An outsider is one who never held office by my definition. Do you wish to use another?You now think Trump an insider in DC? Asking for a friend?
I very much appreciate your candor. Thank you for this response.To you, perhaps
In 2016 we needed an outsider because everyone else just had minor riffs on the same old stale prescriptions
Having found an outsider who proved he could do the jobs I most wanted done, especially if congress would have his back, I was satisfied
Thus, I consider the push to replace what works with an outsider of dubious and unproven potential to be counter productive from my viewpoint. The LAST thing I want is another George W Bush
I'm waiting to see if anyone else will unabashedly embrace America First in its entirety, rather than just in a pastel, last minute and pandering way when their consultants think it might be useful
One of the things I liked best about Trump was I didn't feel he would hesitate to take an unpopular position out of some political gamesmanship or cost/benefit analysis. He was very much his own man in many areas. The flip side of that is he made many mistakes because no one has a high depth of knowledge in all areas. His instincts were good but those around him influenced him to doubt those instincts, and once you lose that inner guide I'm sure the competing pull of all the power centers and the grasping climbers that occupy them becomes cacophony
I do not see the need to replace what worked admirably the first time around, rather I see the need to re-elect him to finish the job he started and get him enough support in congress to make it stick. Our problems cannot be solved by a little tweaking around the edges, they need a wholesale change in focus - and it would be better to have a clear idea of what is realistically achievable and then prioritize that list
That's about as honestly and thoughtfully as it is possible to answer your concerns and keep it succinct. I tire easily of those who approach every discussion from the starting point of their own animus for Trump which they believe everyone should share. I am aware that a complaint of the obverse could be lodged against me. When such complainers have endured another 6 3/4 years of that state of affairs, then maybe we can talk - though I fully believe Ron will have flamed out long before then
Caveat: Because I take an adversary seriously one time should not be interpreted to mean that will always be the case
I don’t wish, I do define it differently. It is someone not a part of the permanent DC apparatus, hence the outsider designation. An outsider is attacked by the establishment of both parties.An outsider is one who never held office by my definition. Do you wish to use another?
Pretty subjective definition. I like mine better because it is very objective. Care to make yours moreso?I don’t wish, I do define it differently. It is someone not a part of the permanent DC apparatus, hence the outsider designation. An outsider is attacked by the establishment of both parties.
An outsider is one who never held office by my definition. Do you wish to use another?
Can a person be a temporary insider and still be an outsider? Can someone schmooze with insiders and still be an outsider?I don’t wish, I do define it differently. It is someone not a part of the permanent DC apparatus, hence the outsider designation. An outsider is attacked by the establishment of both parties.
Depends on how much stock the activist investor holds and how many other votes they can get.Even if a company straddles the middle, staying out of politics and just tries to provide good products and services, they are still targets.
Unless a company stays or goes back "private", their hands are tied to a certain degree.
Activist investors move on a company to "bring them around" to the activists way of thinking.
IF a company is "public", their options are limited, when activist investors show up at the door.
**** schmoozers.A political outsider is someone who is not supported by the political establishment. I don't have a problem with Trumpers calling him an outsider so long as he doesn’t schmooze with insiders.
Can a person be a temporary insider and still be an outsider? Can someone schmooze with insiders and still be an outsider?
I'm only replying so I can use the word "schmooze". It's a good word. It's fun to say. Schmoooooooze. I don't think I've ever schmoozed... I've probably schmutzed though. I don't know what that is, but it sounds like something I might do.A political outsider is someone who is not supported by the political establishment. I don't have a problem with Trumpers calling him an outsider so long as he doesn’t schmooze with insiders.
Can a person be a temporary insider and still be an outsider? Can someone schmooze with insiders and still be an outsider?
They can have Milley after we kick his *** to the curbSome people want spit and polish over grit and substance.
Maybe extend the one for outsider art?Pretty subjective definition. I like mine better because it is very objective. Care to make yours moreso?
When you schmooze don't be a schmuck.I'm only replying so I can use the word "schmooze". It's a good word. It's fun to say. Schmoooooooze. I don't think I've ever schmoozed... I've probably schmutzed though. I don't know what that is, but it sounds like something I might do.
I did a quick search, I think your friend is stiil G2G and enjoy that ruby red brew with a gentle hop bitterness & a sweet malt finish.Smithwick's Red Ale didn't hook up with anybody weird this week, right? Asking for a friend who enjoys a ruby red brew with a gentle hop bitterness & a sweet malt finish.
You have a bright future describing the taste of wine in overly self-aggrandizing publicationsSmithwick's Red Ale didn't hook up with anybody weird this week, right? Asking for a friend who enjoys a ruby red brew with a gentle hop bitterness & a sweet malt finish.