First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
Post Reply Trump Is President In Four Days Now. Deal With It.
42430 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
suffering for art
Offline
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/18/17

Xxanthar wrote:


animegirl2222 wrote:

you don't have to be a liberal to dislike Trump. he's dislikeable on his own accordance of being fucking intolerably annoying and grating.


Much like you.



sweetheart, I keep telling you. I'm a centrist with left undertones, but I'd rather have the annoying female clod in office than the carrot man.
the fact that you're salty that not all of GD likes preshus trumpy is your own damn fault, but go on mal's ce and you'll find plenty of likeminded people who agree with you
5149 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / The Cat Empire
Offline
Posted 1/17/17

Xxanthar wrote:


Yeah, and a lot of Republicans dealt with Obama the same way Democrats dealt with Bush. So the cycle continues, while getting worse each time around. Ain't life grand.




i don't know how exactly Bush was dealt with, as I was only a kid when he was president

However badly he was dealt with, Obama was probably treated more awfully-
Posted 1/17/17

official-shinsengumi wrote:


Xxanthar wrote:


Yeah, and a lot of Republicans dealt with Obama the same way Democrats dealt with Bush. So the cycle continues, while getting worse each time around. Ain't life grand.




i don't know how exactly Bush was dealt with, as I was only a kid when he was president

However badly he was dealt with, Obama was probably treated more awfully-


Lol, nah. Trump still has not achieved Bush levels of hate from the left yet.
Posted 1/17/17

Akage-chan wrote:

^ Joking about assassination is not funny. You want a man to die because you don't agree with him? Petty indeed.


Fox News and others did it to Obama on a few occasions.
Eg http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0508/Fox_analyst_apologizes_for_Obama_assassination_joke.html

https://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/01/03/foxs-benghazi-expert-endorsed-assassinating-oba/197411

39161 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/17/17

Xxanthar wrote:


official-shinsengumi wrote:

Deal with it?


I'll deal with him the same way a lot of Republicans dealt with Obama


Yeah, and a lot of Republicans dealt with Obama the same way Democrats dealt with Bush. So the cycle continues, while getting worse each time around. Ain't life grand.




Well said, Xxanthar!
Posted 1/17/17
Ejanss 
16817 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17
And if the Florida votes had been recounted in '00, and Al Gore got that one last little dingy, would we be just as charitable in saying "The votes are there, and that's that--The American people voted their Chief Executive, and he's in the history books now, so zippers!"?

(Or would we be crying that there must have been under-the-table deals, miscounts, and voter fraud, just like the reasons we never thought Bush Jr. was the real "elected" president, either?
At least nobody was using the R-word back then...)
39161 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/17/17

official-shinsengumi wrote:


Xxanthar wrote:


Yeah, and a lot of Republicans dealt with Obama the same way Democrats dealt with Bush. So the cycle continues, while getting worse each time around. Ain't life grand.




i don't know how exactly Bush was dealt with, as I was only a kid when he was president

However badly he was dealt with, Obama was probably treated more awfully-


What he's saying is that as loud and mean the Republicans have been to Obama, they voted for a lot of stuff he wanted. Just as the Democrats were loud and mean to Bush, but still voted for a lot of stuff that he wanted.

In essence, it's all an act. The Democrats and Republicans hate on each other in the news, but when the news isn't watching, they sit back and have a few drinks and work on how to pass the next Bill, while laughing and joking together.

This is the first time that I've seen an in coming administration come in with the stated goal of repealing much of the work of a previous administration. This is new to normal politics in Washington DC.
Posted 1/17/17

DeadlyOats wrote:
This is the first time that I've seen an incoming administration come in with the stated goal of repealing much of the work of a previous administration. This is new to normal politics in Washington DC.


Not quite. George Bush promised the same kind of "repeal the previous administration's work" but ended up falling short. Trump is going to do the same thing. The Republicans don't stand a chance of a filibuster-proof situation until 2018 (the next mid-term elections).

For the next two years, the Republicans are going to have to be careful as to how they phrase things and how they pass laws. Democrats are still able to pull a filibuster move (just like the Republicans had done). The only difference is that due to the last filibuster (where the Republicans pulled one to try to prevent the consideration of ACA), the majority leader can reject the notion of a filibuster if the only motion against it is to prevent the beginning proceedings of considering a bill.

Trump is nothing special or unique. He's the same type of politicians we've been voting in for the past 50-60 years. He mentions the blue collar community and they go vote for him when the Democrats had focused on raising ease of education (and thus, singling out the blue-collar community who focuses on low-education but more labor positions). As Xxanthar said - both sides will go back and forth, the escalation of rage between the two parties just carries on into the next election .. and the one after it.. so on and so on.
39161 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/17/17

ninjitsuko wrote:


DeadlyOats wrote:
This is the first time that I've seen an incoming administration come in with the stated goal of repealing much of the work of a previous administration. This is new to normal politics in Washington DC.


Not quite. George Bush promised the same kind of "repeal the previous administration's work" but ended up falling short. Trump is going to do the same thing. The Republicans don't stand a chance of a filibuster-proof situation until 2018 (the next mid-term elections).

For the next two years, the Republicans are going to have to be careful as to how they phrase things and how they pass laws. Democrats are still able to pull a filibuster move (just like the Republicans had done). The only difference is that due to the last filibuster (where the Republicans pulled one to try to prevent the consideration of ACA), the majority leader can reject the notion of a filibuster if the only motion against it is to prevent the beginning proceedings of considering a bill.

Trump is nothing special or unique. He's the same type of politicians we've been voting in for the past 50-60 years. He mentions the blue collar community and they go vote for him when the Democrats had focused on raising ease of education (and thus, singling out the blue-collar community who focuses on low-education but more labor positions). As Xxanthar said - both sides will go back and forth, the escalation of rage between the two parties just carries on into the next election .. and the one after it.. so on and so on.


I don't remember, what specifically Bush promise to have repealed?
Posted 1/17/17

DeadlyOats wrote:

I don't remember, what specifically Bush promise to have repealed?


Bush went out of his way to try to repeal most of Clinton's administration's legislature regarding the workforce and taxes. He repealed Clinton's regulations on the ergonomic rules of the workplace, as well as a few other regulations that Clinton's administration put through. Bush tried to repeal the "Commodity Futures Modernization Act" that Clinton had signed into law at the end of 2000 but Congress forced their hands to ensure that it didn't happen.

I guess what I'm trying to say that this is a pretty common practice when the "majority party" switches. They try to undo everything that the opposite party had done during their x amount of years as the majority (even if it's two .. or four .. or eight).
1882 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Shanghai China
Offline
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17
hes still not as bad as Nixon was people forget but Nixon had worst approval rate before he was sworn in and he served almost 2 terms
Ejanss 
16817 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17

gsm642 wrote:

hes still not as bad as Nixon was people forget but Nixon had worst approval rate before he was sworn in and he served almost 2 terms


Keep in mind, he played the "Silent Majority" card against the protests during the '68 campaign, just as moderate middle-America was finally having enough of Kent State and the later riots at Chicago's Democratic convention, and was up against Hubert Humphrey's perceived support of LBJ and Vietnam.
In 1972, Watergate hadn't gone public yet, and Nixon was still riding strong from his Russia and China visits. George McGovern was too far left, and took no state except Massachusetts. (Giving us the famous "Don't blame me..." bumper sticker during Watergate.)

Nobody trusted Nixon even before they had reason not to, but he was a senator and VP, and at least had experience for doing his job.
Which is how he stayed out of the bottom five Worst Presidents in History, for which we already have two likely prospects in our lifetime.
37097 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17
I'm of the same mind as Bernie Sanders on the matter. Trump should be held to account for the positive promises he's made and vigourously opposed when taking any action on the negative ones he's made. Should Trump present proposals that sincerely protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid as he promised, should he present or support proposals that empower people in the US to import cheaper prescription medications like the one Sanders recently made, should he negotiate trade deals that actually advance the interests of labour over the interests of high dollar donors and lobbyists, he should be supported by progressives. Should Trump try to torture, or seek war against Iran on John Bolton's advice, or make good on his promise to refill the extrajudicial prison in Guantanamo, he should be given no quarter and be opposed to the last.
1882 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Shanghai China
Offline
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17
Watergate was a cover-up designed to distract the press and keep them busy. A eyes only document that had a highest security level at the time that was accidently leaked during a freedom of information act that shouldn't have I wont say for what because that's an entire different argument
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.