The [Current Year] General Political/Salma Hayek discussion thread, part 4!!!

[DoggyDaddy]

I really think it was the not giving a damn part of his personality that is largely responsible for his political success. People are sick of the whining unprincipled inaction that has dominated Washington.

With Trump, you at least know that he's going to do something.

Or at least try to do something (you know, if it weren't for those obstructionist Dems ). Whether it gets done or not, it does at least seem to provoke some change. Real change, not just "Hope and Change".

 

[mmpsteve]

With Trump, you at least know that he's going to do something.

And this is why I wish Ruth Bader all the happiness possible in her retirement. Trump will do something, and it's going to last a Loooong Time, and be Huuuuge. Much more important than the impotent House of Reps. Take care, all you Senators, it's about to get ugly, when Nancy P realizes she has no real power.

My point being, the judicial branch now holds the power, since the Congress can't get their **** together.

 

[Fargo]

Or at least try to do something (you know, if it weren't for those obstructionist Dems ). Whether it gets done or not, it does at least seem to provoke some change. Real change, not just "Hope and Change".

Trump claims to intend to do all sorts of things that he very likely cannot, the big difference between him and the establishment is that he will actually try. It beats pure lipservice I guess.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Trump claims to intend to do all sorts of things that he very likely cannot, the big difference between him and the establishment is that he will actually try. It beats pure lipservice I guess.

It does bring his allies and enemies to the forefront. Some may call it divisive, but it also could just be a call to get off the fence (to the Republicans). The gains in the Senate would seem to indicate that at least part of the electorate agreed.

 

[Fargo]

It does bring his allies and enemies to the forefront. Some may call it divisive, but it also could just be a call to get off the fence (to the Republicans). The gains in the Senate would seem to indicate that at least part of the electorate agreed.

These midterms were largely decided by which seats were up, rather than by a sea change. What they did demonstrate is a remarkable amount of voter interest, far more than I can recall in my lifetime.

 

[nonobaddog]

During which administration?

I was referring to the unprecedented obstruction of the United States Congress by the democraps during the last year and a half.

 

[BugI02]

Trump claims to intend to do all sorts of things that he very likely cannot, the big difference between him and the establishment is that he will actually try. It beats pure lipservice I guess.

D'accord!

 

[BugI02]

Yeah, it's weird, almost like a lot of Republican lawmakers either didn't want the wall, didn't want to fund the wall, or recognized it was political suicide to do so.

Calling that the Democrats fault, is disingenuous at best. Then again, actually accepting responsibility seems to have fallen out of favor with the Republicans almost as much as it has with the Democrats.

Foolishly idealistic, I know - but should that last thing really matter if you are deciding what's good for the country? Maybe the wall wasn't their favorite solution, well then come up with a better one. Dithering and sitting on your hands worrying about a place at the trough should be considered [strike]shameful[/strike] [strike]McCainism[/strike] being part of the problem

BTW accept your criticism on characterizing your position. Mea culpa

 

[Trigger Time]

Trump needs to go out of his way to provoke the dems for the next 2 years. Shouldnt be to hard. Make them as crazy as possible. Force them into drawing lines in the sand and cross them and either force them to back down or go forward with things each time. Overwhealm them. The American people need to see how crazy the Democrats really are and that their only interest is in inflicting payback for 2016. Force them to impeach him. They're gonna do it anyway so let's see how many impeachment hearings we can get them to have and keep that front and center for 2 years

 

[BugI02]

The way the game is played, when your guy is in trouble, you need the support of your party's representatives in congress. Several Republican senators called for sessions to recuse himself. The optics of "Eric Holdering" the president after it was revealed that sessions had a meeting with the Russian Ambassador aren't very good.

You can think of it as an issue of political capital. Obama and Holder had all kinds of political capital to spend on Holder protecting his president. All the democrats were united in supporting Obama. All the press was united in Supporting Obama. Sessions didn't have that. Republicans were split on blindly supporting Trump, especially early on. The press, of course, has been against Trump from day one. Sessions knows how the game is played. At the time there wasn't the political capital to spend. I don't think his decision was bad. And I certainly don't want the AG running interference for the President.

I think Sessions has done remarkably well considering what he has to work with. If Trump fired him for what happened at the beginning of Trump's presidency, that's kinda petty. He's **** on Sessions the whole time and from what we can tell Sessions was nothing but loyal to him.

I think Trump's criticism was valid, though. If Sessions had decided that he would recuse himself, he should have informed Trump. The President-elect had the right to appoint someone who could actually exercise all the powers and responsibilities of the position, not damaged goods

 

[nonobaddog]

Well, when you are trying to please everyone, accepting responsibility and taking a position kinda sucks. It's much easier to just convince the nonobaddogs of the world that it is those lousy "fill in the blanks" fault.

If you are trying to attack me personally - it takes a lot more than your grade school slurs to bother me.

 

[jbombelli]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cn...pended-by-white-house-sarah-sanders-announces


About time.

 

[BugI02]

Orange man bad!

TEOTWAWKI

We'll all be killed

 

[Trigger Time]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cn...pended-by-white-house-sarah-sanders-announces


About time.

Yeah when they announced that earlier I said the same exact thing

 

[nonobaddog]

 

[Fargo]

If you are trying to attack me personally - it takes a lot more than your grade school slurs to bother me.

Since there was no attack or slur in my post, I’m not certain your point.

 

[red_zr24x4]

DAYUM

 

[nonobaddog]

You sound just like Sarah Palin.
Can you see Mexico from your apartment?

You've got the Palinesque idioms down pat though.
You do realize she lost that election way back when? Hard habit to break?

Well, when you are trying to please everyone, accepting responsibility and taking a position kinda sucks. It's much easier to just convince the nonobaddogs of the world that it is those lousy "fill in the blanks" fault.

Since there was no attack or slur in my post, I’m not certain your point.

Yeah, my fault. I'm sorry. That was alpo doing the attempted slurs. I misread your post as a continuation of that.

 

[Alpo]

I have a problem with your ability to construct sentences without demonizing a significant portion of the citizens of this country, towit: "democraps". Not every democrat is a socialist or SJW or radical. Your coarse sieve of people who have decided that the republican party does not well represent them (an opinion held by more than a few INGO members) is a continuing insult that is largely ignored. Even if the position is widely held on INGO, most members have the courtesy to speak about the opposition in a less pejorative manner.

If one can't do this, they generally reap what they sow.

 

[1911ly]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cn...pended-by-white-house-sarah-sanders-announces


About time.