[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore - buddy - Jul 13, 2025 - 5:49pm
 
M.A.G.A. - R_P - Jul 13, 2025 - 3:53pm
 
July 2025 Photo Theme - Stone - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 13, 2025 - 3:20pm
 
Are they married yet? YES THEY ARE! - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 13, 2025 - 3:16pm
 
Wordle - daily game - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Jul 13, 2025 - 3:07pm
 
NY Times Strands - ptooey - Jul 13, 2025 - 1:37pm
 
NYTimes Connections - ptooey - Jul 13, 2025 - 1:26pm
 
Israel - R_P - Jul 13, 2025 - 1:15pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - kcar - Jul 13, 2025 - 12:41pm
 
Trump - R_P - Jul 13, 2025 - 12:08pm
 
Name My Band - DaveInSaoMiguel - Jul 13, 2025 - 12:06pm
 
The Marie Antoinette Moment... - Isabeau - Jul 13, 2025 - 11:43am
 
Infinite cat - Isabeau - Jul 13, 2025 - 11:37am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Jul 13, 2025 - 11:35am
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Jul 13, 2025 - 11:05am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - GeneP59 - Jul 13, 2025 - 10:10am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - GeneP59 - Jul 13, 2025 - 9:53am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Jul 13, 2025 - 9:29am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Jul 12, 2025 - 9:16pm
 
What the hell OV? - oldviolin - Jul 12, 2025 - 8:39pm
 
Europe - R_P - Jul 12, 2025 - 6:30pm
 
Why atheists swallow, - R_P - Jul 12, 2025 - 2:37pm
 
Democratic Party - R_P - Jul 12, 2025 - 1:37pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - machar - Jul 12, 2025 - 12:34pm
 
Beyond mix - Steely_D - Jul 12, 2025 - 11:29am
 
A motivational quote - steeler - Jul 11, 2025 - 6:58pm
 
Beyond... - GeneP59 - Jul 11, 2025 - 6:35pm
 
Protest Songs - R_P - Jul 11, 2025 - 12:38pm
 
True Confessions - oldviolin - Jul 11, 2025 - 11:56am
 
Jess Roden - legendary UK vocalist - and "Seven Windows" ... - J_C - Jul 11, 2025 - 11:22am
 
Live Music - oldviolin - Jul 11, 2025 - 10:13am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jul 11, 2025 - 8:04am
 
It seemed like a good idea at the time - ptooey - Jul 11, 2025 - 6:10am
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 10, 2025 - 9:13pm
 
TV shows you watch - R_P - Jul 10, 2025 - 5:31pm
 
Wasted Money - GeneP59 - Jul 10, 2025 - 5:22pm
 
Rock mix / repitition - walk2k - Jul 10, 2025 - 4:31pm
 
How's the weather? - GeneP59 - Jul 10, 2025 - 3:21pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jul 10, 2025 - 12:52pm
 
Random Solutions - Random Advice - oldviolin - Jul 10, 2025 - 10:11am
 
Spambags on RP - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 10, 2025 - 9:02am
 
misheard lyrics - GeneP59 - Jul 10, 2025 - 6:30am
 
New Song Submissions system - Teja - Jul 10, 2025 - 3:36am
 
TEXAS - Red_Dragon - Jul 9, 2025 - 5:57pm
 
DQ (as in 'Daily Quote') - black321 - Jul 9, 2025 - 11:33am
 
Fascism In America - ColdMiser - Jul 9, 2025 - 10:23am
 
Republican Party - Red_Dragon - Jul 9, 2025 - 7:50am
 
Economix - oldviolin - Jul 9, 2025 - 7:45am
 
Outstanding Covers - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2025 - 9:29pm
 
Trump Lies™ - R_P - Jul 8, 2025 - 7:14pm
 
Musky Mythology - R_P - Jul 8, 2025 - 5:43pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Alchemist - Jul 8, 2025 - 11:45am
 
What is the meaning of this? - islander - Jul 8, 2025 - 10:11am
 
Love & Hate - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2025 - 8:15am
 
Artificial Intelligence - Red_Dragon - Jul 8, 2025 - 6:45am
 
Anti-War - R_P - Jul 7, 2025 - 6:45pm
 
Environment - R_P - Jul 7, 2025 - 5:38pm
 
(Big) Media Watch - R_P - Jul 7, 2025 - 12:04pm
 
The Grateful Dead - black321 - Jul 7, 2025 - 11:17am
 
Music Videos - black321 - Jul 7, 2025 - 9:00am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 7, 2025 - 8:59am
 
Immigration - black321 - Jul 7, 2025 - 8:02am
 
Russia - Red_Dragon - Jul 7, 2025 - 7:39am
 
Triskele and The Grateful Dead - geoff_morphini - Jul 6, 2025 - 10:33pm
 
Hey Baby, It's The 4th O' July - GeneP59 - Jul 6, 2025 - 9:42pm
 
Customize a shirt with my favorite album - 2644364236 - Jul 6, 2025 - 7:20pm
 
Those Lovable Policemen - R_P - Jul 6, 2025 - 10:56am
 
Beer - SeriousLee - Jul 6, 2025 - 6:54am
 
Iran - R_P - Jul 5, 2025 - 9:01pm
 
What are you doing RIGHT NOW? - Coaxial - Jul 5, 2025 - 6:48pm
 
New vs Old RP App (Android) - mhamann123 - Jul 5, 2025 - 5:41am
 
Britain - R_P - Jul 4, 2025 - 1:41pm
 
Ukraine - R_P - Jul 4, 2025 - 11:10am
 
Best Song Comments. - 2644364236 - Jul 3, 2025 - 11:32pm
 
The Obituary Page - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 3, 2025 - 11:27am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Trump Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1161, 1162, 1163 ... 1350, 1351, 1352  Next
Post to this Topic
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 6:42pm

 R_P wrote:
“You have a bunch of bad hombres down there,” Trump told Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt seen by the Associated Press. “You aren’t doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn’t, so I just might send them down to take care of it.”


 
+1
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 6:35pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

Being perfectly honest, I think it will be good for you to do, but I don't think you should post it here. I already assume I will see circular logic, conclusions that conflict with your stated goals, etc etc. And if that's what I expect to see, I'm sure I'll find it. That might be more "on me" than on you, but still, I don't want to see you waste your time. I'd much rather see you create a scorecard for his first, say, 2 weeks. Are you okay with his nominations? Most of us howl at the "drain the swamp" gang getting on board with Trump nominating a whole family of Swamp Things.

Yes, I've set a simple trap: If you agree with everything so far, I cannot consider you to be in your right mind. Any rational person who still wants to be a team player would at least say "Betsy DeVos isn't my favorite, but maybe she'll work out." Or some other kind of faint praise for the picks they are unsure of. As opposed to my suckup senators who are all gushing about how great all of Trump's picks have been.  

 
You're right as usual.  Not even a yawn, although some interest was expressed prior.  That is not a complaint at all, btw.  just an observation.  

I'll leave it up until the morning so noenz can weigh in.  He'll be having lunch when I wake up.  He pushed for it and I promised I would do it.  So I do hope that he at least acknowledges that I did try.  I don't feel that I said anything new, just restated the same old.  I did warn yooz'all that would be the case.  And TLTR.


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 6:29pm

"...President Trump blasted Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull over a refu­gee agreement and boasted about the magnitude of his electoral college win, according to senior U.S. officials briefed on the Saturday exchange. Then, 25 minutes into what was expected to be an hour-long call, Trump abruptly ended it...."
islander

islander Avatar

Location: West coast somewhere
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 6:03pm

 steeler wrote:

I think he sees it in terms of promises made on campaign trail being met; and his supporters appear to be seeing it that way, too — whether or not it is doing any good, or, worse, causing harm.  The weird thing is that his promise on campaign trail was a ban on Muslims from these countries (which also was met with applause at some of his rallies), and that had to be altered in the executive order to try to avoid it being unlawful.  So, his supporters see it as a campaign promise met, while denying that it is a ban on Muslims (nod, nod, wink, wink).
 
A common tactic that will be repeated at length for a while.
R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 5:53pm

“You have a bunch of bad hombres down there,” Trump told Pena Nieto, according to the excerpt seen by the Associated Press. “You aren’t doing enough to stop them. I think your military is scared. Our military isn’t, so I just might send them down to take care of it.”

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 3:57pm

 Proclivities wrote:

The chaos does seem to be favorable or even comfortable for him and his cabinet - for now at least, like some misdirection tactic.

 
What cabinet ?  Until yesterday, there were only two members.  Now there are just four.


steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 2:22pm

 black321 wrote:

Right.  No reason for the rush to action...as the current system seemed adequate, given the lack of foreign terrorist acts.
Either he's incompetent or intends to continue to create as much chaos as possible as some sort of tactic.  

 
I think he sees it in terms of promises made on campaign trail being met; and his supporters appear to be seeing it that way, too — whether or not it is doing any good, or, worse, causing harm.  The weird thing is that his promise on campaign trail was a ban on Muslims from these countries (which also was met with applause at some of his rallies), and that had to be altered in the executive order to try to avoid it being unlawful.  So, his supporters see it as a campaign promise met, while denying that it is a ban on Muslims (nod, nod, wink, wink).

Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 1:59pm

 black321 wrote:

Right.  No reason for the rush to action...as the current system seemed adequate, given the lack of foreign terrorist acts.
Either he's incompetent or intends to continue to create as much chaos as possible as some sort of tactic.  
 
The chaos does seem to be favorable or even comfortable for him and his cabinet - for now at least, like some misdirection tactic.
black321

black321 Avatar

Location: An earth without maps
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 1:49pm

 steeler wrote:
 

The question I have regarding the temporary ban on refugees is what evidence is there that the current vetting process is inadequate, as the Trump administration claims?  As I understand it, the vetting done before a refugee may be admitted to the U.S. is the most rigorous in the world. It is my understanding that we have not had terrorism involvement of a refugee admitted to the U.S . since 2011, when the Obama administration intensified the protocols. Trump talked on the campaign trail as if the current vetting process is inadequate for ensuring our security.  I never heard or have read what specifically is lacking. So, what is prompting this review, and what protocols have been deemed to be suspect or inadequate?  Obviously, we could just permanently ban immigration from  all 7 countries, as is being done for Syria on an indefinite basis, and justify it by saying we are erring on the side of the security of the American people on American soil.  That, however, would seem to go against American tradition of accepting refugees. Still, in this climate, I am not surprised that a lot of people are in favor.  The fact that Trump on the campaign trail said he was in favor of a temporary ban on Muslims did not help.            
 



 
Right.  No reason for the rush to action...as the current system seemed adequate, given the lack of foreign terrorist acts.
Either he's incompetent or intends to continue to create as much chaos as possible as some sort of tactic.  


steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 1:27pm

 black321 wrote:

What we need is honest politicians on both sides, willing to come to a consensus on a compromise that is best for the people and country. Less party over politics.  Any takers?
Back to immigration. I read a poll that said 49% support, 10% unsure, and 41% against...I wonder how many of the 41% are against just because its trump?  But I would think more would not approve of the way he enacted this change.

  

The question I have regarding the temporary ban on refugees is what evidence is there that the current vetting process is inadequate, as the Trump administration claims?  As I understand it, the vetting done before a refugee may be admitted to the U.S. is the most rigorous in the world. It is my understanding that we have not had terrorism involvement of a refugee admitted to the U.S . since 2011, when the Obama administration intensified the protocols. Trump talked on the campaign trail as if the current vetting process is inadequate for ensuring our security.  I never heard or have read what specifically is lacking. So, what is prompting this review, and what protocols have been deemed to be suspect or inadequate?  Obviously, we could just permanently ban immigration from  all 7 countries, as is being done for Syria on an indefinite basis, and justify it by saying we are erring on the side of the security of the American people on American soil.  That, however, would seem to go against American tradition of accepting refugees. Still, in this climate, I am not surprised that a lot of people are in favor.  The fact that Trump on the campaign trail said he was in favor of a temporary ban on Muslims did not help.            
 




kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 1:26pm

Here ya go.  This is just my opinion and nothing more.  Its only if wishes could be horses, then we would all be riding.  Don't make it into anything more than that.  I still have an open mind on everything.

Immigration

I, like Trump, insist on the distinction between legal and illegal immigrant.  To conflate the two means that there are no laws or rules that apply to the matter.  With or without papers is a legal distinction that means that laws and rules do apply somewhere, somehow.  And immigration laws are not racist or bigoted when applied evenly.

No one other than US citizens has a right to enter this country at will with their proof of citizenship.  Everyone else is granted privileges to enter on condition of rules and laws that are subject to change.

I share the same belief that a country without respected borders is not a country and what ever laws are in place, they could only be considered transient and malleable based upon expediency and convenience only.  It renders the US Constitution meaningless as only the country called the USA can defend it and its worth within its borders.  It applies no where else.

There are enough existing laws, so that if enforced we already have enough to straighten out the mess we are in.  The mess we are in stems from selective enforcement of the existing laws to further political ends deemed worthy in the name of Social Justice.  That is the case of ends justifying the means.  The Constitution is designed to prevent this from happening.

Since the 60’s I have used the term Anchor Babies once I became aware of the act.  I, like Trump, believe that the 14th Amendment is not being properly used as the right used to justify it in this case.  Congress has the right to decide the citizenship status of births on USA soil to non resident foreign citizens while here as provided in the Constitution.  Congress has never acted in its role on this nor has this interpretation ever been challenged in court.

There are four fronts on the immigration front.  Legal, illegal, border security and enforcement.  There is a system in place for all four, yet none of them are properly and evenly applied.

What I hope Trump will do …

Build the wall, once and for all regardless of who pays for it.  It was acknowledged in the 80’s as necessary.  We were going to pay for it then, why is now any different other than it would have been a lot cheaper and would have helped a long way in not letting things get to where we are today.  Once we have secured the border and are evenly enforcing the laws such as employment laws, holding employers criminally liable for violating them and using tools like E-Verify, then and not before can we then decide the fate of those who are illegally here.  In the meantime, we end Sanctuary Cities which in addition to ignoring law provides a magnet that attracts and initiates illegal immigration.  We deport on a priority basis, with number one being criminal illegal aliens.  There will be enough there that will keep everyone busy leaving everyone else, except those who overstay their visas, that we can wait to deal with them once our border is considered under control.  We will force the country of their citizenship to take them back and detain them until that happens.  Steps to make these counties take back their citizens have already been identified and I believe will be taken very shortly.  They will not be released to roam the streets and continue their criminal acts. The second priority is to enforce the terms of our visas, like every other country in this world.  The majority of illegal aliens here is from the overstaying of visas.  We must get our visa system functional.

I am compassionate towards those here who embrace this country for what it is supposed to be (the meaning of which needs to be defined by a public conversation but until then shall mean embracing and compliance with existing laws) and that they be given a legal status of some kind short of citizenship (serving in our military would be a worthy exception) and be allowed to remain.  Those who come here wanting to change this country for whatever reasons as a reason for being here, well no way.

Refugees ?  Sure, if they come here to join us and accept us as we are and want to be here.  Having no other place to go is not acceptable.  I think that this is what Trump wants and is self explainable.  I want to know more about how refugees end up where they do.  Do they express a desire for one place over another or does someone else tell them where they are going in spite of their desires.

I believe if Trump follows the above, it will be good for all involved.  I believe that this is what he wants.  And I do believe that the majority of Trump supporters agree based upon many conversations and observations.

 

Judging Trump as a POTUS

Politician versus Businessman …

The way that this country has been run in my lifetime by professional politicians uses the standard of intentions as the only way they should be judged.  Results are not to be considered, as long as their hearts were in the right place.  Unintended consequences are to overlooked rather than anticipated and no one should be held accountable again, if their intentions were good.

A businessman is judged by results bound within compliance of existing laws and held accountable for their actions including unintended or unanticipated consequences.  Intentions have no place as a justification for poor results or breaking or ignoring laws to achieve a goal.

The two are diametrically opposed.  The former is the establishment thinking and the latter is the thinking that threatens the establishment thinking.  The establishment defends itself by saying the government is too bulky and too unwieldy to hold anyone accountable for poor results and unintended consequences.  Yet government is a business anyway you look at it.

What Trump brings to the table is the skill and approach of a project manager, responsible for coordinating many moving parts and variables to produce the intended result.  He is used to being measured and judged by results and held accountable, unlike career politicians who will remain in office as long as they keep convincing enough people to vote for them with the faulty premise that they are the only ones who can fix the messes they created in the first place.  They also know that if they fix things they will no longer be considered irreplaceable.  So to speak.

As a businessman Trump has had to work with politicians to accomplish his goals.  He knows what works and does not work and why.  He is the bullshitter that you cannot bullshit to use a professional term.  Based on that, I believe he does have the skill set to make things work and get results, in spite of establishment myth and opposition, which comes from both sides equally.

Drain the swamp

I can only hope.  One beginning is keeping lobbyists on a leash which is already under way.  The charges that he is putting billionaires and cronies in his cabinet thereby keeping the swamp intact on face value might be disturbing.  I’m looking at it another way.  First, I don’t believe another billionaire is going to have any problem telling Trump he is full of shit and out of line if they think so.  They will not be yes men by default.  They are also goal and result oriented so everyone understands the mission.  Hope enters the equation that they are in it for the good of the country as opposed to themselves.  That they like Trump, are giving back with their time and skills as opposed to simply passing out money and saying do something good with it.  They are just as tired as Trump and the rest of us who voted for Trump, with the establishment and the status quo which in addition to what was mentioned above also serves up uncertainty which serves to make it hard for anything to get done and serves them in the area of keeping power and maintaining their own job security.

This also is what is meant by tearing down / destroying the government.  No, the government can and will work properly if the establishment can be knocked out of power.  We don’t need pitchforks, torches and blood in the streets to do it.  We just need someone who is not afraid of the establishment and hasn’t been bought out and compromised before they raise their hand and say … so help me God.   And has an ability to do it.  Trump is the second one in my life time to make it this far.  I can say that I used tear down and destroy the government as a metaphor for draining the swamp and removing the establishment from uncontested power.  I believe in government as intended in the Constitution, with very limited powers, certain responsibilities with accountability to the people and laws of the land.

Just took a peak at the thread to see what I have left unaddressed and it’s too late to stop this undertaking Scott.  I did want to wait like you suggested before even bothering to do something like this, but there was interest expressed.

So wrapping this up, who is and isn’t an outsider ?  That will always be debated with shifting goal posts.  All’s I can say is that Trump is my outsider.  Do I believe that he really cares about me as an individual ?  No, I am not that foolish, but I do believe that he cares about fixing the system and leveling the playing field in favor of those of us who are here and belong here, giving us the best chance we have had in ages to do more than just cope and survive.

Yes the fox and the hen house.  I get it and understand everyone’s concerns.  If Trump was in his 40’s and 50’s, I would certainly be concerned.  But he’s in his 70’s.  Taking over a country and becoming a dictator is a young man’s game.  Fixing things and trying to leave the world in a better place is an old man’s game.  He may be old, but he has demonstrated stamina and energy that few in their 50’s have.  He has the skill set.  I have watched him fumble and fuck up during his campaign which is to be expected with any neophyte politician, but what kept me going and believing in him was his ability to recognize these failures and gaffes and make the necessary adjustments to keep going forward and overcoming himself getting in his own way.  He had no problem blowing Corey Lewandowski and Paul Manifort out of the way when it was clear that they had to go.  He hired better people and brought it home across the finish line.  He made the yuge gaffe when he implemented his travel ban on Friday, yet worked quickly to fix it.  I give him a pass for two reasons.  First he is new at this.  Second, perhaps iffen he had a Secretary of State and his own Attorney General in place, it would have been done properly or at least much better.  But he didn’t, he was left with himself to determine what was best to do as he saw it.  Maybe he hasn’t admitted he effed up, but things were quickly fixed regardless, which is most important and bodes well for things to come and illustrates that he has the high learning curve ability needed to learn and make the needed changes, rather than stammer and say I meant well … gimme a break, like a career politician more than likely would have.  Having watched Trump over the years and during the campaign, I don’t think he starts anything he thinks he can’t succeed with and finish.  That is what a builder does.  I know this being the son of a builder / architect.  I know this as a Business Administration major with a recent degree from an accredited university in 2007. 

He was in it to win it from day one.  He’s already spoken in terms of 8 years.  He ain’t walking off the job.

Lastly, as I have mentioned before, he is not going to do much on the social front.  He will not pursue overturning R v. W.  He has been pro choice nearly his entire life and would rather not be bothered with it.  I believe he really wants to fix our health care system and as an employer round the world, has had to deal with many systems and also knows the good and bad of each.  He really wants to get it right.  I know I didn’t touch on taxes, trade policy, etc.  That’s for another time.

There ya have it.  Its time for a nap.

This is too long to reply to so don’t try.  Just highlight some stuff, copy and paste it in a post if you want to address any of this.   Otherwise discuss it amongst yourselves.  I’ll be around.

 




miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 1:16pm

 Proclivities wrote:
He can afford it.
 
he could tour the border and sell tickets
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 1:10pm

 miamizsun wrote:

i say get roger waters on the job...

 
He can afford it.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 1:00pm

 Skydog wrote:
Ryan & McConnell have already said they will consider spending 12-15 billion for the wall
huge, yeah I know
 
i say get roger waters on the job...
Skydog

Skydog Avatar



Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 12:40pm

 Proclivities wrote:

"Support" which aspect(s)?  The ban on Muslims, building the ($3B) wall, or general Immigration Reform? 
 
Ryan & McConnell have already said they will consider spending 12-15 billion for the wall
huge, yeah I know


Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 12:30pm

 black321 wrote:

had to do with the 7 nation ban.
It was a Reuters poll

 
Okay - I did see that one earlier.  I came across one of the the "wall" polls somewhere else.  I guess the wording may not have asked opinions about how it was enacted; I guess those responses could be different.  It would be hard to tell how many "Trump opponents" would've supported it.  I suppose "7 Nation Ban" is more accurate in some ways, but it may soon be a song by Jack White.


black321

black321 Avatar

Location: An earth without maps
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 12:25pm

 Proclivities wrote:

"Support" which aspect(s)?  The ban on Muslims, building the ($3B) wall, or general Immigration Reform?

 
had to do with the 7 nation ban.
It was a Reuters poll
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 12:24pm

 black321 wrote:

What we need is honest politicians on both sides, willing to come to a consensus on a compromise that is best for the people and country. Less party over politics.  Any takers?
Back to immigration. I read a poll that said 49% support, 10% unsure, and 41% against...I wonder how many of the 41% are against just because its trump?  But I would think more would not approve of the way he enacted this change.

 
"Support" which aspect(s)?  The ban on Muslims, building the ($3B) wall, or general Immigration Reform? 

black321

black321 Avatar

Location: An earth without maps
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 12:19pm

 steeler wrote:

I am mostly thinking aloud on these labels and what meaning(s) should be attached to them, and are being attached to them.

Similarly, I am not really sure what we mean by "blowing up the system."  I think that is what some of NoEnz's questions were aimed at discovering. It probably means different things to different people, but a good chunk of folk undoubtedly like the sound of it — at least before we get down to particulars. 

I know some of this gets back to a desire to return to citizen-statesmen, instead of "career" politicians.  Not sure how we do that in this day and age.

We do have one power — to vote out, or try to vote out, those who are participating in a manner of governance with which we disagree.  The problem is that you can read now where people who are protesting various Trump actions and statements are demanding that their elected representatives in Congress do the same.  This is happening a lot with Trump nominations.  Similarly, the constituents of some of the so-called tea party congressmen have demand in the past that they shut down the government over some policy standoff. In many of these cases, we have met the enemy — it is us.    

 

 
What we need is honest politicians on both sides, willing to come to a consensus on a compromise that is best for the people and country. Less party over politics.  Any takers?
Back to immigration. I read a poll that said 49% support, 10% unsure, and 41% against...I wonder how many of the 41% are against just because its trump?  But I would think more would not approve of the way he enacted this change.
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Feb 1, 2017 - 11:48am

 black321 wrote:

OK, so there is no need to "blow up the system," right? What has the tea party and their inability to compromise, seek consensus...gotten us?  And now the democrats are taking a page from their book, grand standing, not showing up for meetings...

 
I am mostly thinking aloud on these labels and what meaning(s) should be attached to them, and are being attached to them.

Similarly, I am not really sure what we mean by "blowing up the system."  I think that is what some of NoEnz's questions were aimed at discovering. It probably means different things to different people, but a good chunk of folk undoubtedly like the sound of it — at least before we get down to particulars. 

I know some of this gets back to a desire to return to citizen-statesmen, instead of "career" politicians.  Not sure how we do that in this day and age.

We do have one power — to vote out, or try to vote out, those who are participating in a manner of governance with which we disagree.  The problem is that you can read now where people who are protesting various Trump actions and statements are demanding that their elected representatives in Congress do the same.  This is happening a lot with Trump nominations.  Similarly, the constituents of some of the so-called tea party congressmen have demanded in the past that they shut down the government over some policy standoff. In many of these cases, we have met the enemy — it is us.    

  

  

 




Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1161, 1162, 1163 ... 1350, 1351, 1352  Next