Jumbo Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Michael Smerconish (a columnist/radio/tv guy--has a CNN sunday show) moderate republican, usually comes off as an independent, uses the line "I'm only a butter knife away from Trump Land at family dinners." So he often notes how it behooves him to work at expanding his bubble. I think it's really interesting for so many of us that have powerful anti-trump emotion to reconcile it with loved ones who like him. And I regularly reflect on how the large slice of people who are actual trump lovers felt they were enduring 8 years of horror and now an opposing large slice is getting a deluxe dose of that same feeling but it's only been a week...therein lies the opportunity for...wait for it...yes tailgate, I'm going to use the "E" word...ready?...empathy 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 6 hours ago, Destino said: I can't help but notice the oddly specific language. Why does it specify terrorist attacks on American soil? Because those are the only ones that the Trump Ban can possibly Save Us From? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: Yes, you should have voted for Hillary. 1. She was the best candidate on the ballot. 2. Donald Trump. I wouldn't say she was the best candidate on the ballot certainly not even top five and maybe even in the bottom five. And Trump as number 2???? I don't think anyone in this thread would agree with that. Edited January 30, 2017 by nonniey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 minute ago, nonniey said: I wouldn't say she was the best candidate on the ballot certainly not even top five and maybe even in the bottom five. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 So one of the criticisms State has found is that the 'temporarily' ban of 90 days includes language about requirements the government for the country of origin must meet that, in reality, some can't meet (like documentation standards) or just wont meet (because they don't particularly desire their people to come here for any reason, and they think screw us) which can potentially turn into a permanent ban. Thats fun. Biggest victims being highlighted are the Iranians, especially considering the Iranian people seem to actually like us it's their government that hates us, but this basically targets their people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: Which state is that? Very limited in your choices. Really don't like Johnson but I'd put him above Hillary. (On that ballot I'd put three of the VP candidates above any of those at the top of the ticket). Edited January 30, 2017 by nonniey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 4 minutes ago, Jumbo said: Michael Smerconish (a columnist/radio/tv guy--has a CNN sunday show) moderate republican, usually comes off as an independent, uses the line "I'm only a butter knife away from Trump Land at family dinners." So he often notes how it behooves him to work at expanding his bubble. I think it's really interesting for so many of us that have powerful anti-trump emotion to reconcile it with loved ones who like him. And I regularly reflect on how the large slice of people who are actual trump lovers felt they were enduring 8 years of horror and now an opposing large slice is getting a deluxe dose of that same feeling but it's only been a week...therein lies the opportunity for...wait for it...yes tailgate, I'm going to use the "E" word...ready?...empathy It's tough to have empathy when we watch people say things like "I voted for Trump. I don't think he will really repeal Obamacare because we need it." Or "I hate Obama because unemployment is up and the stock market is down compared to when he came into office and we are not better off." I get that emotions are a part of the problem, but a fact based conversation is needed to elicit true empathy. I empathize with those that have lost jobs to automation and to jobs being moved to Texas or overseas. Those are things that really have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, nonniey said: Which state is that? Very limited in your choices. Really don't like Johnson but I'd put him above Hillary. (of course I'd put three of the VP candidates above any of those at the top of the ticket. Massachusetts. On no planet is Johnson a better candidate than Clinton (with maybe the exception of the planet that Johnson lives on). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 41 minutes ago, Llevron said: This is not a lie. Im born raised and grown Washington DC. Furthest south I had ever lived was Norfolk. Then my niece started going to BAMA and I went to visit for a week. Lasted 3 days. Its not the same place outside of our little circle, honestly. Since then I have been telling all my buddies (who want so badly to get out of MD) that the world really isnt what they think it is. Well, any metro area with a large population (500k+) will give you a similar vibe socially (for the most part). Boston, San Fran, and DC are my favorite cities in the US. The issue I think is hurting the Dem Party is the whole "coastal elite" thing (I had never heard that term before this election cycle). Outside of pockets in the midwest, the GOP has been DOMINANT anywhere not on either coast. Chicago pretty much carries Illinois, the union vote in upper midwest carried MI/WI/MN, and Pitt/Philly carried PA. Trump won 33 states! Clinton won 6 states that don't touch the ocean :NV, CO, NM, IL, MN, VT. The rest were on the coast. The failure of the Dems to maintain the map Obama won cost them the election (DUH!). But why did they fail to maintain that map? I don't think the Dems strategy in 2020 will incorporate any lesson from 2016, as is evidenced by the massive infighting for party control. Fortunately for them, they will be running off a Trump presidency, so as long as the body is still warm they should win (I imagine voter turnout will be MASSIVE and that will hugely favor the Dems; I don't think I am breaking any news there). Pardon my rant, I am thinking I will start a Real Talk Politics thread. I think we need a cathartic, what could be good for the country, no Trump anything allowed thread.... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: Massachusetts. On no planet is Johnson a better candidate than Clinton (with maybe the exception of the planet that Johnson lives on). Well you are not going to get me to strongly defend Johnson as he is an idiot and for years on this board I was the lone voice calling him that, but at least he didn't have that corruption perception Hillary has (I will stick by three of the VPs being better than any of top of the ticket choices though). 56 minutes ago, Popeman38 said: ........... Fortunately for them, they will be running off a Trump presidency, so as long as the body is still warm they should win (I imagine voter turnout will be MASSIVE and that will hugely favor the Dems; I don't think I am breaking any news there). Didn't we just have that prediction this past November. I have never been so wrong in my life so I'd hesitate to make such a prediction again. Are you sure you want to? Edited January 30, 2017 by nonniey 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 4 minutes ago, Popeman38 said: I don't think the Dems strategy in 2020 will incorporate any lesson from 2016, as is evidenced by the massive infighting for party control. Fortunately for them, they will be running off a Trump presidency, so as long as the body is still warm they should win (I imagine voter turnout will be MASSIVE and that will hugely favor the Dems; I don't think I am breaking any news there). You will be proven completely wrong. A lot of Democrats understand that part of the problem, the one I think you are getting at, is that there was no message of jobs taken directly to people outside of the cities that HRC campaigned in. Infighting in Jan. of 2017 is irrelevant to 2020 elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 4 hours ago, tshile said: by the way, i imagine people in the intelligence community spend a lot of time and effort collecting information, arguing in back rooms, coming up with ideas just to scrap them and start over, to try to craft policy that actually works to at least attempt to protect the rest of us (even if it ultimately ends up flawed in some way) then this guy comes in and does this over the weekend. didn't bother to ask for their opinions, didn't even tell them he was doing it. i can only imagine how furious those people are. Assume most of those people knew all they needed to know, after the response to Russian hacking (if not before). We ARE talking about people who make a living by looking at information, and forming conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, Hersh said: You will be proven completely wrong. A lot of Democrats understand that part of the problem, the one I think you are getting at, is that there was no message of jobs taken directly to people outside of the cities that HRC campaigned in. Infighting in Jan. of 2017 is irrelevant to 2020 elections. I hope I am. And you are right, infighting in Jan 2017 won't be relevant in Nov 2020, except in that the leadership that emerges from the infighting must be inclusive. I fear that won't happen. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) I find the whole "coastal elite" thing to be just about to be completely made up anyway. Does it exist with some folks? Sure, but no more than the folks from "real America" having the same disdain and stereotypes for people who live on the coasts. It's just another anecdotal quip that plays well to folks who are angry and looking for someone to blame, but looking in the wrong direction. Also, the death of either political party as a force is highly exaggerated. This always happens when there is a change of power and the party picks up the pieces and figures out how to get back in the game. I remember specifically listening to right wing radio the day after Obama was re-elected and they sounded just as whiny and in disbelief as Democrats did on election night 2017. They did self-reflecting for about 48 hours until it was right back to Obama-derangement syndrome. Edited January 30, 2017 by NoCalMike 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 I don't see any booze, how is a man supposed to form sound legal reasoning w/o booze? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 6 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: I find the whole "coastal elite" thing to be just about to be completely made up anyway. Does it exist with some folks? Sure, but no more than the folks from "real America" having the same disdain and stereotypes for people who live on the coasts. It's just another anecdotal quip that plays well to folks who are angry and looking for someone to blame, but looking in the wrong direction. Also, the death of either political party as a force is highly exaggerated. This always happens when there is a change of power and the party picks up the pieces and figures out how to get back in the game. I remember specifically listening to right wing radio the day after Obama was re-elected and they sounded just as whiny and in disbelief as Democrats did on election night 2017. They did self-reflecting for about 48 hours until it was right back to Obama-derangement syndrome. When I use "coastal elite" I am not speaking directly about the people that live on the coasts. I am talking about the Dem Party catering to large blocs of wealthy donors that happen to live on the coasts. Just look at where Clinton did her fundraising. It wasn't in Des Moines or Charleston, WV. It was in LA, the Hamptons, NYC, DC, Hollywood, Martha's Vineyard. She was almost exclusively focused on the coasts. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCB Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 10 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: I find the whole "coastal elite" thing to be just about to be completely made up anyway. Does it exist with some folks? Sure, but no more than the folks from "real America" having the same disdain and stereotypes for people who live on the coasts. It's just another anecdotal quip that plays well to folks who are angry and looking for someone to blame, but looking in the wrong direction. Completely agreed here, and some version of this same epithet/bad explanation has been a regular feature of American politics since at least the late 19th century. It's a surefire galvanizer, along with its parent "big government," and its cousins "pointy-headed liberals" and "Washington insiders." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, Popeman38 said: When I use "coastal elite" I am not speaking directly about the people that live on the coasts. I am talking about the Dem Party catering to large blocs of wealthy donors that happen to live on the coasts. Just look at where Clinton did her fundraising. It wasn't in Des Moines or Charleston, WV. It was in LA, the Hamptons, NYC, DC, Hollywood, Martha's Vineyard. She was almost exclusively focused on the coasts. Of course, not the Russian money................. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 9 minutes ago, twa said: I don't see any booze, how is a man supposed to form sound legal reasoning w/o booze? Lots of mixer though and there's bound to be a duty free shop close by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 BOOM! Hail. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Well, Marla Maples was born in the United States, so Trump wouldn't have two wives. I'm sure this announcement will garner applause, I'm taking a break from all things political for a bit and that means political threads in the Tailgate, and FB too. After the last couple of weeks, my blood pressure can't take it. I wish us all well, and when I feel better I'll be back. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 14 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said: Well, Marla Maples was born in the United States, so Trump wouldn't have two wives. I'm sure this announcement will garner applause, I'm taking a break from all things political for a bit and that means political threads in the Tailgate, and FB too. After the last couple of weeks, my blood pressure can't take it. I wish us all well, and when I feel better I'll be back. Sometimes we all have to know when we need to take a step back and right now politics in America are as emotional and divided as I've ever seen them. I'm sure there were worse times, but not in my memory. Take care of yourself. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: Yes, you should have voted for Hillary. 1. She was the best candidate on the ballot. 2. Donald Trump. My criteria when voting was the same as always: I ask myself "Will the country be better off with President Hillary or President Trump?" And vote accordingly. I'm pretty confident that my decision was the right one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now