Apparently, he has compromised.
1 Like
Ah, ha. I knew it. You cannot answer my question.
And today’s Democrats are, indeed, evil. You see, I can recall a time that was not true. I rate President Truman for example, the finest POTUS of the last century . . . yes, even above the great Reagan. President Kennedy was an American hero. He was also a Democrat in case you are unaware. Both put America first . . . like Trump does.
I don’t really know when it was that Democrats went over to the dark side. Perhaps it started with McGovern. The Vietnam war really rattled a bunch of 'em. Sad.
Define for us what you consider to be “Conservative objectives”.
What exactly is Trump doing thats so great in your mind?
I am a staunch Conservative. I don’t have much use for a great many Republicans . . . who are weak.
I do vote, though. And given there are only two choices I’m forced to vote for the Republican, too often as the lesser of two evils. I voted for John McCain, for example, a jackass. Really I was voting for Sarah, a great woman. I surely would never have voted for Obama.
No, in your mind there is only your objective reality.
And Argyll my friend, you still did not answer my question!
From March 25th :
2 Likes
It’s a really long list. He is building the wall over the furious objections of Democrats. He is appointing Federal judges, including two SCOTUS justices, who will not rule from the bench. He has slashed ridiculous and unnecessary regulations and roadblocks erected by the Obama administration. He is placing American interests first in our international dealings.
Trump does not believe in globalism. Neither do I!! He is doing his level best to extract our troops from foreign entanglements. I agree. Trump supports reliance on and use of natural gas. So do I. Trump wants an America which is energy independent. I agree. Trump does not swallow the global warming kool-aid. I agree. We see how well reliance on models works with the pandemic. Trump is a staunch defender of the second amendment. I’m with him on that. Trump has done his level best to deep six Obamacare. Well done, Mr. Trump! Trump supports only legal immigration. Spot on! Trump has supported lower taxation. Good.
There is much more. But I’m tired of writing.
1 Like
But in that response, he only makes it seem like he doesnt know what “sarcastic” means. As I noted, it was a potentially valid concept so I can see what he was getting at, but it was a very piss poor delivery. And if you havent noticed, I generally stick up for him, or I’m at least not bothered by a lot of his stuff.
1 Like
But the opposite is just as true - anyone not wanting to rake Trump over the coals and roast his head on a spit is seen as a blind cult worshiper.
2 Likes
I seem to recall Hilary being point person on some issue as first lady. Michelle Obama “fixed” school lunches, and is now being considered a legit VP candidate (at least here, in that thread) based entirely on her experience as first lady. Family having an active role in isnt exactly unusual.
Ahahaha. Now I can see why you like Trump. Although Sarah appeared competent in comparison.
(Who would ever conceive saying Palin appeared competent??? The world we live in…)
5 Likes
Lets itemize those :
- build a wall
- appoint judges
- cut regulations
- placing American interests first
- anti-globalism
- isolationist
- supports US energy sector
- supports US energy independence
- climate change denier
- gun rights
- oppose Obamacare
- oppose illegal immigration
- lower taxes
Most of those are supported by anyone in the GOP… 2, 3,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 are all right out of the playbook. Bush JR. should tick all those boxes.
For the most part then Trump is really just like any Republican plus isolationism and xenophobia.
so… foreigners
3 Likes
Having the 1st lady do some sort of project or work goes back a long ways and is not exlusive to Democrats. Nancy Reagan had the ‘Just Say No’ to drugs campaign. As you say thats not unusual and is actully more tradition kinda.
NO democrats put their daughter in a Sr. WH job.
NO democrats gave their son in law a white house Sr title job and pretended they had any ability to solve the Middle East conflict
Or am I forgetting when that happened ever in our history? Pretty sure its not in my lifetime.
7 Likes
Of course it did:
1862: Progressive income taxes, i.e. high-income earners subsidize low-income earners
1870: Free elementary education
1935: Social Security
1938: Farm subsidies
1965: Medicare
All are elements of socialism.
7 Likes
Ok, formally maybe. But she’s a “senior advisor”, and unpaid at that. Formalized may be unusual, but surely you agree that Hilary likely had an informal yet similar advisor role with President Clinton.
To just say “put his daughter in a senoir WH job” is trying hard to imply like she is Chief of Staff or part of his cabinet, filling a significant role that’d otherwise be filled by someone with more qualifications. She’s not, her role is supplimental.
Back on the coronavirus subject, I give NYT credit for their reporting here.
WHO’s report on China’s global disinformation campaign regarding their responsibility and subsequent lies about the virus… was successfully censored by China’s global disinformation campaign!
2 Likes
So she didn’t create 10 million jobs?
Yes her role is a “supplimental” role. Ivanka’s role is not typical though. What other president gave his daughter ANY kind of job or title??
Jared is being put into jobs that don’t seem trivial.
Putting your Son in Law into jobs hes’ not qualified for is totally unprecedented in the White House and the height of cronyism & nepotism
5 Likes
I don’t give a rats ass if any of them are or aren’t paid a cent
They could pay her $1M a year and I really wouldn’t care vs 1 cent
The money for the salaries is trivial in relation to the damage they can do with their incompetence and the amount they can get for themselves in favoritism and power or simply writing a book after or lobbying consulting jobs, etc.
This is true for Republican or Democrat in my mind.
But in this case I’d support giving Ivanka & Jared a stipend of $5M a year to sit down and shut up.
3 Likes
Don’t give them any ideas! And yes it certainly would make a huge difference if they were paid (that’s taxpayer money!). Thankfully government salaries are public and pretty much fixed, so they could never be that high.
But the idea is to pay reasonable amounts to government officials. That way they aren’t “working for free” working for bribes, corruption, and enrichment instead.
You don’t want them all “working for free”, because that eliminates normal people from ever being able to accept the job.
1 Like