Politics

[Doug3006]

so…he’s a swamp turd because he thinks Trump is an unhinged demagogue? He worked for the man as I recall. Perhaps he has better perspective on the man than most of us.

 

[Red Leg]

Another establishment swamp turd that continues to float around in the political punch bowl.
View attachment 549562

Typical "me too" meme unburdened by context

I am with him and literally beg God daily someone else will emerge as the Republican nominee.

What he actually said on NBC news on March 7, 2022 which seemed to make Savannah Guthrie's head hurt.

"Well, I certainly have made it clear. I don't think he should be our nominee and I'm going to support somebody else for the nominee,"

But “because I believe that the greatest threat to the country is the progressive agenda being pushed by the Democratic Party,” Barr added, “it’s inconceivable to me that I wouldn’t vote for the Republican nominee.”

 

[Scott CWO]

Finally, something to cheer on!! I love this!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1686630819861762049

Somebody finally got a spanking!! Lol

 

[Brent in Az]

Bill Barr, is a gutless coward that didn't do his job.
Now, he's doing nothing but bloviating with glee about the Trump indictments, just like the rest of the wind bags.

Barr, Sessions, and Pence, are all swamp Weasels.

 

[Brent in Az]

I agree, Mr. President. You brought in too many of the wrong people. Hope you learned a lesson for the next term. Bring in Pit Bulls, and not Chihuahuas.

Trump calls ex-cabinet members 'weak and pathetic,' 'incompetent' while revealing appointments he regrets

2024 presidential hopeful Donald Trump blasted several key cabinet officials from his first term, telling Maria Bartiromo he should have done some things differently.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

Is it my imagination or is Trump calming down? Saying more sensible things, more thoughtful.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

Please may I pose a few questions?
1. It seems to me that the longer Biden is left where he is, the weaker the Democrat’s position becomes. Is there a cut off date by which time they should replace him and get the next candidate in? There may actually be a rule about this, but I am thinking more upon the lines of there being just too little time left to punt the next candidate.

2. If Biden resigns or is pushed out via the 25th, Harris becomes president. Who is to say she won’t dig her heels in and declare that she is running for election?

3. If Trump is indeed convicted, can he really continue running, or is he disqualified? There is back and forth on this.

 

[mdwest]

Barr, Sessions, and Pence, are all swamp Weasels.

If Trumps #1 promise when he was elected was to drain the swamp...

and by your assessment principle members of his appointed team (people he personally chose) are swamp Weasels..

What does that say about Trump himself?


Don't get me wrong.. I voted for him twice (didnt feel like I really had any other better option)... but.. there really isnt a good answer to the above question... if he didnt know what he was doing.. that is a serious problem.. if he did in fact know what he was doing.. thats a serious problem.. if he was "tricked".. that is a serious problem...

In any of those scenarios, Trump is at the center of the problem.. not a victim of it..

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Please may I pose a few questions?
1. It seems to me that the longer Biden is left where he is, the weaker the Democrat’s position becomes. Is there a cut off date by which time they should replace him and get the next candidate in? There may actually be a rule about this, but I am thinking more upon the lines of there being just too little time left to punt the next candidate.

2. If Biden resigns or is pushed out via the 25th, Harris becomes president. Who is to say she won’t dig her heels in and declare that she is running for election?

3. If Trump is indeed convicted, can he really continue running, or is he disqualified? There is back and forth on this.

In response to each in order:

1. The Dems know Biden is vulnerable and I believe behind closed doors they want someone new to run instead. My gut feel is they want Gov. Newsom of California. I may quite incorrect on the latter.

2. She almost certainly would want to take his place, but I don't think she has the support of her party.

3. I'm not sure if he's legally disqualified, but I don't think it would matter. He'd be out by virtue of the distractions of his legal woes.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

Last night, the Ukrainians carried out a naval drone attack against a Russian naval vessel. This morning Russia, naturally announced to the world that there was nothing to see. that the drones had been destroyed and no damage was caused to any naval asset.

First below is Ukrainian release of the video of the attack.

Regrettably for the Russian narrative, the Gornyk was in sinking condition it had dragged into port in broad daylight in front of Russian tourists with cell phones.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/15hsv6f

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/15htj4s

There was a similar incident about 6 weeks ago in which a drone was seen getting right up to a ship and the screen blanked. Was that ship damaged or sunk, we never heard any more.

 

[mdwest]

3. I'm not sure if he's legally disqualified, but I don't think it would matter. He'd be out by virtue of the distractions of his legal woes.

As I understand it there is no legal obstacle for a convicted criminal (even a felon) from running for President. They can even run from behind bars..

The only legal obstacle is conviction in a Senate impeachment trial.. (which I would assume would happen immediately after a criminal conviction.. but.. I am certainly no expert in the law)..

That said... I think if all of this legal drama is still going on at this time next year, while the persecution only further rallies Trumps base, it also further disenfranchises the middle.. and without the entirety of the right side of the aisle willing to go to the polls and vote for him, there is no way he gets enough votes to win the white house back... the democrats could run Donkey from Shrek and win (they are going to turn out in huge numbers and support ANYONE that runs opposite of Trump)..

If everything gets resolved in the next 4-5 months (unlikely.. but I suppose possible) then MAYBE he rallies his base and encourages others to go to the polls through campaigning and debates, etc..

But even then I find it doubtful..

 

[Brent in Az]

If Trumps #1 promise when he was elected was to drain the swamp...

and by your assessment principle members of his appointed team (people he personally chose) are swamp Weasels..

What does that say about Trump himself?


Don't get me wrong.. I voted for him twice (didnt feel like I really had any other better option)... but.. there really isnt a good answer to the above question... if he didnt know what he was doing.. that is a serious problem.. if he did in fact know what he was doing.. thats a serious problem.. if he was "tricked".. that is a serious problem...

In any of those scenarios, Trump is at the center of the problem.. not a victim of it..

Trump chose poorly. That comes from not being a political insider, and knowing who is who inside the arena.
Similar to a new CEO being hired to run a big corporation. You dont really know who you have working for you.

 

[Wheels]

Please may I pose a few questions?
1. It seems to me that the longer Biden is left where he is, the weaker the Democrat’s position becomes. Is there a cut off date by which time they should replace him and get the next candidate in? There may actually be a rule about this, but I am thinking more upon the lines of there being just too little time left to punt the next candidate.

2. If Biden resigns or is pushed out via the 25th, Harris becomes president. Who is to say she won’t dig her heels in and declare that she is running for election?

3. If Trump is indeed convicted, can he really continue running, or is he disqualified? There is back and forth on this.

1. Republican position - "Never interfere with an enemy when he is in the process of destroying himself". If the House impeaches Biden, then McCarthy and the House feels enough self destruction has been done and they are changing tactics.

1. & 2. Democrats are in a tough position and having a hard time figuring this one out. They know they have very real problems.

3. There is nothing in the Constitution that disqualifies Trump, regardless of what the talking heads say. It doesn't look like any of the indictments will come to trial prior to the election. There are three currently and there will be at least one more, possibly two that seem to be in the works. It is all about:
a. Throwing mud and hoping something sticks.
b. Keeping Trump tied up and busy with things besides campaigning.
c. Spend campaign money on attorney fees instead of the campaign.

 

[Wheels]

Guess Al Sharpton never heard of the American Revolution. Or that Jefferson actually wrote the Declaration of Independence.


Al Sharpton - "Imagine if Madison and Jefferson tried to overthrow the government"

MSN

 

[mdwest]

Trump chose poorly. That comes from not being a political insider, and knowing who is who inside the arena.
Similar to a new CEO being hired to run a big corporation. You dont really know who you have working for you.

Thats where we absolutely disagree..

I happen to be a CEO and was hired to run a fairly good sized corporation about 6 years ago..

I inherited a leadership team.. many of whom I didnt know, didnt trust, and frankly a few I didnt like..

I spent about 90 days evaluating each persons performance, each persons capability, and each persons willingness to operate within the scope and terms laid out by the new boss (me) coming in... and then I began to reset the senior leadership team and bring in people that I absolutely knew could do the job I needed them to do.. because I had spent the time and energy to have every single person I brought in completely vetted and/or I knew them personally, had prior experience working with them personally, etc.. Thats what good CEOs do...

Trump has been a CEO of a large corporation most of his adult life.. he has bought countless firms, gotten rid of leadership, brought in new talent, brought in experienced and vetted talent, etc for the better part of the last 50 years of his life.. He knows the process..

He has also run in the highest level of political circles for most of his adult life.. He has had relationships with multiple past POTUS.. he has had relationships with numerous senators, numerous congressmen, numerous federal judges, etc.. while he might not have lived and worked in DC prior to becoming POTUS.. neither have the majority of past presidents (Governors like Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc generally have LESS dealings with senior members of the federal government than the CEO of a multi-billion dollar global corporation HQ'd inside the US)..

Not only would he know how to hire, fire, etc senior leadership in ANY organization.. and would have had decades long prior relationships with numerous political officials in DC.. he also had a team whose responsibility is to source the right people for the right jobs in his cabinet.. if/when done correctly.. this is an exhaustive process.. every rock is turned over and examined related to every single person in consideration for a cabinet position..

So... either Trump selected the wrong team to do the vetting for him... Or.. he ignored the recommendations of the team doing the vetting for him... but either way.. he absolutely had the ability to call the final shot... he has the experience to know what needs to be done and how to do it when it comes to making hiring decisions for senior leadership positions.. and he had the resources to get it done right..

Trump is a lot of things.. but one of them is not stupid.. nor is he an inexperienced senior leader..

He simply did a horrible job when making those decisions..

The question goes back to.. the promise was to drain the swamp.. youre stating Barr, Sessions, and Pence are swamp creatures.. (I'd argue Pence is not.. he is less of a DC insider than Trump.. and certainly wielded far less power and influence in DC while he was VP than he was expected to have.. but thats neither here nor there)... So how does a guy that promises to drain the swamp, that knows how to (and is willing to) hire and fire, that knows how to evaluate leadership and capability, that has an entire team thats sole purpose is the vetting of leadership candidates... end up bringing swamp creatures into his own administration?

Was it willful and intentional? or was it out of ignorance? was he "tricked"? how did it happen?

It certainly shouldnt have.. and there is really no good excuse for it...

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

@mdwest you did a excellent job detailing your thoughts and rationale on Trump, but I have to disagree on several of your points.

Please keep in mind that I voted for Trump twice because as bad as he is, he was better than Biden.

These are my opinions and people will certainly disagree with some or all.

Trump is not a leader. Trump is a boss and not a very good one at that. When half the country loves you and half the country hates you, you need to figure out how to bring together people. Trump appears incapable of this.

If Trump was an executive of a publicly traded company or a flag officer in the US military, he would be fired due to his childish behavior.

Lastly, his campaign promises to drain the swamp or build the border wall are just campaign promises. Trump, as all presidents do, took an oath to defend the Constitution. The question is, did Trump do this?

 

[mdwest]

@mdwest
Please keep in mind that I voted for Trump twice because as bad as he is, he was better than Biden.

We're in the same boat... I did the same..

I wasnt a huge fan the first time.. but there was no way in hell I was voting for Hillary... so.. Trump got my vote..

The second time around I was reasonably happy with most of his domestic and foreign policy intentions.. but not super impressed with his effectiveness... whether it was mean tweets or the inability to put the right people in the right place to get the job done doesnt really matter.. I expected more.. and didnt see it delivered... that said.. I probably would have voted for a potato chip that claims to be conservative rather than vote for Joe Biden... so.. Trump got my vote again...

IF he ends up being the republican nominee (I still think that is a long shot on the best day..).. He will likely get my vote a third time...

Im not a fan at this point.. but, again am left with the problem of.. Trump vs Newsome? Trump vs Biden? Trump vs Harris? etc... despite my lack of faith that Trump can actually deliver to the degree desired.. and my growing distaste for his behaviors and antics.. If the choice is Trump vs pretty much anyone else I have seen the left talk about considering... Trump gets my vote again.. Once again I'd rather vote for a potato chip than Gavin Newsome, Biden, Harris, etc..

 

[mdwest]

@mdwest

These are my opinions and people will certainly disagree with some or all.

Trump is not a leader. Trump is a boss and not a very good one at that. When half the country loves you and half the country hates you, you need to figure out how to bring together people. Trump appears incapable of this.

If Trump was an executive of a publicly traded company or a flag officer in the US military, he would be fired due to his childish behavior.

Lastly, his campaign promises to drain the swamp or build the border wall are just campaign promises. Trump, as all presidents do, took an oath to defend the Constitution. The question is, did Trump do this?

I actually agree with you on all three of these things...

His leadership qualities certainly leave much to be desired.. where he has gotten ahead is through grit, determination, and being a strong negotiator.. he is more Atilla the Hun than Ronald Reagan for sure..

I also agree in todays military he'd be relieved of command and forced out.. 50 years ago he probably would have been allowed to stay in, but like Patton, would have never seen a 4th star.. Im not certain about a publicly traded company.. It really depends on the companys culture and the performance of its portfolio.. there are a LOT of outright assholes that run the fortune 50... as long as their stock keeps performing, their boards dont seem to care that the CEO is a hated tyrant and that corporate turnover exceeds the national average by 25%.. But.. I agree that in many of the fortune 500 companies he wouldnt last long due to his behavior...

Regarding campaign promises.. thats really the crux of my position... DC insider or not.. like pretty much every other prior POTUS, lots of promised made.. and only a few delivered on... whether thats willful and intentional, or simple ignorance (not understanding or knowing what is being promised is not possible to deliver).. you really cant commit to "draining the swamp" and then blame the swamp for your demise.. when you hired "the swamp" to work for you... you made a decision.. and the decision did you harm... thats YOUR fault.. not anyone elses..

 

[shootist~]

If Trump did indeed pick loosers for his administration, it's because much of the available talent refused to work for him.

 

[Ray B]

Three topics being discussed at present on this site:
1. Generations and their culpability for the present situation.
It makes no more sense to lump people by age into separate categories and then blame that category for this or that than it does to group people by ethnicity, religion or other factor.
2. The degradation of society due to the various forms of federal assistance.
Blaming the govt of 1930s for societal norms in 2020 is nothing more than revisionist history. For someone who suffered from the economic downturn of the 1920s, the idea that they would choose welfare over work was inconceivable. But given a few generations of selecting welfare has degraded those beliefs. the problem was not in the well intentioned people but in the system that penalized people for working. Since a "safety net" is desired, then there needs to be a system to provide for a minimum standard of living for all citizens. the problem is that those distributing the benefits want to determine how they are spent- so instead of giving someone money, the system pays a portion of their housing, or pays for some of their food, or medical expenses. If a country believed that freedom was the highest virtue then the govt would provide sufficient funds for minimum standard of living and let the person decide how to spend it- if spent foolishly, such as on drugs or prostitutes, then the person would need to wait until next months check. The system would need to pay every citizen over 18 years of age a set dollar amount. Age 0 - 17 would be prorated. How would this be funded? Simple, All of those agencies designed for safety net purposes would be dissolved. All of those people who work in non-productive government positions would be freed to work in production, thereby increasing the supply of goods and services, thus increasing the countries wealth and wellbeing.
3. I'll get to later.