President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
If I never buy a gun, I still have the power to buy a gun. And if I previously had a gun and gave it up, I also still have the power to buy a gun.
I doubt trump even considered turning pbs into a right leaning media company. Having the fed govt fund a media company is what someone who wants more power would do. Trump has continuously showed us how he is the least power hungry president we have had in a long-time.
- Yes using false pretext to use emergency power to do w.e he wants .
- Using dubious out of context laws from the 18/19th centuries to impose his will.
- Not respecting SC decisions.
Threatening or firing judges , AG or any private entities standing in its way.
- Trying to erase the independency of the FED, trying to fire Powell or impose the interest rates he wants to see.
- Threatening any elected official of massive retribution if they don’t do what trump asking .
- Trump Trespassing the congress power by imposing he desires, like tariffs.
I’ll stop here…
Yes we known , u had to get your pay check !
If you fire people in the executive branch without replacing them, that's literally reducing the power of the executive branch. Fewer people to execute whatever you want to do with that department or agency.Closing down agencies, same thing. Trump increased ICE funding, and decreased a lot of everything else in government. That's a reduction in the power of the executive (and h
Huh ?
If the CEO reduce his board by half , u don’t think the power of the CEO has increase ?
Much better worded than me .
U should be my editor 😀
I didn't claim any dollar was saved. But cutting taxes isn't an increase in the power of governmnt either. Government doesn't do MORE STUFF after you pass the tax cuts.
If they cut tax but increases deficit whats the difference ?
They still got the money shrug
Very often, yes. That isn't why Luciom is wrong.
lol.
35 trillions and still going up faster then ever .
If I never buy a gun, I still have the power to buy a gun. And if I previously had a gun and gave it up, I also still have the power to buy a gun.
This is an important point also.
Trump is the least isolationist president in my lifetime, what are we even doing here?
Of course you don't. Real people should not be mascots - it is demeaning.
It seems like an incredibly tedious gotcha that doesn't change my opinion about the propriety of naming a team "The Redskins."But maybe there's more to it than that. I'm sure it wasn't just a halfassed attempt to provide cover for racist idiots crying over the loss of Chief Wahoo, and Didace will be happy to explain whatever point he's making.
Always jumping to the worst possible interpretation in order to continue your "if you're not totally with us you are against us" posting style. I just found the story about how the people from the area didn't have a problem with the name because it reflected who they are were stumped by outsiders calling them racists. Of course it was a small story that blew over quickly (as it should have). But the point of my comment was only that I found it amusing when juxtaposed against the example of "Watermelon Eaters" (or what ever it was).
If you want my take on team nicknames, here it is. Redskins had to go and was long overdue. It is racist and a slur. There is no other interpretation. Likewise, Chief Wahoo and the even more odious Chief Nok-a-homa (actual mascots) were also overdue to say goodbye to.
Indians? Meh, I didn't have a problem with that, but if a team wants to change its name for reasons, I don't care.
I made a point of not drawing conclusions and inviting you to explain yourself. When someone says "racist team names are bad" and your reaction is to jump in with stupid JAQ-off/whatabout questions, it's kinda your fault when people misinterpret your motives.
But the point of my comment was only that I found it amusing when juxtaposed against the example of "Watermelon Eaters" (or what ever it was).
Why is it amusing? Mostly it just seems like a bad analogy to what people are talking about. And you seem to agree.
yes it is. It has a lot less room to introduce new gigantic projects of any kind right now. Including fighting full scale wars.
Imagine how easier it would be have been for democrats to finance a full green transition if debt/gdp had been 28% in 2021 instead of 100+
Lack of fiscal space is a huge constraint on gvmnt power.
What matters with campaigns is how the message is received, and I'm sure a lot of people thought that sounded like "We had Bill as president so now it's her time".
yes it is. It has a lot less room to introduce new gigantic projects of any kind right now. Including fighting full scale wars.
Imagine how easier it would be have been for democrats to finance a full green transition if debt/gdp had been 28% in 2021 instead of 100+
Lack of fiscal space is a huge constraint on gvmnt power.
It would of never pass anyway .
And the U.S. isn’t like any other government , they got the reserve currency .
The U.S. is still extremely powerful and no one dare the U.S. in fighting either .
Are you talking about the flesh and blood person in the constume? When I used the term mascot rather than nickname, I obviously wasn't referring to the human being in the mascot suit.
If you are making the point that your mascot shouldn't be a stereotypical representation of an ethnic group, I mostly agree, but your team's nickname and logo shouldn't reflect the stereotype either, which is why I don't think the mascot/nickname distinction is important for the point I was making.
