Trump

[Play Angry]

There is a lot of shouting into the void going on in the above post.

The biggest issue seems to be the rampant use and abuse of the poor scarecrow from the Wizard of Oz. Using invented quotes to frame arguments that people are not actually making is not the best. Sometimes it can be persuasive, but that doesn't seem to be a priority here based on this page's activity.

I do appreciate your strange concern for the location from which I am posting.

I agree that it was odd for you to come here seeking a pat on the back for Schumer's d.o.a. bill proposal. That is why I was confused when you dug in so hard yesterday on insisting that we acknowledge its merits.

As a final and largely unrelated note, I suspect many of us here are not thrilled with certain moves by this Congress and this administration. I did not vote for Trump and am unlikely to vote for him in 2020. I am also very unlikely to vote for the Democrat nominee in 2020, as they are not filling any of the void created by the Republicans' lurch in a myriad of directions which conflict with more traditional conservative ideology. The Democrats are wasting an opportunity to expand their tent in this environment, IMO, as they continue to double down on many of the strategies which led to defeat in 2016 - I am not a target for them since my views on abortion would probably preclude a party conversion at any point in the near future, but there are a lot of folks who are much less single-issue determinate. I suspect many of them will remain homeless for a while.

[ShockCrazy]

There is a lot of shouting into the void going on in the above post.

The biggest issue seems to be the rampant use and abuse of the poor scarecrow from the Wizard of Oz. Using invented quotes to frame arguments that people are not actually making is not the best. Sometimes it can be persuasive, but that doesn't seem to be a priority here based on this page's activity.

I do appreciate your strange concern for the location from which I am posting.

I agree that it was odd for you to come here seeking a pat on the back for Schumer's d.o.a. bill proposal. That is why I was confused when you dug in so hard yesterday on insisting that we acknowledge its merits.

As a final and largely unrelated note, I suspect many of us here are not thrilled with certain moves by this Congress and this administration. I did not vote for Trump and am unlikely to vote for him in 2020. I am also very unlikely to vote for the Democrat nominee in 2020, as they are not filling any of the void created by the Republicans' lurch in a myriad of directions which conflict with more traditional conservative ideology. The Democrats are wasting an opportunity to expand their tent in this environment, IMO, as they continue to double down on many of the strategies which led to defeat in 2016 - I am not a target for them since my views on abortion would probably preclude a party conversion at any point in the near future, but there are a lot of folks who are much less single-issue determinate. I suspect many of them will remain homeless for a while.

A bit of a side-track since you self identified about being a single issue voter regarding abortion and it interests me, I have some questions. I genuinely really just wanna pick your brain. I would self identify as someone who opposes abortion(definitely not a single issue voter though), but thinks that most single issue anti abortion voters don't approach the right way and have wrecked their credibility.

Would you support welfare programs to help support unwanted pregnancies be to carry to term and support those parents?
Would you support a government program that helps provide free(or nearly free) and accessible contraceptives?(Are there any limitations on these ie: do you support birth control, condoms, and/or plan B? Which and why/why not?)
Do you support increased emphasis on sex education and contraceptives in schools?
Would you support a government program that emphasized supporting adoption both for the person giving up the child and future parent seekers(current system sucks)?

If you answer no to all those, what do you support and what is the solution then to an unwanted pregnancy?

[jdshock]

I agree that it was odd for you to come here seeking a pat on the back for Schumer's d.o.a. bill proposal. That is why I was confused when you dug in so hard yesterday on insisting that we acknowledge its merits.

This is going to be my last post in response to you. You're apparently wholly unwilling to engage in any real discussion and are much more interested in lobbing thinly veiled insults.

I'm only responding to point out that you have misunderstood the intention of my first post. I would need to be delusional to think folks like you would "pat me on the back" for pointing out the merits in a bill proposed by Dems. I posted it in hopes that there could be an actual discussion of "that bill isn't actually a strategic move because the corporate tax cuts were a critical component of Trump's underlying policy goals" or "the proposal is silly because the purpose of infrastructure rebuilding isn't to benefit the middle class" or "I actually do support the proposed bill" or whatever.

Instead, you have dragged the conversation into a pissing match about who can be the most derisive and flippant.

I wouldn't have responded at all, but it's honestly infuriating. The point is that we're willfully spending our time on a political message board when we have other things we could be doing... because it's fun, or at least should be, to talk with folks who you disagree with. Instead, you've attempted to shut down discussion and paint it as if I'm the one looking for affirmation. It's utter nonsense.

[Play Angry]

A bit of a side-track since you self identified about being a single issue voter regarding abortion and it interests me, I have some questions. I genuinely really just wanna pick your brain.

Sure.

I would self identify as someone who opposes abortion(definitely not a single issue voter though), but thinks that most single issue anti abortion voters don't approach the right way and have wrecked their credibility.

Would probably agree in some instances.

Would you support welfare programs to help support unwanted pregnancies be to carry to term and support those parents?

I think Medicaid probably serves as a flawed but existing welfare system for unwanted pregnancies carried to term. I wouldn't support a welfare system that is tied to whether the pregnancy is wanted/unwanted instead of income/assets for the recipient, as that would open a host of other issues and its inherent subjectivity would leave it exposed to rampant abuse.

Would you support a government program that helps provide free(or nearly free) and accessible contraceptives?(Are there any limitations on these ie: do you support birth control, condoms, and/or plan B? Which and why/why not?)

I am supportive of education programs and providing subsidized contraceptives in many cases. Condoms and birth control are fine, I would not support Plan B being included as part of the program.

Do you support increased emphasis on sex education and contraceptives in schools?

Depends on what increased emphasis means, but generally yes I do acknowledge the value of and support sex education in schools. I think it's often done poorly, but that varies widely from school to school and city to city.

Would you support a government program that emphasized supporting adoption both for the person giving up the child and future parent seekers(current system sucks)?

I think this is very important. Yes.

[wufan]

Abortion is tricky. It pits the three premises of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness at odds against one another.

[ShockingButTrue]

I know. Like getting knocked up in a cadillac behind a bar on a Saturday night, while totally s***faced. Again!

[ShockCrazy]

Sure.



Would probably agree in some instances.



I think Medicaid probably serves as a flawed but existing welfare system for unwanted pregnancies carried to term. I wouldn't support a welfare system that is tied to whether the pregnancy is wanted/unwanted instead of income/assets for the recipient, as that would open a host of other issues and its inherent subjectivity would leave it exposed to rampant abuse.



I am supportive of education programs and providing subsidized contraceptives in many cases. Condoms and birth control are fine, I would not support Plan B being included as part of the program.



Depends on what increased emphasis means, but generally yes I do acknowledge the value of and support sex education in schools. I think it's often done poorly, but that varies widely from school to school and city to city.



I think this is very important. Yes.

We're mostly on the same page then. I'm more fine with Plan B. Also I don't think Medicaid covers this well enough. The biggest issue I have with the anti-abortion crowd is they want to put the cart before the horse. You don't start by overturning Roe v Wade. You start with all the other policies first, then I think you will see abortion rate plummet. Once that happens if you want overturn Roe v Wade, you can because it's become an undesirable, and rarely selected option. I think fundamentally many anti-abortion people lack the compassion to understand why people choose an abortion and just want it outlawed without thinking of how/why it happens. I'm going to guess no one who has had an abortion had that as a life goal(excepting for stupid wack job comments Lena Dunham makes).

[Play Angry]

We're mostly on the same page then. I'm more fine with Plan B. Also I don't think Medicaid covers this well enough. The biggest issue I have with the anti-abortion crowd is they want to put the cart before the horse. You don't start by overturning Roe v Wade. You start with all the other policies first, then I think you will see abortion rate plummet. Once that happens if you want overturn Roe v Wade, you can because it's become an undesirable, and rarely selected option. I think fundamentally many anti-abortion people lack the compassion to understand why people choose an abortion and just want it outlawed without thinking of how/why it happens. I'm going to guess no one who has had an abortion had that as a life goal(excepting for stupid wack job comments Lena Dunham makes).

Agreed for sure that compassion is often absent or lacking in abortion discussions. There are a lot of interconnected issues.

[ShockingButTrue]

I actually turned to CNN to see what the progressive narrative concerning the President's planned get-together with Kim from N. Korea. All they wanted to talk about was some movie actress who Trump larked around with before he was elected for office. Why is the left's mind always in the gutter?

The left had better hope the Stormy tapes or dossier videos, or obstruction charges, "collusion" (?) indictments, or anything for the love of God, appear before 2020.

[wufan]

I actually turned to CNN to see what the progressive narrative concerning the President's planned get-together with Kim from N. Korea. All they wanted to talk about was some movie actress who Trump larked around with before he was elected for office. Why is the left's mind always in the gutter?

The left had better hope the Stormy tapes or dossier videos, or obstruction charges, "collusion" (?) indictments, or anything for the love of God, appear before 2020.

Trump’s relationship with Stormy SHOULD matter. It doesn’t.

[ShockingButTrue]

Are you suggesting impeachment as a result of a relationship from years ago, before he was elected as President? That's where my concern lies.

You can discuss morality with Play Angry if you wish, or better yet, tune into CNN for civic lessons on morality, but just leave me out of that one. I'm a little more concerned about wide open borders.

Be careful though, he's proven, to me at least, he's an -ahem- inept judge of character who's just plain too full of himself (and bull**** too) to have any discussion not revert to name calling. Pity his poor wife.

[Play Angry]

^ pretty weird stuff.

[ShockingButTrue]

#PrettyWeirdButTrue

Run and tell that.

[Play Angry]

Movie actress, lol.

[ShockingButTrue]

[wufan]

ShockingButTrue said, “Are you suggesting impeachment as a result of a relationship from years ago, before he was elected as President?”

Simply put, no.

[wufan]

ShockingButTrue said, “You can discuss morality with Play Angry if you wish, or better yet, tune into CNN for civic lessons on morality, but just leave me out of that one. I'm a little more concerned about wide open borders.”

You are the one that brought up the affair. You are the one that asked how it could matter. You appear to be the one supremely interested in this, and then you follow with, “leave me out of that one.” No problem, as soon as you quit talking about it.

[ShockingButTrue]

You misunderstood me I'm sure. My polemic was more directed at the asymmetry of the CNN coverage of the N. Korea impasse and it's recent positive developments.

But, if you want to discuss the significance of a decade old relationship, and it's impact on the average american's life today, fine, I'm more than game.

But I made no hint of, nor alluded to, any interest in a long-winded discussion of Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics of Human Nature (morality).

p.s.- what happened to the lecture on morals?

[ShockCrazy]

By forward progress with North Korea do you mean where Trump is trying give up long-standing policy to concede ground to Kim? Because they certainly have taken no steps forward. They've always wanted to talk, we've been the ones who have said no, disarmament has always been a prerequisite.

[jdshock]

ShockingButTrue said, “You can discuss morality with Play Angry if you wish, or better yet, tune into CNN for civic lessons on morality, but just leave me out of that one. I'm a little more concerned about wide open borders.”

You are the one that brought up the affair. You are the one that asked how it could matter. You appear to be the one supremely interested in this, and then you follow with, “leave me out of that one.” No problem, as soon as you quit talking about it.

To be fair, I was the one who brought it up. I argued that Dems need to court the middle class vote in 2018/2020 by pointing out Republicans' hypocrisy on the topic. It was suggested Trump has far bigger scandals than being hypocritical about tax policy. I suggested I probably couldn't convince SBT to vote against Trump because of Stormy.

Frankly, the recent discussion feels like I kind of hit the nail on the head with that one.

[ShockingButTrue]

If your trying to convince me of the validity of any scandal involving the president deciding my next vote because you said so, then yes, you are correct. Keep hope alive though. Plan D next? Just come up with something better than hypocrisy. Going back to bigotry would be the progressive's best gamble, I would think. Failed as it is.

[Aargh]

If you like taxes, you'll love tariffs, just not as much as taxes.

Tariffs on steel and aluminum will raise the price of everything made with steel or aluminum. The money from the tariffs goes to the government. Then when you buy a car, an airline ticket, a can of soda, a tractor - even a roll of aluminum foil, you will pay for the tariffs the government previously collected. Just another way of collecting taxes.

But there's a HUGE difference. When things made in the USA, like airplanes and cars cost more because of the tariffs, those products will be less competitive in international markets, resulting in lower sales and layoffs.

And it gets worse. Other countries don't like our government making their products more expensive for American consumers, so they put tariffs on things the USA exports to their countries. Things like airplanes, automobiles, agricultural products. Prices of products from farmland tend to go down (sometimes seriously) when the USA puts tariffs on imports. Farmers and factory workers usually pay the price - not Wall Street.

[wufan]

Not a lot of modern economists like tariffs, but Trump did find one.