I'm stuck with him just like everybody else in this country. I'm not going to defend him but I'm also not going to have an aneurysm believing that he's the second coming of Hitler or something.
This whole narrative is sounding eerily like how the Democrats under Clinton back in the 90's were building camps to hold all of the Republicans who wouldnt give up their guns back in the 90's. Bill was so 'horrifying' to conservatives that some of them said he was going to allow UN troops to come in and herd us all up for execution. Yeah, I wish I was kidding...
Except, that's completely different because Bill Clinton never said he wanted to do those things. In this case, Trump just admitted that he both wanted to, and attempted to implement a plan to put people that are, in his eyes, rapists and drug-dealers into a cites in an attempt to hurt Democrats.
He shouldnt get a pass because saner minds prevented him from doing something like this. I wish people would stop trying to excuse it.
Who said I was excusing it? I'm just not that threatened by it. Sorry. He's like that nutjob uncle that everybody rolls their eyes at when he starts talking. I think it's becoming clear that holding the office of President of the USA isn't the same as being a king or an emperor. That, more than anything, is what I think is pissing him off. He believed that crap about being 'the most powerful man in the world' and is now finding out that it isn't really true.
No, Trump is definitely the most powerful man in the world. Spending your first 2 years in office with a House of Representatives, Senate, and Supreme Court controlled by your own party only makes you even stronger, and even now his party still controls the top court in the land as well as the stronger chamber of Congress. It's just that possessing power doesn't mean you know how to use it.
No, Trump is definitely the most powerful man in the world. Spending your first 2 years in office with a House of Representatives, Senate, and Supreme Court controlled by your own party only makes you even stronger, and even now his party still controls the top court in the land as well as the stronger chamber of Congress. It's just that possessing power doesn't mean you know how to use it.
Exactly. It's not the total power to do anything you want like a lot of people think. I'd argue that Xi Jinping is more powerful than Trump just due to their very different form of government. Even when the Republicans controlled everything Trump wasn't able to steamroll through Congress like he wanted. The Dems were more monolithic in their opposition than the Republicans were in their support.
A lot of it is probably just a factor of the kind of policies that Trump is trying to implement. Building the wall is much more difficult to do than changing immigration policies, so most of Trump's accomplishments relating to the construction of the wall is taking credit for walls that already existed years before his presidency. Trying to reach an agreement with North Korea that they would actually respect is a tall order, so it's not surprising that nothing came of it. Releasing illegal immigrants into sanctuary cities is not something ICE would accept, so it's not surprising they didn't go along with it.
If Trump was trying to land some free throws instead of going for three-pointers two towns over, his progress would have been much different.
A lot of it is probably just a factor of the kind of policies that Trump is trying to implement. Building the wall is much more difficult to do than changing immigration policies, so most of Trump's accomplishments relating to the construction of the wall is taking credit for walls that already existed years before his presidency. Trying to reach an agreement with North Korea that they would actually respect is a tall order, so it's not surprising that nothing came of it. Releasing illegal immigrants into sanctuary cities is not something ICE would accept, so it's not surprising they didn't go along with it.
If Trump was trying to land some free throws instead of going for three-pointers two towns over, his progress would have been much different.
Subtly is not in Trump's repertoire. He's that guy in the chess club that quits when his three move checkmate is foiled...
Does Littlefinger's "chaos is a ladder" speech pop into anyone's head here?? We have gone from the story being reported, to the White House issuing an emphatic denial, to Trump admitting it, to the SAME GUY who denied the idea was even being discussed 24 hours ago now saying that Democrats should help implement this "plan". For the 100th time, how do you negotiate, have a discussion, or even remotely take seriously a group of people who take 3 different positions on ONE issue in a single day??
I'm stuck with him just like everybody else in this country. I'm not going to defend him but I'm also not going to have an aneurysm believing that he's the second coming of Hitler or something.
This whole narrative is sounding eerily like how the Democrats under Clinton back in the 90's were building camps to hold all of the Republicans who wouldnt give up their guns back in the 90's. Bill was so 'horrifying' to conservatives that some of them said he was going to allow UN troops to come in and herd us all up for execution. Yeah, I wish I was kidding...
Except, that's completely different because Bill Clinton never said he wanted to do those things. In this case, Trump just admitted that he both wanted to, and attempted to implement a plan to put people that are, in his eyes, rapists and drug-dealers into a cites in an attempt to hurt Democrats.
He shouldnt get a pass because saner minds prevented him from doing something like this. I wish people would stop trying to excuse it.
Who said I was excusing it? I'm just not that threatened by it. Sorry. He's like that nutjob uncle that everybody rolls their eyes at when he starts talking. I think it's becoming clear that holding the office of President of the USA isn't the same as being a king or an emperor. That, more than anything, is what I think is pissing him off. He believed that crap about being 'the most powerful man in the world' and is now finding out that it isn't really true.
@Balrog99 I think it's a mistake to think that Trump is all talk and has had no real impact. Even on very controversial issues there have been real attempts made with severe effects on individuals - like banning travel for muslims, closing borders to force migrants to enter illegally or the use of family separation. The way he's provided or not provided emergency support has also affected millions.
His major problem has been in getting policies through Congress, but away from there he has made extremely significant changes through executive action. I think some of those you may be in favor of, at least in principle, like rolling-back various environmental protection rules. The way that's been done though seems, to me at least, very dubious.
There are lots of concerns, but let's take an example like the impact of fracking. That's a technology that the Obama administration promoted, partly for climate change reasons and partly to make the US self-sufficient in energy. Both of those are good policy goals and it's unsurprising that some compromises with safety would result from attempting to achieve them. However, under that administration the framework still existed to identify problems and try to resolve them if necessary. That process could be seen for instance in the 2016 EPA report outlining the potential for contamination of water supplies from fracking. Since then, however, the EPA has been neutered and environmental legislation removed - so that future cases like this one in Dimock Pennsylvania are unlikely to be settled.
In 20 years time I expect people will think it was bizarre that companies currently have so much freedom to pollute local communities, but that wouldn't be much consolation to those people affected by the pollution in the meantime. Even if you think that sort of pollution is justifiable in the wider context, is it really appropriate that people affected receive no compensation from either the government or the companies causing the pollution?
Even by his standards it's nakedly Islamophobic and part of his general attack on, well, essentially anyone not part of his base. I can't help feeling there's something ironic about Trump working so hard to inflame worries about the damage that 'others' could do to the US, given the damage his own actions are doing.
He wants to indirectly use people he believes to be dangerous against people who don't agree with him. He wants to intentionally put Americans in harm's way. He is trying to get people he took an oath to protect murdered, robbed, and/or raped(his view,not mine). He does realize that even in sanctuary cities there are Trump supporters, doesn't he? He seems to think every single Democrat automatically agrees with every other Democrat in every single issue. There are democrats and others who don't want sanctuary cities, seriously, no really they're out there. But even if all dems agreed on this, it's no excuse for purposely endangering them.
It started with a COMPLETELY bad faith attack from Dan Crenshaw (the Representative who gained so much traction because Pete Davidson of SNL made fun of his eyepatch). If you watch the whole clip, she is CLEARLY talking about how all Muslims were branded as guilty because of the 9/11 attacks. As someone who remembers the Bush years, this is 100% true. I distinctly remember the very next day friends of mine at the time calling Muslims working in the cafeteria at college "ragheads" and "sand n***ers" and saying they were probably going to poison our food. Again, this is a COMPLETELY bad faith attack that (just like her comments about AIPAC) only stands to prove what Omar is talking about. And Dan Crenshaw is garbage for pushing this as far as he has. And the fact that he lost one of his eyes serving overseas doesn't change that fact. But he is absolutely counting on his military "super-citizen" status to always be his shield. Oh, and guess what?? Look at how Mr. Patriot acted when confronted with an ACTUAL issue about 9/11 recently:
But just for the record to all the right-wingers on social media pretending to be up in arms about Omar, I'll remind everyone about Donald Trump's record on the subject. As the even was unfolding, he bragged that his building was now the tallest in New York. He applied and received $150,000 dollars in relief money meant for small businesses, even though his wasn't affected. He said he helped clear rubble (never happened). And this isn't the first time he has lied about Muslims in regards to the attack, as he was the #1 person spreading the urban legend that thousands of Muslims were seen celebrating on the streets of New Jersey as the towers fell. Trump is a piece of shit. Crenshaw is a piece of shit. Their attacks on Omar may work, but only because our political and media landscape rewards this kind of naked cynicism nearly every time.
The only reason to do this is to circumvent congress to attack Iran forces.
I think the attacks on Omar and the “never forget” message ties into this. Best way for a president to get his approval numbers up is to go to war and Russia won’t send troops to Iran like they did Syria and Venezuela.
Republicans have been playing this card for 18 years, so I don't see why they'd stop now. The media always plays along, and (more importantly) still pretends they have more credibility on national security and "patriotism". By the way, this is totally off-topic, but since he's part of the conversation, just take a peek at how utterly absurd the gerrymandering of Crenshaw's district is. In what universe is this a legitimate way to section off the map??:
If you start from the bottom, it goes north, then west, then north again, then in a very narrow path east, before landing on large swath at the end. The beginning and end of his district are nowhere NEAR each other.
Republicans have been playing this card for 18 years, so I don't see why they'd stop now. The media always plays along, and (more importantly) still pretends they have more credibility on national security and "patriotism". By the way, this is totally off-topic, but since he's part of the conversation, just take a peek at how utterly absurd the gerrymandering of Crenshaw's district is. In what universe is this a legitimate way to section off the map??:
If you start from the bottom, it goes north, then west, then north again, then in a very narrow path east, before landing on large swath at the end. The beginning and end of his district are nowhere NEAR each other.
Looks like the demarcation of a river flood plain. Maybe his district follows along an old creek bed or something...
Lest you think the Democratic Party is above these shenanigans. This is what I've been saying all along. Neither party wants to so anything about gerrymandering because they both do it and have been since the 1800's.
We've known China has been investing in facial recognition technology for surveillance, but there's an eerie new detail: the government is now using AI that's designed to identify ethnic Uighurs, a minority group common in Xinjiang. This isn't an accidental effect, either, like American AI being weaker at identifying darker-skinned faces; this AI was designed for the specific purpose of tracking Uighurs. Uighurs have more Eurasian features than East Asian, so they look distinct from ethnic Han Chinese, and this AI is exploiting that.
I hate to think what the government plans to use this information for. Not to conjure up the ghosts of the past, but the Chinese government is already locking up Uighurs in concentration camps for reeducation purposes, and this kind of technology would let them round up Uighurs wholesale.
Imagine the U.S. government purchasing software that could track the activities of every black person in America--and was designed strictly for that one reason. The Chinese government is doing just that.
Good little article as a rebuttal to 'the Republicans do it more' bs. Truth is, the Republicans were just the last ones to do it after the Tea Party surge right at the last Census (2010). I read somewhere that new technology has made it easier to draw the lines in your favor as well (sophisticated computer algorithms apparently). If the Dems keep their momentum through the 2020 election we'll see how much they do to fix gerrymandering. My guess is that they'll do nothing and the Repubs will start whining about it shortly after the new districts are drawn...
That would be pretty disturbing. I'm hoping it won't come to that, because eventually we need at least one party or coalition to outlaw the practice while they're in office. You can't ban the practice until after you win the election, and actually gain the voting power necessary to make it illegal.
To make getting rid of gerrymandering even more daunting, the states themselves decide how they perform the distracting process. There would need to be an overriding edict from the Feds to make sure that all states use the same system. That's likely to be fought out in the courts. I dont think this is even as easy as one party with control of the executive and legislative branches being able to get rid of it. Both parties at the national as well as state levels will need to agree to abolish it I'm afraid...
To make getting rid of gerrymandering even more daunting, the states themselves decide how they perform the distracting process. There would need to be an overriding edict from the Feds to make sure that all states use the same system. That's likely to be fought out in the courts. I dont think this is even as easy as one party with control of the executive and legislative branches being able to get rid of it. Both parties at the national as well as state levels will need to agree to abolish it I'm afraid...
Regardless it's un-American and we should not just throw our arms up and "oh well it's too tough".
Here's Dan Crenshaws district in Tx, this look reasonable to any1 reasonable.
Finland General Election - the biggest party only had 17.7% of the vote, and the two runners ups had ca. 17% as well
Government parties took a drubbing in Finland’s parliamentary election on Sunday as Prime Minister Juha Sipilä’s Centre Party polled its lowest general election result ever with just 13.8 percent of the vote to lose 13 seats with all votes counted, while hard-right populist Finns Party came second with 39 seats, just one behind the Social Democrats' 40.
The Social Democratic Party newspaper Demokraatti today writes that it was a desire for change that won in these elections. This desire was channeled in two directions, with victories for the political left and for the Greens, but also for the populist Finns Party.
Demokraatti goes on to say that if it is assumed in Finland that "major parties" poll at least 20 percent of the vote, then there are only mid-sized parties left in the country. Success in this election is being measured above all on two scales - a comparison with results in the previous election, and how results stack up against the other parties. In both respects, writes Demokraatti, the SDP was the most successful party.
This paper says that the election results are so close and so exceptional that government formation talks will be complex. It points out that in a somewhat similar situation in the spring of 2011, negotiations on forming a new government took until Midsummer. Now, that is not really possible because of Finland's EU presidency, which begins on 1 July.
To make getting rid of gerrymandering even more daunting, the states themselves decide how they perform the distracting process. There would need to be an overriding edict from the Feds to make sure that all states use the same system. That's likely to be fought out in the courts. I dont think this is even as easy as one party with control of the executive and legislative branches being able to get rid of it. Both parties at the national as well as state levels will need to agree to abolish it I'm afraid...
Regardless it's un-American and we should not just throw our arms up and "oh well it's too tough".
Here's Dan Crenshaws district in Tx, this look reasonable to any1 reasonable.
Well truthfully, gerrymandering is as American as apple pie.
If you really want to get rid of it, I'll say again, we need to get rid of our two-party system. That more than anything is why this b.s. works. Throw a few more parties into the mix and gerrymandering would be next to impossible.
Essentially, Crenshaw's district SPECIFICALLY runs around areas making $18,000-$50,000 and almost exclusively runs through areas where it's $60,000-$200,000. You''ll notice an area near the north of the map in red (the lowest mean income) that somehow magically isn't in his district, yet their wealthier neighbors a couple miles away are. I wouldn't be shocked to find out if this district was gerrymandered to the point of having specific PROPERTIES included.
And just for shits and giggles, let's look at Ilhan Omar's district:
Huh, isn't that interesting. No shenanigans whatsoever. It's just Minneapolis and it's suburbs. Crenshaw's district resembles a snake winding it's way through Harris County Texas, with the only consistency being how much money people make along the route, and Omar's is damn near a vertical rectangle. So, you know how Reps are always identified on TV with a (D) or (R) after their name?? New proposal: in addition to that, let's show a map of their district beforehand as well.
Essentially, Crenshaw's district SPECIFICALLY runs around areas making $18,000-$50,000 and almost exclusively runs through areas where it's $60,000-$100,000. You''ll notice an area near the north of the map in red (the lowest mean income) that somehow magically isn't in his district, yet their wealthier neighbors a couple miles away are. I wouldn't be shocked to find out if this district was gerrymandered to the point of having specific PROPERTIES included.
And just for shits and giggles, let's look at Ilhan Omar's district:
Huh, isn't that interesting. No shenanigans whatsoever. It's just Minneapolis and it's suburbs. Crenshaw's district resembles a snake winding it's way through Harris County Texas, with the only consistency being how much money people make along the route, and Omar's is damn near a vertical rectangle. So, you know how Reps are always identified on TV with a (D) or (R) after their name?? New proposal: in addition to that, let's show a map of their district beforehand as well.
I mentioned the fact that the demographic algorithms have gotten more sophisticated a few posts back. So yeah, they likely can micro-manage the districts down to individual properties or at least down to individual sub-divisions. Yay, technology!
Not politics, but breaking news. Notre Dame cathedral in Paris is burning. By the looks of things, they're going to lose the entire central structure. If they're lucky they might be able to save the towers, but the spire has already fallen.
Comments
Who said I was excusing it? I'm just not that threatened by it. Sorry. He's like that nutjob uncle that everybody rolls their eyes at when he starts talking. I think it's becoming clear that holding the office of President of the USA isn't the same as being a king or an emperor. That, more than anything, is what I think is pissing him off. He believed that crap about being 'the most powerful man in the world' and is now finding out that it isn't really true.
Exactly. It's not the total power to do anything you want like a lot of people think. I'd argue that Xi Jinping is more powerful than Trump just due to their very different form of government. Even when the Republicans controlled everything Trump wasn't able to steamroll through Congress like he wanted. The Dems were more monolithic in their opposition than the Republicans were in their support.
If Trump was trying to land some free throws instead of going for three-pointers two towns over, his progress would have been much different.
Subtly is not in Trump's repertoire. He's that guy in the chess club that quits when his three move checkmate is foiled...
Or Republicans have no ideas other than tax cuts and taking away Obamacare with no replacement.
Does Littlefinger's "chaos is a ladder" speech pop into anyone's head here?? We have gone from the story being reported, to the White House issuing an emphatic denial, to Trump admitting it, to the SAME GUY who denied the idea was even being discussed 24 hours ago now saying that Democrats should help implement this "plan". For the 100th time, how do you negotiate, have a discussion, or even remotely take seriously a group of people who take 3 different positions on ONE issue in a single day??
@Balrog99 I think it's a mistake to think that Trump is all talk and has had no real impact. Even on very controversial issues there have been real attempts made with severe effects on individuals - like banning travel for muslims, closing borders to force migrants to enter illegally or the use of family separation. The way he's provided or not provided emergency support has also affected millions.
His major problem has been in getting policies through Congress, but away from there he has made extremely significant changes through executive action. I think some of those you may be in favor of, at least in principle, like rolling-back various environmental protection rules. The way that's been done though seems, to me at least, very dubious.
There are lots of concerns, but let's take an example like the impact of fracking. That's a technology that the Obama administration promoted, partly for climate change reasons and partly to make the US self-sufficient in energy. Both of those are good policy goals and it's unsurprising that some compromises with safety would result from attempting to achieve them. However, under that administration the framework still existed to identify problems and try to resolve them if necessary. That process could be seen for instance in the 2016 EPA report outlining the potential for contamination of water supplies from fracking. Since then, however, the EPA has been neutered and environmental legislation removed - so that future cases like this one in Dimock Pennsylvania are unlikely to be settled.
In 20 years time I expect people will think it was bizarre that companies currently have so much freedom to pollute local communities, but that wouldn't be much consolation to those people affected by the pollution in the meantime. Even if you think that sort of pollution is justifiable in the wider context, is it really appropriate that people affected receive no compensation from either the government or the companies causing the pollution?
Even by his standards it's nakedly Islamophobic and part of his general attack on, well, essentially anyone not part of his base. I can't help feeling there's something ironic about Trump working so hard to inflame worries about the damage that 'others' could do to the US, given the damage his own actions are doing.
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-texas-republican-ilhan-omar-fdny-firefighter-attack-20190411-qs7sbccinbd4zhirps2d7g6wpm-story.html
But just for the record to all the right-wingers on social media pretending to be up in arms about Omar, I'll remind everyone about Donald Trump's record on the subject. As the even was unfolding, he bragged that his building was now the tallest in New York. He applied and received $150,000 dollars in relief money meant for small businesses, even though his wasn't affected. He said he helped clear rubble (never happened). And this isn't the first time he has lied about Muslims in regards to the attack, as he was the #1 person spreading the urban legend that thousands of Muslims were seen celebrating on the streets of New Jersey as the towers fell. Trump is a piece of shit. Crenshaw is a piece of shit. Their attacks on Omar may work, but only because our political and media landscape rewards this kind of naked cynicism nearly every time.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/designating-iran-s-revolutionary-guard-terror-group-could-jeopardize-u-n992356
The only reason to do this is to circumvent congress to attack Iran forces.
I think the attacks on Omar and the “never forget” message ties into this. Best way for a president to get his approval numbers up is to go to war and Russia won’t send troops to Iran like they did Syria and Venezuela.
If you start from the bottom, it goes north, then west, then north again, then in a very narrow path east, before landing on large swath at the end. The beginning and end of his district are nowhere NEAR each other.
Looks like the demarcation of a river flood plain. Maybe his district follows along an old creek bed or something...
Lest you think the Democratic Party is above these shenanigans. This is what I've been saying all along. Neither party wants to so anything about gerrymandering because they both do it and have been since the 1800's.
I hate to think what the government plans to use this information for. Not to conjure up the ghosts of the past, but the Chinese government is already locking up Uighurs in concentration camps for reeducation purposes, and this kind of technology would let them round up Uighurs wholesale.
Imagine the U.S. government purchasing software that could track the activities of every black person in America--and was designed strictly for that one reason. The Chinese government is doing just that.
While both parties do it, Republicans are far guiltier of picking their voters than Democrats are.
Gerrymanders, Part 1: Busting the both-sides-do-it myth
(Princeton)
http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/30/gerrymanders-part-1-busting-the-both-sides-do-it-myth/
All voters should be against politicians picking their voters.
Good little article as a rebuttal to 'the Republicans do it more' bs. Truth is, the Republicans were just the last ones to do it after the Tea Party surge right at the last Census (2010). I read somewhere that new technology has made it easier to draw the lines in your favor as well (sophisticated computer algorithms apparently). If the Dems keep their momentum through the 2020 election we'll see how much they do to fix gerrymandering. My guess is that they'll do nothing and the Repubs will start whining about it shortly after the new districts are drawn...
Regardless it's un-American and we should not just throw our arms up and "oh well it's too tough".
Here's Dan Crenshaws district in Tx, this look reasonable to any1 reasonable.
Government parties took a drubbing in Finland’s parliamentary election on Sunday as Prime Minister Juha Sipilä’s Centre Party polled its lowest general election result ever with just 13.8 percent of the vote to lose 13 seats with all votes counted, while hard-right populist Finns Party came second with 39 seats, just one behind the Social Democrats' 40.
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/sdp_takes_top_spot_populists_rally_heavy_losses_for_pms_centre_in_finnish_election/10739392
No more big parties
The Social Democratic Party newspaper Demokraatti today writes that it was a desire for change that won in these elections. This desire was channeled in two directions, with victories for the political left and for the Greens, but also for the populist Finns Party.
Demokraatti goes on to say that if it is assumed in Finland that "major parties" poll at least 20 percent of the vote, then there are only mid-sized parties left in the country. Success in this election is being measured above all on two scales - a comparison with results in the previous election, and how results stack up against the other parties. In both respects, writes Demokraatti, the SDP was the most successful party.
This paper says that the election results are so close and so exceptional that government formation talks will be complex. It points out that in a somewhat similar situation in the spring of 2011, negotiations on forming a new government took until Midsummer. Now, that is not really possible because of Finland's EU presidency, which begins on 1 July.
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/mondays_papers_tough_govt_formation_talks_expected_more_women_mps_nationalism_here_to_stay/10740388
Well truthfully, gerrymandering is as American as apple pie.
If you really want to get rid of it, I'll say again, we need to get rid of our two-party system. That more than anything is why this b.s. works. Throw a few more parties into the mix and gerrymandering would be next to impossible.
Essentially, Crenshaw's district SPECIFICALLY runs around areas making $18,000-$50,000 and almost exclusively runs through areas where it's $60,000-$200,000. You''ll notice an area near the north of the map in red (the lowest mean income) that somehow magically isn't in his district, yet their wealthier neighbors a couple miles away are. I wouldn't be shocked to find out if this district was gerrymandered to the point of having specific PROPERTIES included.
And just for shits and giggles, let's look at Ilhan Omar's district:
Huh, isn't that interesting. No shenanigans whatsoever. It's just Minneapolis and it's suburbs. Crenshaw's district resembles a snake winding it's way through Harris County Texas, with the only consistency being how much money people make along the route, and Omar's is damn near a vertical rectangle. So, you know how Reps are always identified on TV with a (D) or (R) after their name?? New proposal: in addition to that, let's show a map of their district beforehand as well.
I mentioned the fact that the demographic algorithms have gotten more sophisticated a few posts back. So yeah, they likely can micro-manage the districts down to individual properties or at least down to individual sub-divisions. Yay, technology!