader is to say well those folks need to train themselves for other jobs. Not that simple, the automation is going to be too vast. We need something for those people to do. I'm at least ready to keep an open mind that his protectionist strategies might help create better paying jobs for the middle class.

- Putting Iran on notice. Thumbs up.

- Generally carrying himself with a no-nonsense, take no bullshit persona. Didn't like the way he treated Australia, but toughness counts on the international stage when it comes to your enemies. I already like the way that plays better than I did Obama's intellectual, thoughtful posture.

But again, Bannon in the room. It dwarfs everything else. I'm so worried about the advice Trump is getting from that guy. Not sure Flynn is much better. Removing the Joint Chiefs, independent level-headed people, for those two guys is unbelievably concerning. I just hope Mattis can keep everybody's head on straight.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I voted for Hillary. First time I've voted D in a presidential election in my life. I'm particularly troubled that Steve Bannon is being permitted in the room for National Security Council discussions, and the Joint Chiefs are not. I don't understand that at all and it concerns me greatly. That concern is so great that it overshadows all other concerns by a mile.

I agree. This is a guy who admires Lenin and quite frankly is pattern his tactics after him.

Steve Bannon, Trump’s Top Guy, Told Me He Was ‘a Leninist’ - The Daily Beast

When you hear comments like "the media should keep its mouth shut" is when you know the threat is real. People wanted to talk about how Obama was some secret agent muslim terrorist sent to tear down America, but here we actually have a guy on the national security trying to do just that.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I'm a free trade guy, but I get economic protectionism in an era of increasing automation. Automation is going to continue, and as long as it does we're going to have oodles and oodles of people out of work. My first inclination as a free trader is to say well those folks need to train themselves for other jobs. Not that simple, the automation is going to be too vast. We need something for those people to do. I'm at least ready to keep an open mind that his protectionist strategies might help create better paying jobs for the middle class.

I agree with free trade in principle, but the problem with that is it's going to just further expedite the manufacturing jobs to outside the country. We agree totally with the automation thing, and it's a huge reason why a basic income has being discussed in Congress.

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Sadly I think the divide in our country is growing or has grown beyond where the original topic is answerable with anything but either punch's reply or my equal and opposite reply that so far there is very little to make me think I am going to turn my support away from DT.

I know a guy, he and his wife are a good to great couple and they can talk about most things as far as I know. He likes trump she hates trump. A quote from him "if two people who know each are considerate of one another know each to be smart sane people - can't talk about trump, what hope is there for the country." Her response. "Probably none". Sadly that resonates through this thread.

I can easily talk about Trump and I will point out the good things he does when he does them. However, must Trump supporters have their heads buried in the sand and refuse to acknowledge the shitty moves or justify them with bullshit excuses. Take for instance some of his cabinet choices.

James Mattis- Great choice
Betsy DeVos- Insane choice
Nikki Haley- great choice
Ben Carson- good choice but wrong area. Should be health service or surgeon general, not an area he has no experience.
Tillerson- awful choice with too many ties to Russia affairs

This is being unbiased. If you can't see why some of the cabinet choices are bad (or decisions) then there isn't much help. It's why people continue to treat politics like their favorite sports team. No matter how dumb the decisions the team makes, you will continue waving that flag supporting them week after week.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I agree. This is a guy who admires Lenin and quite frankly is pattern his tactics after him.

Steve Bannon, Trump’s Top Guy, Told Me He Was ‘a Leninist’ - The Daily Beast

When you hear comments like "the media should keep its mouth shut" is when you know the threat is real. People wanted to talk about how Obama was some secret agent muslim terrorist sent to tear down America, but here we actually have a guy on the national security trying to do just that.



I agree with free trade in principle, but the problem with that is it's going to just further expedite the manufacturing jobs to outside the country. We agree totally with the automation thing, and it's a huge reason why a basic income has being discussed in Congress.





I can easily talk about Trump and I will point out the good things he does when he does them. However, must Trump supporters have their heads buried in the sand and refuse to acknowledge the shitty moves or justify them with bullshit excuses. Take for instance some of his cabinet choices.

James Mattis- Great choice
Betsy DeVos- Insane choice
Nikki Haley- great choice
Ben Carson- good choice but wrong area. Should be health service or surgeon general, not an area he has no experience.
Tillerson- awful choice with too many ties to Russia affairs

This is being unbiased. If you can't see why some of the cabinet choices are bad (or decisions) then there isn't much help. It's why people continue to treat politics like their favorite sports team. No matter how dumb the decisions the team makes, you will continue waving that flag supporting them week after week.

Good post NC, I agree with a lot of it, mostly your cabinet picks lineup. Seeing as how I know nothing about free trade and have no idea how to compensate for losing jobs to automation, I will stay out of that one. After being hesitant about his SC nominee I have warmed up to that one too, after all it is important to have a neutral judge to balance out the right and left on the bench. I was moreso mad about Congress' unwillingness to at least consider Obama's nominee.

And I totally agree on Bannon, I think people really aren't as upset about that as they should be. Removing the Joint Chiefs makes no sense and replacing it with one of your yes men makes even less sense. The power of the NSC should not be taken lightly.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Also sticking with the thread...

...

- I'm a free trade guy, but I get economic protectionism in an era of increasing automation. Automation is going to continue, and as long as it does we're going to have oodles and oodles of people out of work. My first inclination as a free trader is to say well those folks need to train themselves for other jobs. Not that simple, the automation is going to be too vast. We need something for those people to do. I'm at least ready to keep an open mind that his protectionist strategies might help create better paying jobs for the middle class.

...

This is way off topic, and not a chance of reality, but with the level of automation coming in the 20 years, and the ease of accumulation of wealth in the top 1%, I really wonder what your thoughts are about the Netherlands living wage.

My normal mindset would be no, BUT, I do think automation is a game changer in economics, and if you have the living wage to all citizens, then you do away with minimum wage to employers, and once again let free market forces act, within the constraints of that. I really don't know any feasibility, but I'm curious about your thoughts Schneed.

[CRedskinsRule]

Sadly I think the divide in our country is growing or has grown beyond where the original topic is answerable with anything but either punch's reply or my equal and opposite reply that so far there is very little to make me think I am going to turn my support away from DT.

I know a guy, he and his wife are a good to great couple and they can talk about most things as far as I know. He likes trump she hates trump. A quote from him "if two people who know each are considerate of one another know each to be smart sane people - can't talk about trump, what hope is there for the country." Her response. "Probably none". Sadly that resonates through this thread.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[NC_Skins]

It's shit like this that bothers me with Trump.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/u...-churches.html


Allowing churches to be political but not taxing them? Fuck that. Fuck that to all hell and back. There is a reason why the founding fathers separated church and state and why that glorious documents mention nothing of God, Jehovah or Allah.