muppy Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 52 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: You two lovebirds should get married. 😎 Rockefeller would be 174 years old if he were alive today. The r party has changed since the studebaker was all the rage, and the d party has as well. I’m a conservative with socially liberal tendencies who recognizes the abject stupidity of both parties at times. What appealed to me about Trump was his America first agenda. I don’t see that as really all that different than the “Buy American” movement of the 1970s by union democrats. I also tend to believe if you have your own house in order, it’s much easier to help others. senor leo is my sensi' of political thought. Smart guy, Majorly nice, and NO I WONT MARRY YOU or senor redtail either tyvm 😏 lol 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 10 minutes ago, muppy said: senor leo is my sensi' of political thought. Smart guy, Majorly nice, and NO I WONT MARRY YOU or senor redtail either tyvm 😏 lol I'm married with no plans to move to some backwoods county in Utah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 Just now, BillsFanNC said: Matching scumbags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muppy Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 1 minute ago, redtail hawk said: I'm married with no plans to move to some backwoods county in Utah... Ive been to Utah once. But I live in socal.....anyway Im Out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 1 minute ago, Westside said: Matching scumbags Now I can't figure it out. Is bipartisanship and negotiating a good thing or a bad thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 Just now, ChiGoose said: Now I can't figure it out. Is bipartisanship and negotiating a good thing or a bad thing? Two thieves working on anything together is a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 1 minute ago, muppy said: Ive been to Utah once. But I live in socal.....anyway Im Out. no disrespect meant. I was trying to be funny. I guess polygamy isn't all that funny 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roundybout Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 23 minutes ago, Chris farley said: Amen. when the establishment in both parties are openly purchased and agenda hurts. the best thing for Americans is a deadlocked DC. Shutting down the country to own the libs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 9 minutes ago, Westside said: Two thieves working on anything together is a bad thing. Two crooks working together to bankrupt us. But hey, yay bipartisanship or something. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 Take your time and get the right person in there. There's no rush. The hearings can wait another few more days to get started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 10 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: no disrespect meant. I was trying to be funny. I guess polygamy isn't all that funny I think @muppy is unaware that Utah is considered the San Diego of the land of the Latter Day Saints. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I’m a conservative with socially liberal tendencies who recognizes the abject stupidity of both parties at times. What appealed to me about Trump was his America first agenda. I don’t see that as really all that different than the “Buy American” movement of the 1970s by union democrats. This is true. “America First” — what did it really mean? - Protectionism: starting with Bill Clinton, both parties were strongly free trade. Starting with the Bernie/Trump rise in 2016, both parties moved sharply back to the old protectionist/high tariff side. Add in the return of old fashioned (I’d say “failed”) industrial policy, and that’s “America First”-ism. It goes back to Truman at least; back to the 1st half of the 19th century mercantilism at most. Bernie provided a pro-union flavor of protectionism; Trump’s new spin was anti-unionism combined with protection from competition for old industries. You won’t find many economists other than Peter Navarro who think either flavor is a good idea. - Foreign policy: again, an idiosyncratic Trump blend. Kissingerian “real politik” (a focus on what alignments work best for America rather than the emphasis on democratization that flowed from Jimmy Carter to Bush 43), but without the broad conflict of ideology thinking that informed Cold War policy. It was almost more Monroe Doctrine than anything 20th Century: Russia, your natural domain is Eastern Europe to the Pacific; we’ll leave you alone as long as you don’t meddle in our half of the globe. As such it was a rejection of Republican strategy from Eisenhower through Mitt. - Immigration: it started out with a rational idea — the USA, unlike most developed countries, doesn’t so much pick and choose its immigrants as those immigrants pick and choose us. So maybe we move to more of the Canada/NZ points-based model for legal immigration, trying to attract high-value workers and deter low-value arrivals. But it dissolved into a general “immigration bad” narrative, whether legal or illegal, as Trump cozied up to the so-called white nationalist wing. There was a pro-USA compromise to be had early on (Trump’s pro-DACA sentiments had people dreaming), but the Muslim ban so poisoned the well that no bipartisan compromise could ever emerge. - Cultural issues. A very selfish conspicuous consumer who extolled a return to traditional moral values; a kind of “serial marriage and fatherhood and secularism is fine for people like me, but an unmitigated disaster for all those people like you.” I don’t deny the importance of government in leading on moral/social issues, but this is one area in which the messenger really needs to live it in order for the message to have an impact. - Fiscal policy. A total repudiation of the budget balancing obsession that was a Republican mantra since the time of Reagan. Cut taxes, keep spending, forget all about social security and Medicare reform since those are not popular with the electorate. It’s a mishmash of social, economic, and national security theories that may not even deserve the title of “theory.” America First had appeal as a slogan, but this incoherent mess is best described with a different neologism: Trumpism. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muppy Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 23 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: no disrespect meant. I was trying to be funny. I guess polygamy isn't all that funny DUH on me I didnt get it....I should have lol OY VEY 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 4 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: This is true. “America First” — what did it really mean? - Protectionism: starting with Bill Clinton, both parties were strongly free trade. Starting with the Bernie/Trump rise in 2016, both parties moved sharply back to the old protectionist/high tariff side. Add in the return of old fashioned (I’d say “failed”) industrial policy, and that’s “America First”-ism. It goes back to Truman at least; back to the 1st half of the 19th century mercantilism at most. Bernie provided a pro-union flavor of protectionism; Trump’s new spin was anti-unionism combined with protection from competition for old industries. You won’t find many economists other than Peter Navarro who think either flavor is a good idea. - Foreign policy: again, an idiosyncratic Trump blend. Kissingerian “real politik” (a focus on what alignments work best for America rather than the emphasis on democratization that flowed from Jimmy Carter to Bush 43), but without the broad conflict of ideology thinking that informed Cold War policy. It was almost more Monroe Doctrine than anything 20th Century: Russia, your natural domain is Eastern Europe to the Pacific; we’ll leave you alone as long as you don’t meddle in our half of the globe. As such it was a rejection of Republican strategy from Eisenhower through Mitt. - Immigration: it started out with a rational idea — the USA, unlike most developed countries, doesn’t so much pick and choose its immigrants as those immigrants pick and choose us. So maybe we move to more of the Canada/NZ points-based model for legal immigration, trying to attract high-value workers and deter low-value arrivals. But it dissolved into a general “immigration bad” narrative, whether legal or illegal, as Trump cozied up to the so-called white nationalist wing. There was a pro-USA compromise to be had early on (Trump’s pro-DACA sentiments had people dreaming), but the Muslim ban so poisoned the well that no bipartisan compromise could ever emerge. - Cultural issues. A very selfish conspicuous consumer who extolled a return to traditional moral values; a kind of “serial marriage and fatherhood and secularism is fine for people like me, but an unmitigated disaster for all those people like you.” I don’t deny the importance of government in leading on moral/social issues, but this is one area in which the messenger really needs to live it in order for the message to have an impact. - Fiscal policy. A total repudiation of the budget balancing obsession that was a Republican mantra since the time of Reagan. Cut taxes, keep spending, forget all about social security and Medicare reform since those are not popular with the electorate. It’s a mishmash of social, economic, and national security theories that may not even deserve the title of “theory.” America First had appeal as a slogan, but this incoherent mess is best described with a different neologism: Trumpism. I’ll revisit this later, Frankish, thanks for putting the work in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muppy Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 (edited) 14 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I think @muppy is unaware that Utah is considered the San Diego of the land of the Latter Day Saints. it flew right over my head chirp chirp chirp chirp lol carry on 🙂 Edited January 4, 2023 by muppy 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 53 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: There’s a wide range between “in lockstep” and “utter chaos devoid of serious leadership” and the GOP is currently closer to the latter than the middle. We're not anywhere near utter chaos 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 Just now, Pokebball said: We're not anywhere near utter chaos Shhhhh. Let them have their fantasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 8 minutes ago, Pokebball said: We're not anywhere near utter chaos A good leader would have wrapped this up in caucus prior to the first day of the new congress. Or else, have had a plan to actually gain votes during the balloting. McCarthy is weak and is publicly demonstrating that weakness to everyone. This is the first time in 100 years that we've needed multiple ballots because most Speakers tend to be able to lead. McCarthy is a follower. It's not utter chaos yet, but it's certainly not some testament to anything other than McCarthy's weakness. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nedboy7 Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 The budget rose by a record 7.8 trillion dollars to 28 trillion under Trump. I don't remember you all melting down over this. So spare me the two thieves BS. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts