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 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 car
I interpreted your comment about cotton pickers more as pointing out a curiosity than a true attempt at a gotcha. I did not take it as a defense of the Redskins as a nickname or Chief Wahoo as a mascot.
Trump is the least isolationist president in my lifetime, what are we even doing here?
You were alive when W was president, so I wouldn't agree with this characterization. In any case, I was commenting on Luciom's logic. I wasn't saying anything one way or the other about whether it is accurate to describe Trump as an isolationist.
I interpreted your comment about cotton pickers more as pointing out a curiosity than a true attempt at a gotcha. I did not take it as a defense of the Redskins as a nickname or Chief Wahoo as a mascot.
This guy ^^^ he gets it.
Trump is the least isolationist president in my lifetime, what are we even doing here?
Lol
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.
Name a single time that the US has failed to implement a program that Congress was in favor of because it would cost too much
MLK files released (despite massive objection from MLK’s family)
Trump confirmed the most transparent president in history
MLK files released (despite massive objection from MLK’s family)
Trump confirmed the most transparent president in history
And the crowd goes mild...
No thread on reddit, no tweet storm on twitter, crickets
Also, there is a Trump tweet for everything
This is not normal and we should never stop calling it out no matter how much they try to gaslight you into thinking you’re bring hysterical.
I ain't no marketing expert, but I would think that the last thing a CEO would want to do is offend their potential customers.
Name a single time that the US has failed to implement a program that Congress was in favor of because it would cost too much
Congress still has enough people who understand basic math in it (especially in the senate) that they do not pass what they don't have the money to finance, that's the point.
In the aftermath of the GFC, there wasn't enough money to help people who were underwater in their mortgages. When obamacare was passed, there wasn't enough money to subsidize private plans as much as democrats wanted to.
The recovery after the GFC was the slowest on record (to get back to the same level of employment) , aka "jobless recovery" for a long while, because of lack of fiscal space to accelerate it.
When they thought "this time is different, debt constraints don't matter anymore" and went allin for real, with covid, that caused the worst inflation in 40 years. And we were back at accumulated debt constraining expenditure for major projects, which is why the green transition democrats wanted to jump start was financed with like 1% of gdp lol.
I mean the last 50 years of american political history are the history of politicians banging their heads against the debt wall that constrained them from doing what they thought was necessary or good for their country.
Because people see name they recognize and their lizard brains are activated. I don’t think it necessarily translates to campaign success but it doesn’t hurt (see: Bush, Trump, Regan, Nixon, Kennedy, all had recognizable names before running for president).
So she polls well because of what we could call "divine aristocratic right", ie name recognition because she was the wife of a popular president.
So she polls well because of what we could call "divine aristocratic right", ie name recognition because she was the wife of a popular president.
She would get killed on the campaign trail for many reasons, so not much of a right that is. Generally we only consider something a right if it can be asserted with little frustration. Having to actually win an election sort of dampens that.
See: Hillary Clinton (twice), Jeb Bush, RFK Jr, Michael Bloomberg (who couldn’t even buy 25% polling in a primary dropping a billy)
Also I mean… Obama and Clinton were not exactly household names when they ran
You are spewing nonsense and you aren't even trying to frame it as not nonsense, you just expect people to be too exhausted to continue to call out your nonsense
Even if this wasn't his goal, for quite some time now his behaviour has been completely inseparable from that of a russian operated LLM and I really don't understand why people continue to engage his misdirections (even, or especially, assuming they are the debate club type).
I don't contribute much myself but I enjoy this as place to read what random Americans think (albeit probably more affluent and amoral than average), not to read the diary of deranged European botlike fascist
Even if this wasn't his goal, for quite some time now his behaviour has been completely inseparable from that of a russian operated LLM and I really don't understand why people continue to engage his misdirections (even, or especially, assuming they are the debate club type).I don't contribute much myself but I enjoy this as place to read what random Americans think (albeit pr
Sure, russian operated bots typically are allin in favor of financing Ukraine to keep fighting Putin like me.
Congress still has enough people who understand basic math in it (especially in the senate) that they do not pass what they don't have the money to finance, that's the point.In the aftermath of the GFC, there wasn't enough money to help people who were underwater in their mortgages. When obamacare was passed, there wasn't enough money to subsidize private plans as much as democ
So you have no actual example to support your thesis that debt constrains government power?
She would get killed on the campaign trail for many reasons, so not much of a right that is. Generally we only consider something a right if it can be asserted with little frustration. Having to actually win an election sort of dampens that.See: Hillary Clinton (twice), Jeb Bush, RFK Jr, Michael Bloomberg (who couldn’t even buy 25% polling in a primary dropping a billy)Also I m
The last republican nominee who was not an "aristocrat" was probably Bob Dole. You have Trump 3x (son of a billionaire back when that was way more than a billion now), Romney (Son of a governor and a prominent LDS family before), McCain (US aircraft carrier named after his dad, father and grandfather were admirals) W Bush (dad was president), Dole, HW Bush (Son of a senator).
Convincing the overwhelming majority of posters to ignore Luciom is not an achievable goal imo. I'm not even sure that allowing 200+ posts of unrebutted right wing extremism per day across virtually every thread would be a good idea. I also have no confidence that he would stop if people ignored him.
I think the only realistic options are status quo, containment, or ban.
Good point. I vote for the second and third options.
You said something similarly objectively false recently and ignored the pushback on that too.
If your perceived reality is on par with a schizophrenic patient then I am not sure you are of right mind to post here tbh
You are threatening me with a ban because I believe trump is the least power hungry president we've had in recent memory? This makes you the ideal 2+2 political mod.
LOL at the idea of banning someone for having an opposing view. Let me guess you lean left?
In all seriousness, look at what he has done or has try to do in terms of reducing the size of the federal gov't. The same federal gov't he currently runs. Then when you are done with that look at what other presidents did to increase the size of the gov't they run.
The best, but not only, example of this is taxes. Trump cut taxes so people and corporations have more money/power while most presidents have tried to increase taxes to increase their power.
Other examples of pushing the legality of abortion to become a state issue (less power for the fed gov't) and giving states more power/decisions in EDU by greatly reducing the power of the Dept of Edu. He was also against most/all of the policies Dems were pushing during covid because, in part, he didn't think the gov't should have that much control over its people. He also cut the size of the Fed gov't because he didn't think the Fed gov't shouldn't have as much power as it does. He also cut business regulations because he thought the gov't should make some rules biz have to go by but gov't shouldn't be everyone's daddy. He was also open to people outside of gov't to come in and audit the Fed gov't to look for fraud and waste - further reducing the power of the fed gov't.
