Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
timschochet

It’s time for Democrats and Republicans to get together...

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Flying Spaghetti Monster said:

Tim if you think for one minutes Republicans will work with Democrats then you are misguided, they define themselves by opposing democrats, that is their whole persona.

Times change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Times change. 

Not yet, and not in the foreseeable future.  The GOP have a good thing going for them , between Russia helping them, voter restrictions, and the gerrymandering it will be almost impossible for the GOP to ever lose control of all three houses.  

Share this post


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

Look my opinion is that Trump won by getting narrow majorities in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin. And that, with the possible exception of Ohio, it was a one time shot, not going to happen again. It’s just an opinion, take it for what it’s worth. 

 The main reason I included it in the OP was not to to “rub it in” On conservatives, but to make the point to Democrats: we don’t need to oppose Trump at every turn. We don’t need to behave like the Republicans did with Obama. It’s bad politics because Trump is going to lose anyhow. So let’s work with him when we can for the good of the country. 

I have said all along that Trump won’t run in 2020.  The GOP may be in the hands of a person that did not support Trump like Kasich. The Dem field is weak nationally with no Biden or Sanders. It’s no slam dunk.  

It’s the candidate that captures the middle and addresses issues like infrastructure that will win.  The winner of the Democratic primaries is going to have to move way left to win that side of the bracket which makes them vulnerable in the middle.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Joe Bryant said:

Do you mean more the "last mile problem"https://www.businessinsider.com/last-mile-delivery-shipping-explained

I'm not sure that's what people are talking about with infrastructure though is it? Aren't you saying more like safe bridges, well maintained roads, good signage, enough lanes to handle traffic and that kind of thing? 

Re the bolded it's really to cross the city. E.g one rail company, Pacific Union, takes it (the cargo on train waggons) to CHI. Part of the train moves on with Burlington Northern. They use different yards. Even 25 years ago when I dealt with this on a regular basis it took up to three days (when things went smoothly) to do this by rail. Normally a crosstown move by truck would be done instead (taking 3-5 hours).

"Last mile" is a separate problem

Edited by msommer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Flying Spaghetti Monster said:

Not yet, and not in the foreseeable future.  The GOP have a good thing going for them , between Russia helping them, voter restrictions, and the gerrymandering it will be almost impossible for the GOP to ever lose control of all three houses.  

Hmm, not sure your logic here holds.  Gerrymandering impacts the House which the Dems just took over.  Most are predicting a Dem to win the WH and they have a decent shot at the Senate.  It’s conceivable they could have all three come January of 2021.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Hmm, not sure your logic here holds.  Gerrymandering impacts the House which the Dems just took over.  Most are predicting a Dem to win the WH and they have a decent shot at the Senate.  It’s conceivable they could have all three come January of 2021.

Agreed, and with 4m additional teen potential voters - and another 4m 65+ potential voters expected to be dead come election day 2020 demographics are not looking kindly on old fashioned ideas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, timschochet said:

Look my opinion is that Trump won by getting narrow majorities in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin. And that, with the possible exception of Ohio, it was a one time shot, not going to happen again. It’s just an opinion, take it for what it’s worth. 

 The main reason I included it in the OP was not to to “rub it in” On conservatives, but to make the point to Democrats: we don’t need to oppose Trump at every turn. We don’t need to behave like the Republicans did with Obama. It’s bad politics because Trump is going to lose anyhow. So let’s work with him when we can for the good of the country. 

His point remains.  The generalization of "the midwest" is unproductive.  Of course there are going to be states that vote GOP no matter what, same with Dems.  But there's a lot more than "the midwest" left behind when you take all those into consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Commish said:

His point remains.  The generalization of "the midwest" is unproductive.  Of course there are going to be states that vote GOP no matter what, same with Dems.  But there's a lot more than "the midwest" left behind when you take all those into consideration.

We disagree but fine. It was not my intention here to disparage anyone. The point of this thread is let’s move on as a country to things we can hopefully agree on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem, of course, is cost. We’re talking trillions of dollars. Some say deficits don’t matter but at some point they must.

Share this post


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

The problem, of course, is cost. We’re talking trillions of dollars. Some say deficits don’t matter but at some point they must.

This is true and of course we squandered a ton of money on the tax cut. That’s not coming back so long as the Republicans share control, so you’re correct that this is going to cost a lot and make the debt much worse. 

But- you know that old conservative argument that tax cuts lead to economic growth and will therefore eventually pay for themselves? That argument almost never turns out to be true. But I think it IS true for investment in infrastructure. I really believe that this is one of 3 key investments we can make to our society that will ensure greater economic growth in the future, which is the only way, short of catastrophic budget cuts, to reduce the debt.

The other investments involves replacing our current energy methods, and changing our health care system, but those  will be much more difficult IMO to gain Republican support for. So let’s go for the easy one first. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump had his chance on infrastructure. He literally had both branches of Congress, the executive branch and a conservative leaning Supreme Court. He had his joke of “infrastructure week” twice and didn’t do anything, neither did Paul Ryan. Now we’re going to do something? Color me highly skeptical.

What’s the lesson? Elect competent politicians, not Donald Trump. What a setback. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

We disagree but fine. It was not my intention here to disparage anyone. The point of this thread is let’s move on as a country to things we can hopefully agree on. 

Right. Perhaps not intentionally. Which is why I stated it was a passive aggressive comment. 

Blaming the election of Trump on a small geographic area, when the map clearly shows he won states as far west as Utah and Arizona, and as far south as Florida and South Carolina, is not moving on as a country. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't even know why this is a thread. We've had 326 infrastructure weeks so far in this admin. We should be all good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, timschochet said:

...on an infrastructure deal. 

The wall fight is over. Trump lost. There’s not going to be another shutdown. Maybe there will be a border security for DACA deal, maybe Trump will declare a national emergency (he’ll just look foolish and lose in the courts if he tries) but there won’t be a wall. Time to move on. 

The Democrats can gloat and have a bunch of committees investigating Trump, but I don’t think this will go down well with the public. Barring a miracle, Trump is a one term lame duck. He was an experiment that some people in the Midwest wanted to try out; it turned out awful, they won’t do it again. The next President will be a Democrat, and 2019-20 will be largely devoted to finding out which one. 

That leaves us the question of what the federal government should do over the next couple of years. The one thing that polls consistently tell us is that everyone, conservative and liberal and independent alike, is sick of all the fighting. They want something accomplished, something big. Infrastructure seems like the obvious choice. 

 

I agree that there should be more partisan work - but Democrats are a one platform party right now - anti-Trump. Anything Trump is for, they're against. That's clear and simple. This Russia thing is a 2 year head hunt and still not over and people are sick of it. I'd say most people are sick of the games in DC.

Trump votes are happy with things right now - its been a great 2 years of economic growth and conservative moves. We like the direction - we could use less Trump mouth and tweets though and if another GOP candidate steps up? Sounds good to me.

#1 thing right now that they can fix is immigration - like that 2013 plan. Get it done. That 2013 plan with some tweaks could be a win win

Edited by Stealthycat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, KCitons said:

Right. Perhaps not intentionally. Which is why I stated it was a passive aggressive comment. 

Blaming the election of Trump on a small geographic area, when the map clearly shows he won states as far west as Utah and Arizona, and as far south as Florida and South Carolina, is not moving on as a country. 

 

I know that you’re smart enough to realize the difference between swing states and red states, so I’m not sure why you keep harping on this point. Of course Trump won every red state that the Republican candidate is supposed to win. He also won several purple states, most of them in the midwest, and these won him the election and was the point of my comment. There was no passive aggressive stuff- that’s nonsense. I was clear in what I wrote, and I can only apologize if you took it amiss. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Trump should probably do is start by asking for a new interstate highway running from Brownsville to San Ysidro and have it built with side sound panels to help protect the desert environment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I know that you’re smart enough to realize the difference between swing states and red states, so I’m not sure why you keep harping on this point. Of course Trump won every red state that the Republican candidate is supposed to win. He also won several purple states, most of them in the midwest, and these won him the election and was the point of my comment. There was no passive aggressive stuff- that’s nonsense. I was clear in what I wrote, and I can only apologize if you took it amiss. 

So you are blaming the purple states only. Not the red states?

This is where your logic fails. 

Share this post


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

This is true and of course we squandered a ton of money on the tax cut. That’s not coming back so long as the Republicans share control, so you’re correct that this is going to cost a lot and make the debt much worse. 

But- you know that old conservative argument that tax cuts lead to economic growth and will therefore eventually pay for themselves? That argument almost never turns out to be true. But I think it IS true for investment in infrastructure. I really believe that this is one of 3 key investments we can make to our society that will ensure greater economic growth in the future, which is the only way, short of catastrophic budget cuts, to reduce the debt.

The other investments involves replacing our current energy methods, and changing our health care system, but those  will be much more difficult IMO to gain Republican support for. So let’s go for the easy one first. 

Yes,  you're right. The debt makes me uneasy but it needs to be done.  I think you're right about it being an investment for economic growth.  

You mention this being "easy" but the fights on where the dollars go would be epic.  It's going to be really hard for the sides to come to an agreement.  It's possible though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, GoBirds said:

Your right, Obama was right and it's all the fault of the right. Beer 30, enjoy the rest of the weekend!:D

Legit question:  in retrospect, shouldn’t we have gone all in on large infrastructure projects backnin ‘09-‘10, when interest rates were zero (cheap money) and cheap labor was abundant.  Seems like we could have gotten a helluva deal - huge boost to the economy, much stronger and safer infrastructure, that would be paying off in spades now and in the future.  

Thoughts? 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

I agree that there should be more partisan work - but Democrats are a one platform party right now - anti-Trump. Anything Trump is for, they're against. That's clear and simple. This Russia thing is a 2 year head hunt and still not over and people are sick of it. I'd say most people are sick of the games in DC.

Trump votes are happy with things right now - its been a great 2 years of economic growth and conservative moves. We like the direction - we could use less Trump mouth and tweets though and if another GOP candidate steps up? Sounds good to me.

#1 thing right now that they can fix is immigration - like that 2013 plan. Get it done. That 2013 plan with some tweaks could be a win win

Funny how you law and order, strict boarder folks sure don’t seem to care when a bunch of white men are indicted for violating laws.  If you’re poor and brown and come into our country illegally to work low skill jobs to feed your kids you’re a criminal who needs to be deported, but if you’re a rich white man who worked for Trump and committed felonies, you’re tired of see those people charged with crimes.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Funny how you law and order, strict boarder folks sure don’t seem to care when a bunch of white men are indicted for violating laws.  If you’re poor and brown and come into our country illegally to work low skill jobs to feed your kids you’re a criminal who needs to be deported, but if you’re a rich white man who worked for Trump and committed felonies, you’re tired of see those people charged with crimes.  

Says the guy that literally pushed for and voted for a white criminal.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Criminal justice reform is an example of how it's possible for both sides to work together to get important things accomplished under Trump.  I don't think the new House needs to change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, tommyGunZ said:

Funny how you law and order, strict boarder folks sure don’t seem to care when a bunch of white men are indicted for violating laws.  If you’re poor and brown and come into our country illegally to work low skill jobs to feed your kids you’re a criminal who needs to be deported, but if you’re a rich white man who worked for Trump and committed felonies, you’re tired of see those people charged with crimes.  

Can you point to a specific post or site that doesn't care about people being indicted? I don't hang out in all the threads, so maybe I'm missing it.

I've been saying for decades that most politicians are corrupt. They rarely act alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, timschochet said:

Times change. 

Not when the President systematically lies and pumps propaganda (see this morning tweets).  Until he and his Republican enablers (because a whole swath a Republicans support him in this nonsense), Democrats should continue to tell them to pound sand.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez guys. The thread is titled "Time for Democrats and Republicans to get together on an infrastructure deal."

Not: " Time for dems and reps to get together and continue flinging poo at each other like monkeys just like we do in every single other thread."

Can we all just maybe talk about it instead of trying to win the talking point war?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Says the guy that literally pushed for and voted for a white criminal.   

Criminal says you? 

In TGZ's post it seems the defining factor on crminal is "been indicted/charged/plead guilty". 

What are your criterea?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Herb said:

Jeez guys. The thread is titled "Time for Democrats and Republicans to get together on an infrastructure deal."

Not: " Time for dems and reps to get together and continue flinging poo at each other like monkeys just like we do in every single other thread."

Can we all just maybe talk about it instead of trying to win the talking point war?

No - screw you guy!!

Agree - infrastructure improvements is something everybody should agree on - get it done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One significant difference between the two sides: Democrats want big government projects like the Tennessee Valley or the Hoover Dam. Republicans want money awarded to private companies and have them do the heavy lifting.

How should we resolve this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, timschochet said:

Times change. 

Democrats did say they will only negotiate if the government is open. The government is now open.

Trump did offer a few deals around DACA and wall funding. Some Democrats seem open to "enhanced fencing" vs. a wall.

What happens next? Do both sides actually make a deal? Compromise? Both sides must if there's a deal to be had.

Share this post


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

One significant difference between the two sides: Democrats want big government projects like the Tennessee Valley or the Hoover Dam. Republicans want money awarded to private companies and have them do the heavy lifting.

How should we resolve this? 

Probably the reason infrastructure deals will fail.

Neither side can agree on the actual terms other than the headlines (rebuilding America, jobs, boost to economy) sound great and easy to run on. Nobody disagrees with the headline, just the details.

Share this post


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

Legit question:  in retrospect, shouldn’t we have gone all in on large infrastructure projects backnin ‘09-‘10, when interest rates were zero (cheap money) and cheap labor was abundant.  Seems like we could have gotten a helluva deal - huge boost to the economy, much stronger and safer infrastructure, that would be paying off in spades now and in the future.  

Thoughts? 

Didn't Obama get a pretty big bill for infrastructure and then most of the money didn't go to that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tommyGunZ said:

Legit question:  in retrospect, shouldn’t we have gone all in on large infrastructure projects backnin ‘09-‘10, when interest rates were zero (cheap money) and cheap labor was abundant.  Seems like we could have gotten a helluva deal - huge boost to the economy, much stronger and safer infrastructure, that would be paying off in spades now and in the future.  

Thoughts? 

:tumbleweed:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Flying Spaghetti Monster said:

Tim if you think for one minutes Republicans will work with Democrats then you are misguided, they define themselves by opposing democrats, that is their whole persona.

Just more evidence that our government is too corrupt to be functional.  Both sides have a lot to be ashamed of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly do not want to see something like Boston’s “The Big Dig” to happen elsewhere.  This $2.5B project ended costing about $25B and we are still paying for the shoddy work. The new tunnel had water leaks everywhere and fallen concrete slabs had crushed a women driver to death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest your next “let’s work together message” not contain potshots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cubd8 said:

Didn't Obama get a pretty big bill for infrastructure and then most of the money didn't go to that?

No.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I certainly do not want to see something like Boston’s “The Big Dig” to happen elsewhere.  This $2.5B project ended costing about $25B and we are still paying for the shoddy work. The new tunnel had water leaks everywhere and fallen concrete slabs had crushed a women driver to death.

By most accounts, isnt the Big Dig a huge success?  Sure there were enormous cost issues, but in retrospect it was money well spent and Bostonians love the transformation undergrounding 93 had on the City.  My friends who live there, at least.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, tommyGunZ said:

No.  

Congress passed the Recovery Act to spend $831 billion between 2009 and 2019.  Surely that package included some money for infrastructure projects?

Edited by bradyfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, tommyGunZ said:

By most accounts, isnt the Big Dig a huge success?  Sure there were enormous cost issues, but in retrospect it was money well spent and Bostonians love the transformation undergrounding 93 had on the City.  My friends who live there, at least.  

Substandard materials should not have been used in a project that costed so much.

Edited by bradyfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, bradyfan said:

Congress passed the Recovery Act to spend $831 billion between 2009 and 2019.  Surely that package included some money for infrastructure projects?

Some.  Much of it was simply tax breaks.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bradyfan said:

Substandard materials should not have been used in a project that costed so much.

In a project that big, of course some mistakes will be made.  

Share this post


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

Some.  Much of it was simply tax breaks.  

What about the $305 Billion for the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

By most accounts, isnt the Big Dig a huge success?  Sure there were enormous cost issues, but in retrospect it was money well spent and Bostonians love the transformation undergrounding 93 had on the City.  My friends who live there, at least.  

A $2.5B project that ended up costing $25B with poor workmanship was a success? Wow.  So that’s what winning feels like. 

Share this post


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

:tumbleweed:

Oh, he still can't respond to your simple question @tommyGunZ I'm shocked 

Edited by Slapdash
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

A $2.5B project that ended up costing $25B with poor workmanship was a success? Wow.  So that’s what winning feels like. 

Maybe our expectation was too high?

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


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

Oh, he still can't respond to your simple question @tommyGunZ I'm shocked 

Maybe read above, like most of your posts his wasn’t accurate. 

So when you are just trying to stir the pot like this is that considered being excellent a Joe asked? Try not to act childish, no one is obligated to respond to all 20 questions from the regular ranters. 

Also as seen above he like you is known for not keeping it excellent. 

Edited by GoBirds

Share this post


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

Maybe read above, like most of your posts his wasn’t accurate. 

So when you are just trying to stir the pot like this is that considered being excellent a Joe asked? Try not to act childish, no one is obligated to respond to all 20 questions from the regular ranters. 

Have you answered his question?  Please send a link if so

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.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.