U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)

[Infanteer]

My guess is any other Republican would have won Alabama.

Political lesson on toxic candidates - the same was probably likely in 2016, with any other Democrat other than Hillary Clinton likely winning the election (well, maybe any other Democrat except Sanders, who's probably too radical for US tastes).  Lesson, when your enemy is running a toxic candidate, don't run your own toxic candidate.

Political lesson on decency - believably, the US voting public does have limits on what it will accept in a candidate (although apparently a homophobic, anti-Islamic guy with a predilection for teenagers still got half the vote).  Lesson, there is still hope?

Political lesson on the dilemma - the GOP was in the horns of one.  If they won, they'd have to contend with the "weaponization" of Moore as a toxic politician - he'd likely drag other Republicans down.  So there is probably a sigh of relief in the party today.  However, they lost, and they lost that razor thin majority in the Senate, which is now 48 to 48, with 2 additional anti-Trump (Corker and Flake), lame duck Republicans sitting until 2018.  So there is probably a sigh of desperation in the party today.  Lesson, this is what happens when you the party doesn't directly control who runs for the nomination - think of all those times in Canada where a party leader has got bad press for interfering with a riding's selection of candidate...it's because they're avoiding the dilemma.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

My sense of US politics is that both the GOP and Dems are in trouble and both refuse to deal with it, Bernie and Trump are part of the result of that. Really both parties are in need of a split, likely the centre moderates would eventually form one party out of that and 2 extreme parties on either end of the spectrum. If that does not happen, I expect more independents, winning, not because of money, but that they don't represent either party.

 

[Infanteer]

My sense of US politics is that both the GOP and Dems are in trouble and both refuse to deal with it, Bernie and Trump are part of the result of that. Really both parties are in need of a split, likely the centre moderates would eventually form one party out of that and 2 extreme parties on either end of the spectrum. If that does not happen, I expect more independents, winning, not because of money, but that they don't represent either party.

That's what my take is as well.  Centre moderates who wait for election day are scratching there heads with the choices, as the far left/right elements of the spectrum set the scene during the party national conventions.  Also, politics in the US spends far more time on social/moral issues than Canada - when I go to the polls, I think about my tax money, how its spent, and why its being spent that way.  In the US, abortion and marriage rights seem to drive a disproportionate part of the political dialogue due to the stronger role of religion there - I've spoken with more than one American who voted for Trump for the simple reason that they believed he would legislate against abortion.  Pretty Faustian bargain, but that's where their political compass is at....

 

[mariomike]

Jones appears to be the new Senator (Democrat) for Alabama. 

Voter demographics.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Has the National Guard been called in yet to deal with all the riots after a republican lost?

 

[a_majoor]

There is certainly a lot of toxic material in the American body politic, and if this article is any indication, the lancing of the boil is going to be very ugly indeed:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/12/coming_attractions_how_the_biggest_political_scandal_in_history_will_play_out_in_2018.html

December 14, 2017
Coming attractions: How the biggest political scandal in history will play out in 2018
By Thomas Lifson

A lot of frustration has been expressed – on these pages and elsewhere – over the slow pace of progress in unraveling the Deep State coup against Trump.  But "the process of uncovering the worst political scandal in American history," as I called it a couple of days ago, needs to be done the right way, or else it will founder under the waves of abuse that will pour from the media and political branches of the establishment.  Not only must legal niceties be observed, but the rollout of information must be undertaken with a strategy in mind.  Each step builds on the previous and addresses the probable response.

Fully quoted blogs are posted in the Archive.
https://milnet.ca/forums/threads/127062/post-1513180/topicseen.html#new

 

[FJAG]

Mmmmm - "Deep State coup against Trump"  :Tin-Foil-Hat:

op:

 

[a_majoor]

With the unravelling of the rule of law over many years, and deepening and hardening divides (especially ones driven by "identity politics") the concept of a new Civil War has become increasingly common (although still mostly lots of talk, thank goodness). Like many other people, I suspect any true breakdown of order and "civil war" in the United States (or Canada, for that matter) will be a multi-sided affair more like Yugoslavia or Syria than the relatively neat devision between "North" and "South" from the last Civil War (although students of history should remember that places like Kansas and Kentucky were scenes of vicious guerrilla warfare during this period).

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/12/what_might_civil_war_be_like.html

December 20, 2017
What Might Civil War Be Like?
By E.M. Cadwaladr
The thought of Civil War has been in the minds of many people lately, on both sides of the political and cultural divide. This is not a thing to be wished for, though no one should kid themselves into believing it’s impossible either. Let us take a sober look at what such a conflict might entail.

To begin with, it would not look like the first American Civil War, which was essentially a war between two regions of the country with different economic interests. The divide created two separate countries, both initially contiguous, intact, and relatively homogeneous. The lines of demarcation now are only somewhat regional, and tend to correspond to differences between urban and rural populations, as well as differences of race and class. A second American Civil War would be much more similar to the Spanish Civil War, with the leftists dominating the cities and conservatives controlling the countryside. Conflicts of this nature, with enemies mixed geographically, are a formula for spontaneous mass bloodletting. India-Pakistan during the 1947 partition comes to mind as another modern example. Given an absence of legitimate government and the friction of proximity, ordinary people can be moved to settle grievances by killing one another without the need for governments to egg them on.

Article here: https://army.ca/forums/threads/127080.0.html

 

[angus555]

Alright folks,

I've been tasked in another thread to debate people in an anti-Trump manner.
Please, anyone that thinks Trump is the best thing since sliced bread, chime in and tell me why.
By the end of the "debate" I'll probably agree with you on some points, disagree on others, go on a few tangents to be corrected by moderators, ask a few questions which the reply would something like "use the search function dummy", but a general rehash of every talking point under the sun will occur ad nauseum.

Any takers?

I'll probably end up agreeing with you right now so I can go about my business.  :cheers:

 

[kkwd]

Alright folks,

I've been tasked in another thread to debate people in an anti-Trump manner.
Please, anyone that thinks Trump is the best thing since sliced bread, chime in and tell me why.
By the end of the "debate" I'll probably agree with you on some points, disagree on others, go on a few tangents to be corrected by moderators, ask a few questions which the reply would something like "use the search function dummy", but a general rehash of every talking point under the sun will occur ad nauseum.

Any takers?

I'll probably end up agreeing with you right now so I can go about my business.  :cheers:

The greatest thing since sliced bread? Not a chance. He is crude rude and ignorant and vindictive and petty. But he does understand one thing, government doesn't create or own wealth, the people do. He gets that the government needs to create a climate where business can thrive with minimal interference. That doesn't mean certain regulations are not required for the safe or ethical conduct of business. Obama didn't understand the people are the ones who create the wealth by his "you didn't build that" statement. Yes, Trump is a real piece of work but consumer confidence is high, the stock market is booming, new tax regulations are in force, regulations are now common sense, the GDP is rising and unemployment is dropping. Do you need a touchy feely kind of president or one that gets the job done? Yes, trump is a big old meanie but who cares, now, where is my pay.

 

[angus555]

The greatest thing since sliced bread? Not a chance. He is crude rude and ignorant and vindictive and petty. But he does understand one thing, government doesn't create or own wealth, the people do. He gets that the government needs to create a climate where business can thrive with minimal interference. That doesn't mean certain regulations are not required for the safe or ethical conduct of business. Obama didn't understand the people are the ones who create the wealth by his "you didn't build that" statement. Yes, Trump is a real piece of work but consumer confidence is high, the stock market is booming, new tax regulations are in force, regulations are now common sense, the GDP is rising and unemployment is dropping. Do you need a touchy feely kind of president or one that gets the job done? Yes, trump is a big old meanie but who cares, now, where is my pay.

I agree with you that the people create wealth, but also that a good government and monetary policy also ensures it. I'm thinking Zimbabwe as an extreme example. The economy has been improving since 2009 mostly due to the influx of easy money from the world's central banks. The stock market rallied due to a hope for lower corporate taxes and deregulation. So that has all happened, now what? Economic cycles happen, they usually don't have much to do with who's in the executive office, unless of course the government becomes reckless or extreme, I'm thinking Zimbabwe again.

I don't think Trump will do anything to damage the US economy, but I think whatever he does in terms of trade or strategic diplomacy might damage it for the next president. If a war doesn't start during his presidency.

All bets are off after that.

 

[QV]

When I saw the footage of President Trump chasing after the hat that blew off the marines head in the wind my immediate thought was what a mean ignorant a-hole to do something like that. 

 

[Kirkhill]

My sense of US politics is that both the GOP and Dems are in trouble and both refuse to deal with it, Bernie and Trump are part of the result of that. Really both parties are in need of a split, likely the centre moderates would eventually form one party out of that and 2 extreme parties on either end of the spectrum. If that does not happen, I expect more independents, winning, not because of money, but that they don't represent either party.

Thumbs up on that.

And to it I would add the observation that 94% of the population of the Capital, and similar numbers in surrounding counties, voted for one party.  I don't care that they all voted Democrat.  I would be equally concerned if they all voted Republican.

That just plain isn't healthy.

 

[mariomike]

When I saw the footage of President Trump chasing after the hat that blew off the marines head in the wind my immediate thought was what a mean ignorant a-hole to do something like that.

Too bad a foot boo-boo kept him out of the Draft,

"One aspect of the conflict, by the way, that I will never ever countenance is that we drafted the lowest income level of America and the highest income level found a doctor that would say they had a bone spur. That is wrong. That is wrong. If we are going to ask every American to serve, every American should serve."
Senator John McCain during an interview about the Draft during the Vietnam War.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Alright folks,

I've been tasked in another thread to debate people in an anti-Trump manner.
Please, anyone that thinks Trump is the best thing since sliced bread, chime in and tell me why.

Straw man argument. If you cycle back through the 1609 posts in this thread I don't think you'll find anyone suggesting Trump is the best thing since sliced bread.
I'm paraphrasing a bit but I think you will find a number of us that think the US political system is broken, septic and dangerous.  Trump getting elected has done a few things like expose the Clinton empire, sneaky back door behavior by the government, expose the growing left-wing radicalism (see below link).  Trump's changed things up.  Trump isn;t afraid to call a slob like Rosie Odonell a slob or call an asshole like Kim Jong-un an asshole.

'm thinking Zimbabwe as an extreme example.

Not only an extreme example but pretty ridiculous to compare the USA to Zimbabwe with really anything if you ask me.



https://www.dailywire.com/news/25029/alleged-isis-linked-terrorist-liked-antifa-groups-ryan-saavedra

A Facebook page that appears to belong to the alleged ISIS-inspired Islamic terrorist that California law enforcement officials arrested this week shows that he followed several groups affiliated with the radical leftist Antifa movement.

Too bad a foot boo-boo kept him out of the Draft

That's the war the Vietnamese started and left an estimated 1 million American soldiers and 2 million US citizens dead right?

 

[angus555]

Straw man argument. If you cycle back through the 1609 posts in this thread I don't think you'll find anyone suggesting Trump is the best thing since sliced bread.

Not only an extreme example but pretty ridiculous to compare the USA to Zimbabwe with really anything if you ask me.

Yes I am being facetious about the "best thing since sliced bread". The best thing since pre-peeled oranges would have been more appropriate.

And I'm not comparing the U.S to Zimbabwe. I'm using Zimbabwe to illustrate my point how I don't think nowadays it's appropriate to attribute the swings of economic cycles to a governing administration, unless of course they take extreme measures and screw up an otherwise stable monetary policy, as in the case of Zimbabwe.
Although every politician in power will take credit for economic upswings, and blame the downswings on the last guy. Most of the time they have SFA to do with it.

I later mentioned that I didn't think Trump would damage the economy directly, because he is luckily not the brains behind a central bank.

EDIT:
I'm fascinated by the many ways Mugabe destroyed that country. It's pretty tragic.
https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/02/economist-explains-20

 

[TheHead]

When I saw the footage of President Trump chasing after the hat that blew off the marines head in the wind my immediate thought was what a mean ignorant a-hole to do something like that.

I guess that gives him a pass for when he attacked and insulted John McCain for getting captured in Vietnam.  Which is a joke itself since the coward dodged the draft 

 

[Rifleman62]

And Clinton.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/nyregion/18blumenthal.html?pagewanted=all

And Sen (D)  Blumenthal who claimed to be a Vietnam Vet.

There was one problem: Mr. Blumenthal, never served in Vietnam. He obtained at least five military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and took repeated steps that enabled him to avoid going to war, according to records.

 

[TheHead]

Great,  we're not talking about Clinton.  Every time someone criticizes Trump we don't need to start the whataboutism.  If Bill Clinton was President, dodged the draft and insulted a war hero like John McCain my comment would still stand no matter if he was Republican or Democrat. 

 

[mariomike]

And Clinton.

And Sen (D)  Blumenthal

This is US Politics 2017. Bill Clinton was in office for only the first 20 days of this millennium.

Senator Blumenthal served in United States Marine Corps Reserve from 1970 to 1976.
He attained the rank of sergeant and received an honorable discharge at the end of his enlistment.

White House Chief of Staff John Kelly put it this way,

"In the America I grew up in, every male was a veteran; my dad, my uncles and all the people on the block. So, with that kind of background and the draft, you assumed you were going to go into the service when your time came."

"So, back in my neighborhood in Boston, a working-class neighborhood, when you got your draft notice, you went down, and you took your draft physical."

The ( U.S. ) Draft ran continuously from 1940 to 1973. Americans didn't get to pick and choose if they wanted to serve.

During the Vietnam era, if you were unable to dodge the Draft, the only other way out was desertion. There was no VR option if you didn't like it.

"According to the U.S. government, as many as 1 million people dodged the draft during the Vietnam War."
"Approximately 50,000 American servicemen deserted during the Vietnam War."
https://web.archive.org/web/20090815084854/http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=24009b4dc8fe8dadcfa96c37bce9dea6