POTUS Donald Trump

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think Pelosi was a huge mistake.

I've said this for 25 years running now. I can't stand Pelosi. To me, she's everything wrong with the Democratic Party (so was Reid but he's gone now).

[jimmer]

I've said this for 25 years running now. I can't stand Pelosi. To me, she's everything wrong with the Democratic Party (so was Reid but he's gone now).

I have had issues with Pelosi as far back as I can remember. Her many problems does not include that she is from California.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I have had issues with Pelosi as far back as I can remember. Her many problems does not include that she is from California.

She should be everything Elizabeth Warren is today, but isn't.

 

She has always struck me as the kind of manipulative partisan we should reject out of hand.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

what does THAT have to do with what POTUS is doing now? Deflect, deflect, deflect.

not deflecting just pointing out that Democrats might come back into power someday. Then what?

[Mike Sixel]

 

not deflecting just pointing out that Democrats might come back into power someday. Then what?

 

The EPA and DoEducation and Endangered Species departments/acts will be restored into existence (either literally or in effect).

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

The EPA and DoEducation and Endangered Species departments/acts will be restored into existence (either literally or in effect).

True.

*also very important

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Funny I was also upset that Johnny Quest and company would be tainted by an association with this administration.  No one better mess with Bullwinkle, Scooby, or Underdog.  Scrappy - feel free to ruin him.

 

Bullwinkle was in frequent contact with Russians too!

 

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/4/41760/1171768-boris_and_natasha_1.jpg

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Trump, though, he's just an awful person. I don't fully understand why people can't see it or, if they do, why they accept it.

"You just resent him for his success, and that he tells it like it is" according to my Facebook feed...

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

"You just resent him for his success, and that he tells it like it is" according to my Facebook feed...

Man, the "tells it like it is" line really gets under my skin.

 

Are people really this stupid?

 

If you say five things, all of which contradict each other, how on earth are you "telling it like it is"?

 

I waver between Trump being an idiot and genius. He plays a small percentage of Americans like a fiddle. He says wildly inaccurate things that contradict each other, yet somehow convinces people to select what they find palatable and discard the rest.

 

It's pure madness. My faith in humanity has bottomed out over the past few months because I simply refused to believe people are this gullible.

[Mike Sixel]

I also love "if you don't like it, move out of the country"....wish some of them had in the previous 8 years.... not really

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I also love "if you don't like it, move out of the country"....wish some of them had in the previous 8 years.... not really

Are you kidding me? I'd love to see some of those jackasses navigate the liberal socialist minefield that is Canada or all of Europe.

 

Because you know, sure as ****, they're not going to pack up and move to Guatemala.

[Squirrel]

 

I think Pelosi was a huge mistake. Everyday Americans consider her an establishment politician that is paid by non profits and jobless people. Just the way it is. Schumer is at least some new blood and a new face. The elite image is what the gop has been effectively marketing to white America.

I was just going to say this in response ... I like Schumer and I think he's a good choice. Who cares what coast he's from. Pelosi? I wish she would step down and let someone else be the House Minority Leader.

[Mike Sixel]

Pelosi strikes me as a better WHIP than face of the team....

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Pelosi strikes me as a better WHIP than face of the team....

I guess that's what bothers me. She is the face of the team and perceptions matter.

[Squirrel]

 

I keep thinking back to how Democrats ran on health care reform for an entire generation, as their top issue, and then when they get to power in 2009 they have nothing ready, no votes lined up, and end up settling for the far right-wing Heritage Center health care reform plan.

The problem wasn't that they didn't try to have the votes lined up, or didn't work to line them up ... the votes weren't there, period. They initially tried for a more universal coverage type plan, but there were more right-leaning Democrats who wouldn't budge and vote for it. They had to 'compromise' what the plan became in order to get something passed. And, frankly, where was Sanders in 2009? Why wasn't he trying to get the votes? Granted, he was an island unto himself, but he was hardly visible during that time when they were trying hard to get passage of something meaningful. I don't think that can be blamed on Democratic leadership so much as big pharma and insurance lobbies lining the pockets of enough legislators.

 

But this is a huge digression from what this thread is about. It's about Trump and his presidency.

[TheLeviathan]

Does it really matter?  There will always be something to demonize whether it's Schumer or Pelosi or Warren.

[Squirrel]

 

I guess that's what bothers me. She is the face of the team and perceptions matter.

And I find that to be more problematic on the whole ... perception over substance.

[TheLeviathan]

 

The problem wasn't that they didn't try to have the votes lined up, or didn't work to line them up ... the votes weren't there, period. They initially tried for a more universal coverage type plan, but there were more right-leaning Democrats who wouldn't budge and vote for it. They had to 'compromise' what the plan became in order to get something passed. And, frankly, where was Sanders in 2009? Why wasn't he trying to get the votes? Granted, he was an island unto himself, but he was hardly visible during that time when they were trying hard to get passage of something meaningful. I don't think that can be blamed on Democratic leadership so much as big pharma and insurance lobbies lining the pockets of enough legislators.

 

But this is a huge digression from what this thread is about. It's about Trump and his presidency.

 

I think it's relevant.  Especially to anyone that thinks Bernie would've had even a prayer of passing one bit of legislation he proposed.

 

But I think Hosken has a point....the Dems sort of did what the Republicans are doing now: bumble their way through an enormous (and critical) piece of legislation.  

[nicksaviking]

 

 

 

Ack! Don't do that to one of my favorite cartoon characters! Waaaaa! You've ruined it! <sobs uncontrollably>

 

Geez, I knew I recognized Mike Pence from somewhere prior to Trump picking him as running mate.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

The problem wasn't that they didn't try to have the votes lined up, or didn't work to line them up ... the votes weren't there, period. They initially tried for a more universal coverage type plan, but there were more right-leaning Democrats who wouldn't budge and vote for it. They had to 'compromise' what the plan became in order to get something passed. And, frankly, where was Sanders in 2009? Why wasn't he trying to get the votes? Granted, he was an island unto himself, but he was hardly visible during that time when they were trying hard to get passage of something meaningful. I don't think that can be blamed on Democratic leadership so much as big pharma and insurance lobbies lining the pockets of enough legislators.

 

But this is a huge digression from what this thread is about. It's about Trump and his presidency.

It's only a small digression and still on topic, in my opinion.

 

After all, if Trump resigns tomorrow (and anything is possible), you would not automatically lock the thread because Trump is no longer president anymore.

[nicksaviking]

On Pelosi, I also think she lacks substance, but really I think she was a product of over-compensation by the Democrats after a decade of Gingrich and Hastert. They probably thought they needed a brash and tactless mouthpiece vaguely espousing party mantras and denouncing everything the other side did, as the other party had just had two buffoons doing the same thing prior.

 

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Does it really matter?  There will always be something to demonize whether it's Schumer or Pelosi or Warren.

True, but these people are 50 meter (easy) targets for Republicans.

 

What about someone like Tammy Duckworth or a red state senator?

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

On Pelosi, I also think she lacks substance, but really I think she was a product of over-compensation by the Democrats after a decade of Gingrich and Hastert. They probably thought they needed a brash and tactless mouthpiece vaguely espousing party mantras and denouncing everything the other side did, as the other party had just had two buffoons doing the same thing prior.

Don't forget Hastert's history of child molesting. Republicans: gotta love 'em.

[Squirrel]

 

Geez, I knew I recognized Mike Pence from somewhere prior to Trump picking him as running mate.

You have ruined my childhood.

[Squirrel]

 

True, but these people are 50 meter (easy) targets for Republicans.

What about someone like Tammy Duckworth or a red state senator?

Tammy Duckworth is serving her FIRST term in the Senate. Don't get me wrong ... I think she's great and was hugely supportive of her and extremely happy to be able to vote for her. But that wouldn't be a good leadership choice, imo. Klobuchar or Franken would've been good choices. But honestly, I have no problems with Schumer. If the only criteria to choose a leader is to not choose someone from one of the coasts, I think that in and of itself is a huge problem.

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Tammy Duckworth is serving her FIRST term in the Senate. Don't get me wrong ... I think she's great and was hugely supportive of her and extremely happy to be able to vote for her. But that wouldn't be a good leadership choice, imo. Klobuchar or Franken would've been good choices. But honestly, I have no problems with Schumer. If the only criteria to choose a leader is to not choose someone from one of the coasts, I think that in and of itself is a huge problem.

I would prefer Franken or Klobuchar to Schumer. Democrats probably chose Schumer because it was "his turn" and that's how they do things, oblivious to the actual needs at hand.

[jimmer]

I would prefer Franken or Klobuchar to Schumer. Democrats probably chose Schumer because it was "his turn" and that's how they do things, oblivious to the actual needs at hand.

Im not sure there is anything to support the idea that they are promoting based on his turn,or being oblivious to need. He seems a good choice and I hope experience is a consideration.

[kydoty]

 

Are you kidding me? I'd love to see some of those jackasses navigate the liberal socialist minefield that is Canada or all of Europe.

 

Because you know, sure as ****, they're not going to pack up and move to Guatemala.

 

Oh god, I saw so many of the "If Obama wins again, I'm leaving" posts on my Facebook feed back in 2012.

 

And I kept thinking "Where the hell are you gonna go?  We are by far the most conservative developed country in the world."

 

And of course, none of the went anywhere when Obama won again.

[jimmer]

Oh god, I saw so many of the "If Obama wins again, I'm leaving" posts on my Facebook feed back in 2012.

 

And I kept thinking "Where the hell are you gonna go? We are by far the most conservative developed country in the world."

 

And of course, none of the went anywhere when Obama won again.

yeah. This country is too conservative for my tastes. I like the idea of religious freedom, I dont like the idea that people want to, or feel they have the right to, project their religious beliefs onto others. People shouldnt have to make decisions based on other people's religious values.Basing law on religious beliefs shouldnt be a thing.

 

If you dont believe in homosexuality based on relgion, by all means dont engage in homosexual activity. Doesnt mean, because your religion has issues with homosexuality, that other people shouldnt be allowed to be homosexual. That extends to same sex marriages. Your relgion doesnt condone it? Fine, dont marry someone of the same sex. That doesnt mean you should tell other people who have different beliefs that they have to follow your religious rules.

[Bark's Lounge]

 

yeah. This country is too conservative for my tastes. I like the idea of religious freedom, I dont like the idea that people want to, or feel they have the right to, project their religious beliefs onto others. People shouldnt have to make decisions based on other people's religious values.Basing law on religious beliefs shouldnt be a thing.

If you dont believe in homosexuality based on relgion, by all means dont engage in homosexual activity. Doesnt mean, because your religion has issues with homosexuality, that other people shouldnt be allowed to be homosexual. That extends to same sex marriages. Your relgion doesnt condone it? Fine, dont marry someone of the same sex. That doesnt mean you should tell other people who have different beliefs that they have to follow your religious rules.