Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
gussy

The Trump Years- Every day something more shocking than the last!

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, [scooter] said:

No way. He might float the idea for fun (to create chaos and to watch libs get mad) but he's savvy enough not to actually try it.

(Not to mention the fact that the date of Election Day was already set by Congress and couldn't be changed via Executive Order.)

Amount of money to be spent on the wall was set by Congress. Didn't stop an EO to try and spend more. Questions on the census were set by the SC. Apparently might not stop an EO to change it.  Just because anyone with respect for the Constitution or an IQ above 80  would know it can't be done doesn't mean Trump won't try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

>>Trump supporter: I define socialism as when you bring down your own country, your own race, because he’s not black.<<

- Folks like Supermike like to ask what is white nationalism. That’s white nationalism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Most important takeaway from that video: socialism remains a bad word. 

Now, only some extreme Trump supporters like this woman is going to assert that Biden is a socialist. Most people on both the left and right know that’s not so. But most people on both the left and right know that Bernie Sanders IS a socialist and many suspect that Liz Warren is close to being one as well. 

Point being: I don’t think either one can win a national election. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Trump supporters, when you ask why we have a low opinion of Trump supporters, see above.  There are countless videos just like it where it's clear that these people will listen to no one but Trump.  And they'll only listen to Trump's latest version of "facts."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

Most important takeaway from that video: socialism remains a bad word. 

Now, only some extreme Trump supporters like this woman is going to assert that Biden is a socialist. Most people on both the left and right know that’s not so. But most people on both the left and right know that Bernie Sanders IS a socialist and many suspect that Liz Warren is close to being one as well. 

Point being: I don’t think either one can win a national election. 

She's not extreme in the least.  She's a perfect example of a typical Trump supporter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, badmojo1006 said:

>>Over the last couple of years, there were up to 100 employees working at the OSTP, which saw a high level of investment from the former President. It is unclear when or even if the roles will be filled again, and by whom.<<

Established In 1976.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, badmojo1006 said:

"I've never been more proud to be an American" said nobody recently with any honesty or integrity.  What's happening at virtually every science based agency is beyond reprehensible as we, as a nation, continue to face down immense water, energy, food, climate, and health challenges. Our complete lack of leadership here is embarrassing. Really and truly pathetic and indefensible.  Short term thinking is the purview of amateurs and and this kind of ####### decision making will inevitably turn and bite our collective ####.  No thanks.  It's time to right the ship and retake our place as world leaders. Play time is over.

Edited by kwille
  • Like 3
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, kwille said:

"I've never been more proud to be an American" said nobody recently with any honesty or integrity.  What's happening at virtually every science based agency is beyond reprehensible as we, as a nation, continue to face down immense water, energy, food, climate, and health challenges. Our complete lack of leadership here is embarrassing. Really and truly pathetic and indefensible.  Short term thinking is the purview of amateurs and and this kind of ####### decision making will inevitably turn and bite our collective ####.  No thanks.  It's time to right the ship and retake our place as world leaders. Play time is over.

Fortunately, Congress has increased funding for NIH the last 4 years. Trump has proposed cuts, which Congress has rejected the last 2 years and will likely reject again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kwille said:

"I've never been more proud to be an American" said nobody recently with any honesty or integrity.  What's happening at virtually every science based agency is beyond reprehensible as we, as a nation, continue to face down immense water, energy, food, climate, and health challenges. Our complete lack of leadership here is embarrassing. Really and truly pathetic and indefensible.  Short term thinking is the purview of amateurs and and this kind of ####### decision making will inevitably turn and bite our collective ####.  No thanks.  It's time to right the ship and retake our place as world leaders. Play time is over.

Not sure what you’re all worked up about?  Prez says America has the best air and the best water.  All good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, zoonation said:

Not sure what you’re all worked up about?  Prez says America has the best air and the best water.  All good. 

"Well, the United States right now has among the cleanest climates there are based on all statistics. And it’s even getting better because I agree with that we want the best water, the cleanest water. It’s crystal clean, has to be crystal clean clear.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been studying technology and innovation and recently visited Dublin, where all the big tech companies have headquarters because of their low corporate tax rates.

While we once had a sizable lead in science and technology (you know, where the jobs of the future will come from), it's not like the rest of the world is sitting around and waiting while we invest in coal. We're going to face increasing competition from China (and Asia in general), India and the EU as they invest more and more in education, clean energy and infrastructure. It was already going to be hard enough and we're going backwards.

We all know that protectionism might bring some short-term gain at the expense of long-term competitiveness, but that effect is greatly magnified as technology accelerates the rate of change and first movers have a greater and greater advantage. While another year or two might not be fatal, 5 or 6 probably would be. I liken it to the hygiene hypothesis, where excessive cleanliness in children results in vulnerability to much more serious diseases later in life. It's completely naive and delusional to think that we'll remain competitive in perpetuity or that the industries of yesteryear can be recreated or protected without serious deleterious effects.

Combine that with the fact that second and third world countries are rapidly catching up and it's inevitable that the dominance of the white race is eventually going to be threatened. While I applaud this and it's obviously better for the world overall, the influence of right-wing extremism around the globe is only going to become more pronounced and probably violent. I think blaming this effect on racism is a dangerous oversimplification because it's more of a reaction to competition, where the people taking your jobs are the enemy (whatever race they might be) and it becomes easy and natural to vilify them as resources become scarce.

If anyone wants to talk me out of this I'm all ears. I'm graduating next year and am being forced to contemplate leaving the country for the kind of job I want (technology and change management). I'd rather not have to and a year or two ago this never would've crossed my mind, but it's seeming more and more likely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bananafish said:

I've been studying technology and innovation and recently visited Dublin, where all the big tech companies have headquarters because of their low corporate tax rates.

While we once had a sizable lead in science and technology (you know, where the jobs of the future will come from), it's not like the rest of the world is sitting around and waiting while we invest in coal. We're going to face increasing competition from China (and Asia in general), India and the EU as they invest more and more in education, clean energy and infrastructure. It was already going to be hard enough and we're going backwards.

We all know that protectionism might bring some short-term gain at the expense of long-term competitiveness, but that effect is greatly magnified as technology accelerates the rate of change and first movers have a greater and greater advantage. While another year or two might not be fatal, 5 or 6 probably would be. I liken it to the hygiene hypothesis, where excessive cleanliness in children results in vulnerability to much more serious diseases later in life. It's completely naive and delusional to think that we'll remain competitive in perpetuity or that the industries of yesteryear can be recreated or protected without serious deleterious effects.

Combine that with the fact that second and third world countries are rapidly catching up and it's inevitable that the dominance of the white race is eventually going to be threatened. While I applaud this and it's obviously better for the world overall, the influence of right-wing extremism around the globe is only going to become more pronounced and probably violent. I think blaming this effect on racism is a dangerous oversimplification because it's more of a reaction to competition, where the people taking your jobs are the enemy (whatever race they might be) and it becomes easy and natural to vilify them as resources become scarce.

If anyone wants to talk me out of this I'm all ears. I'm graduating next year and am being forced to contemplate leaving the country for the kind of job I want (technology and change management). I'd rather not have to and a year or two ago this never would've crossed my mind, but it's seeming more and more likely.

You think you need to leave the country for a good job in technology?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/6/2019 at 10:03 AM, James Daulton said:

Trump supporters, when you ask why we have a low opinion of Trump supporters, see above.  There are countless videos just like it where it's clear that these people will listen to no one but Trump.  And they'll only listen to Trump's latest version of "facts."

Whoah, whoah - they could be counted.  We may not know the number, but they could be.

Not by any of the people in the videos, but they could be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like half the people in the bar are chanting "Trump sucks!"

And since everyone is emphasizing the word "Trump", the whole thing ends up sounding like "Trump Trump!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jobber said:

Trump going ape*** on Twitter now.

🤣

Looks like he is breaking up with fox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

"The economy served as the only issue where a majority said they approve of Trump's performance, according to the poll. Fifty-one percent of respondents said they approved of the way he has handled economic issues since entering the White House. Forty-two percent said they disapprove of his handling of the economy. 

Meanwhile, a majority of respondents said they disapprove of how Trump has handled immigration, health care, issues of special concern to women, abortion, climate change, gun violence and foreign policy. Forty-nine percent said they disapprove of the way he's handled taxes, while 42 percent said they approve. In addition, 65 percent of respondents said Trump has acted in an "unpresidential" way since taking office. Twenty-eight percent said he has acted in a "fitting and proper" way."

 

 

  • Thinking 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jobber said:

Trump going ape*** on Twitter now.

Fox: Please put Hannity so the old dude doesn't haven't a stroke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Joe Summer said:

Sounds like half the people in the bar are chanting "Trump sucks!"

And since everyone is emphasizing the word "Trump", the whole thing ends up sounding like "Trump Trump!"

Umm no, that's not what I get when listening to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ren hoek said:

poll-trumps-approval-rating-hits-highest-point-of-presidency

I have to say, not pressing Trump on his crimes via the Constitution allows Trump to engage in triumphalism and encourages apathy. So it is what it begets.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/6/2019 at 11:19 AM, badmojo1006 said:

Ok, I'll ask the obvious:    What did the Science Division actually do?   Does anyone really believe that this group -- which btw was only 9 people based on articles I've read -- was contributing anything meaningful?

I'm nowhere near a Trump fan, like as far on the opposite end of the spectrum as possible.  But I don't see this specific situation as anti-science.  I see it as anti-bloat.   The "Science Division" was created in 1976.   Wasn't any science work happening before then?   How could anything possibly get done without a White House "division" to direct activity?  (insert sarcasm)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Alex P Keaton said:

Ok, I'll ask the obvious:    What did the Science Division actually do?   Does anyone really believe that this group -- which btw was only 9 people based on articles I've read -- was contributing anything meaningful?

I'm nowhere near a Trump fan, like as far on the opposite end of the spectrum as possible.  But I don't see this specific situation as anti-science.  I see it as anti-bloat.   The "Science Division" was created in 1976.   Wasn't any science work happening before then?   How could anything possibly get done without a White House "division" to direct activity?  (insert sarcasm)

did you actually read the article you quoted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the polls- Trump’s approval ratings have never been consistent. 47% is certainly the highest I’ve seen. 39% was the lowest. But generally it’s been between 43-46% and I figure it will stay there throughout the rest of his term. 

What IS consistent are his disapproval numbers: starting about two months into his Presidency, these have been at 50-52%. Those numbers do not change; they are, according to pollsters, the most consistent numbers in the history of American polls. And they are problematic for the President because he needs to strip away around 5% of that to have a decent chance at re-election. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, joffer said:

did you actually read the article you quoted?

Yes.  Why?  The article doesn't really provide any evidence that the "division" was necessary or accomplished anything.

Again, I'm not pro-Trump nor am I anti-science.   I'm anti-bureaucracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Speaking of science, Trump is supposed to deliver a speech on the environment today. 

"We have the best environment, beautiful environment. We should thank President Trump for such a great environment." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 2Squirrels1Nut said:

"We have the best environment, beautiful environment. We should thank President Trump for such a great environment." 

To his credit, Trump does not refer to himself in the third person. He will say “We should thank me”. I appreciate that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Regarding the polls- Trump’s approval ratings have never been consistent. 47% is certainly the highest I’ve seen. 39% was the lowest. But generally it’s been between 43-46% and I figure it will stay there throughout the rest of his term. 

What IS consistent are his disapproval numbers: starting about two months into his Presidency, these have been at 50-52%. Those numbers do not change; they are, according to pollsters, the most consistent numbers in the history of American polls. And they are problematic for the President because he needs to strip away around 5% of that to have a decent chance at re-election. 

Vlad to the rescue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Alex P Keaton said:

Yes.  Why?  The article doesn't really provide any evidence that the "division" was necessary or accomplished anything.

Again, I'm not pro-Trump nor am I anti-science.   I'm anti-bureaucracy.

you asked what the division did.  The article stated it’s mission.

you said the group was 9 people.  The article states it has been as high as 100 over the last few years.

thats why

  • Thanks 1
  • Thinking 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Regarding the polls- Trump’s approval ratings have never been consistent. 47% is certainly the highest I’ve seen. 39% was the lowest. But generally it’s been between 43-46% and I figure it will stay there throughout the rest of his term. 

What IS consistent are his disapproval numbers: starting about two months into his Presidency, these have been at 50-52%. Those numbers do not change; they are, according to pollsters, the most consistent numbers in the history of American polls. And they are problematic for the President because he needs to strip away around 5% of that to have a decent chance at re-election. 

I don't think the highlighted sentence makes sense with the rest of your post. Did you mean to say they are consistent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Regarding the polls- Trump’s approval ratings have never been consistent. 47% is certainly the highest I’ve seen. 39% was the lowest. But generally it’s been between 43-46% and I figure it will stay there throughout the rest of his term. 

What IS consistent are his disapproval numbers: starting about two months into his Presidency, these have been at 50-52%. Those numbers do not change; they are, according to pollsters, the most consistent numbers in the history of American polls. And they are problematic for the President because he needs to strip away around 5% of that to have a decent chance at re-election. 

His aggregate 538 numbers really haven’t moved in over a year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, timschochet said:

To his credit, Trump does not refer to himself in the third person. He will say “We should thank me”. I appreciate that. 

My sarcasm meter is on the fritz but he does all the time.  This is from Saturday. 

Quote

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump

FollowingFollowing @realDonaldTrump

Our Country is the envy of the World. Thank you, Mr. President!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.