The anti-Trump resistance takes shape: 'Government's supposed to fear us'

[PattayaJames]

34 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Are Trumpsters tired yet, of winning so much?

The Dems are obviously not tired of loosing.

[iReason]

27 minutes ago, PattayaJames said:

We were talking about yesterdays congressional special election.

 

Oh, that one.

 

You mean the Georgia election?

 

Georgia where republicans have held a stranglehold for decades?

Georgia where in their last election, the republican won by 24%?

 

The Georgia of today where Republican Handell barely sqeaked by a complete unknown with only 5%?

 

Got it.

 

And S. Carolina, another republican stronghold, where last time around it was a defeat by 21%?

Where as this time, it was only by 4%?

 

The tides are turning...  

[F4UCorsair]

2 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

Ossoff was born and bred in the district he ran for. He moved slightly outside the district boundary to allow his wife a shorter commute to work. How is he not 'one of their own' ?

 

Handel was born in Washington and educated in Maryland. She only moved to Georgia in 2006 (born in 1962) to run for State Secretary for Georgia, so you classify her as 'one of their own'?

 

I get what you are trying to say but don't we need a bit of consistency?

 

Al, I don't think to qualify as "one of their own" a representative needs to be born and live continuously in the district, in this case for 55 years.  Surely 11 years is enough??   From where I stand, if a candidate has lived in a district for a couple of years, it shows  sufficient commitment, and I wouldn't vote for somebody who isn't resident, but that's just me, and possibly a lot of others.

 

I agree on the consistency issue.

[F4UCorsair]

41 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

Oh, that one.

 

You mean the Georgia election?

 

Georgia where republicans have held a stranglehold for decades?

Georgia where in their last election, the republican won by 24%?

 

The Georgia of today where Republican Handell barely sqeaked by a complete unknown with only 5%?

 

Got it.

 

And S. Carolina, another republican stronghold, where last time around it was a defeat by 21%?

Where as this time, it was only by 4%?

 

The tides are turning...  

 

Voters are fickle people.   The next election it may well be back to the margins of the previous election.  Polls taken between elections are irrelevant....the only poll that is relevant is the one on election day.

 

Polls can be very inaccurate, e.g., the one that indicated that Trump was never going to win....that poll, the one that left a lot of red faces, including the aspiring, even the over confident, President Clinton (elect)!!

 

Polls, depending on the agency, and who's paying them, can selectively poll so that a result can be 'doctored', and that's before the stupidity of the average punter is accounted for.   I don't believe any of them.

Edited June 22, 2017 by F4UCorsair

[iReason]

38 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

Polls taken between elections are irrelevant...

Polls can be very inaccurate,...

Polls, depending on the agency, and who's paying them, can selectively poll so that a result can be 'doctored',

and that's before the stupidity of the average punter is accounted for.

 

 

They are not polls.

 

They are the vote percentages by which the republicans won.

[Rob13]

4 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:

It will never change.   Politicians are greedy, self centred, arrogant rsoles.

 

It can change. They 're greedy and corrupt, that part won't change. When the checks and balances are working they can be held accountable to doing the job they were hired for. I think the system has broken down and the greed has gone unchecked for so long we've ended up with a bunch of  derelicts in office.  On both sides of the aisle. 

[F4UCorsair]

40 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

 

They are not polls.

 

They are the vote percentages by which the republicans won.

 

I understand that, and said just that in my first sentence.   I probably should have started a new para with the poll info.

 

Regardless, the Republicans won the Georgia seat, margins are irrelevant at this stage.  Bookmark it for 3 1/2 years hence and we can discuss it again.

[boomerangutang]

2 hours ago, PattayaJames said:

The Dems are obviously not tired of loosing.

                       Dems have been in the WH for 8 of the past 10 years.  The year before Obama took over, Bush Jr had been a party to bringing the US to financial collapse, and had enmeshed the US in two wars - both of which we're still grappling with.  

 

The year after those 8 Dem years, well.....  we're heading into stormy waters, as you know.   ....with a broken rudder and officers on the deck who don't mind scuttling the ship.  

 

"coral reef ahead, Captain!"

 

"Head for it, steerman. We'll show those loser PC passengers who's in charge!"

[iReason]

51 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

I understand that, and said just that in my first sentence.   I probably should have started a new para with the poll info.

Not buying it.

 

Was I talking about polls in my post regarding vote percentages? Not at all.

Nevertheless, you responded with a speech about polls:

 

F4UCorsair said:

Voters are fickle people. The next election it may well be back to the margins of the previous election.  Polls taken between elections are irrelevant....the only poll that is relevant is the one on election day.

 

Polls can be very inaccurate, e.g., the one that indicated that Trump was never going to win....that poll, the one that left a lot of red faces, including the aspiring, even the over confident, President Clinton (elect)!!

 

Polls, depending on the agency, and who's paying them, can selectively poll so that a result can be 'doctored', and that's before the stupidity of the average punter is accounted for.   I don't believe any of them.

 

 

Edited June 22, 2017 by iReason

[thaihome]

41 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

I understand that, and said just that in my first sentence.   I probably should have started a new para with the poll info.

 

Regardless, the Republicans won the Georgia seat, margins are irrelevant at this stage.  Bookmark it for 3 1/2 years hence and we can discuss it again.

 House of Representatives are elected to two year term.

 

This particular seat (and the other 3 special elections to replace congressmen Trump selected for his cabinet) were for the remainder of the 2 years of the terms that began in January won in the election this past November.  

 

They will all have to run again in November 2018, some eighteen months from now.

TH 

[iReason]

First on CNN: House Russia investigators want to bring in Trump digital director

 

"House Russia investigators are planning to call on Brad Parscale, the digital director of President Donald Trump's campaign, as the congressional and federal probes dig into any possible connections between the Trump digital operation and Russian operatives, congressional sources said this week."

 

"The Senate intelligence committee is also interested in how Russian bots were able to target political messages in specific districts in critical swing states, although it is not clear if Parscale will be called before the Senate panel as well."

 

"Senate investigators in particular have been interested in looking for a link between the prevalence of fake news that supported Trump and was pinpointed in key areas of Rust Belt states that ultimately flipped from blue to red -- and helped Trump secure the White House."

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/16/politics/russia-investigators-trump-digital-director/index.html

 

Hmmm. The data operation that was overseen by Jared Kushner...

 

 

Edited June 22, 2017 by iReason

[opalred]

sad / sad/ i send my son in law  overseas to try and burn his paper trail 

but he goes some where in mid east to talk peace

he was my puppet now he can speak/ sad/ sad 

he couldn't make a cup of coffeevee at wh sad/ sad

[iReason]

Trump Fans Don't Know What To Make Of His "Solar Wall" But They're On Board

The president suggested for the first time Wednesday that the sun, and not Mexico, would pay for his border wall. (sub-title)

 

"President Donald Trump revealed Wednesday that he has proposed a "solar wall" along the southern border,

suggesting for the first time that the sun, and not Mexico, might pay for his signature campaign pledge."

 

"Speaking at a rally in downtown Cedar Rapids, Trump declared that covering his planned border wall with solar panels

would generate electricity and be "beautiful."

 

“We’re talking about the southern border. Lots of sun, lots of heat,” he told the crowd."

https://www.buzzfeed.com/lissandravilla/trump-fans-dont-know-what-to-make-of-his-solar-wall-but?utm_term=.ssv4zbZZ#.rfxxd6rr

 

 

"Lots of sun, lots of heat"

 

"The main effect of temperature on solar panels is that it reduces the efficiency of the solar cells at converting solar energy (sunlight) into electricity. In other words, the chemical reactions that occur within the solar panels are more efficient at cooler temperatures than at hot temperatures."

http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=2668

 

What an ignorant goof. Just winging it and making stuff up for the Lemmings. 

Again.

 

 

[mesquite]

4 hours ago, iReason said:

 

Oh, that one.

 

You mean the Georgia election?

 

Georgia where republicans have held a stranglehold for decades?

Georgia where in their last election, the republican won by 24%?

 

The Georgia of today where Republican Handell barely sqeaked by a complete unknown with only 5%?

 

Got it.

 

And S. Carolina, another republican stronghold, where last time around it was a defeat by 21%?

Where as this time, it was only by 4%?

 

The tides are turning...  

I think he means election where the Republicans spent $3 million and the Democrats spent $22 million, only to lose.  That one.

[Morch]

20 hours ago, Jingthing said:

AFTER the obnoxious trumpist gloating.

AFTER the anti-trumpist depression and despair.

A realistic hopeful path forward.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/06/21/dont-get-demoralized-by-the-big-georgia-loss-democrats/

 

Would have been an easier sell if not for the hype and drama peppering many of the posts and headlines linked. Keeping it real is only taken up when default euphoria or hysteria can't be easily applied.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Agreed. The ratings on politicians of both parties says that the population has had enough as well.

However, IMO, politicians being creatures of self interest will always put self before the people.

Love him or hate him, or neither, IMO the people of the US elected Trump to try and make a change in that culture. So far the establishment is resisting with all its might.

 

Only, most of the voters did not vote for him. Not when referring actual votes cast, not when referring all potential voters. Some sure did for the reasons outlines above, for many others it was simply a default choice. But the main group simply didn't exercise voting rights. I think that's more worrisome when it comes to democracy. People losing interest or hope that change can be affected can bring about grave consequences. A buffoon like Trump being elected is not the worst possible outcome. Enough to imagine a version of Trump that can actually deliver.

[boomerangutang]

                               Trump said today that he wants rich people to be in charge, not poor people.  The real story is; Trump loves people who are heavily in debt.  He himself is, and Kushner is in debt for a billion bucks.

 

                            The US is also massively in debt.  Perhaps that will be Trump's lasting legacy; to saddle the US with even more crippling debt.  He's already campaigned to spend on the military - much more than the military is asking for.  Drastically lowering taxes for the very rich would be yet another way to increase the US's debt.

 

                              He's even said, on the campaign trail, "I'm great with debt."  

 

                                  I think, as the Russia investigation deepens, that the billions Trump and Kushner owe to Russians will be a lynchpin into proving how deeply Trump and his honchos are involved.  

[Morch]

9 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

It's time for the people to stop putting up with politicians that put them self before the people.  Like Trump.  AND the others.  No reason to continually support Trump just because a minority of the population voted for him.  Or a minority approve of him.  Put his feet to the fire.  Make him commit to doing something for the country.  A good start would be calling him out for all his lies.

 

Change is desperately needed.  From the bottom as well as at the top.  Right?

 

Change is needed. Agreed. What isn't agreed is what this means. Considering the existing divides, it seems far-fetched that an honest, agenda free understanding can be achieved. Even something not so complicated, like acknowledging Trump's flaws and incompetence is troublesome because of partisanship. I think for many of Trump's supporters (or Republican voters), the reluctance to denounce Trump stems from being aware it would not stop there, but be used by "the other side" for political gains.

 

 

5 hours ago, Rob13 said:

 

It can change. They 're greedy and corrupt, that part won't change. When the checks and balances are working they can be held accountable to doing the job they were hired for. I think the system has broken down and the greed has gone unchecked for so long we've ended up with a bunch of  derelicts in office.  On both sides of the aisle. 

 

You are describing what needs to be changed, not how it can be changed. I don't know that repairing the system is possible by using the same corrupt constructs and procedures one wishes to change. Tearing it apart in favor of who knows what may not be all that great too.

[boomerangutang]

Cenk and I see eye to eye, but Cenk expresses it better than I . . . . . . . 

 

 

[iReason]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

Would have been an easier sell if not for the hype and drama peppering many of the posts and headlines linked.

 

Your choice of descriptions.

 

Don't read them.

 

Most Trump apologists only react to "headlines" without reading the source based text.

 

Perhaps you are one of them, by making such a flippant response.

 

 

Edited June 22, 2017 by iReason

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

Your choice of descriptions.

 

Don't read them.

 

Most Trumpeteers only react to "headlines" without reading the source based text.

 

Perhaps you are one of them.

 

Ah yes, if you dare raise doubts, you're one of "them".

And let's toss some generalizations and personal nonsense while at it.

Troll on.

[iReason]

9 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Ah yes, if you dare raise doubts, you're one of "them".

And let's toss some generalizations and personal nonsense while at it.

Troll on.

 

Deflect on...

Yawn.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

Deflect on...

Yawn.

 

How was I deflecting?

More like you didn't have anything on-topic or even related to what I posted on, but charged in anyway.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Would have been an easier sell if not for the hype and drama peppering many of the posts and headlines linked. Keeping it real is only taken up when default euphoria or hysteria can't be easily applied.

It's an emotional time in U.S. politics. The republican party and the white house has been taken over by a dangerous authoritarian clown. Minimize that threat if you want. It's REAL. 

[Morch]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

It's an emotional time in U.S. politics. The republican party and the white house has been taken over by a dangerous authoritarian clown. Minimize that threat if you want. It's REAL. 

 

Only if "minimizing" amounts to refusing getting on a train of hyperbole, hysteria and hate. I don't see it does a whole lot of good in terms of "resistance", and I can see how it does a whole lot of bad for the day after Trump. These elements are not essential, but rather, are a choice. As another poster put it with regard to a related issue, Other than making a repeated bogus point, which was addressed multiple times - nothing much on offer. Seems kinda odd after posting that link.

[Jingthing]

5 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Only if "minimizing" amounts to refusing getting on a train of hyperbole, hysteria and hate. I don't see it does a whole lot of good in terms of "resistance", and I can see how it does a whole lot of bad for the day after Trump. These elements are not essential, but rather, are a choice. As another poster put it with regard to a related issue, Other than making a repeated bogus point, which was addressed multiple times - nothing much on offer. Seems kinda odd after posting that link.

Again, you act like the trump thing is normal. Just another republican in the white house. I think that POV is out of touch with reality. 

 

We've arrived. Too much "hyperbole" is the least of the problem now --

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/06/22/howard_jacobson_talks_pussy_his_swiftian_satirical_novel_about_donald_trump.html

On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”

 

Edited June 22, 2017 by Jingthing

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Again, you act like the trump thing is normal. Just another republican in the white house. I think that POV is out of touch with reality. 

 

We've arrived. Too much "hyperbole" is the least of the problem now --

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/06/22/howard_jacobson_talks_pussy_his_swiftian_satirical_novel_about_donald_trump.html

On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”

 

 

"Again, you act like the trump thing is normal. Just another republican in the white house."

 

No, I don't. That's just you repeating this nonsense, even though it was addressed.

Having a different take how effective or relevant the "resistance" is, or not embracing everything coming out of your corner of the ring doesn't indicate losing touch with reality.

 

 

[Jingthing]

I honestly don't understand where you're coming from. I get the strong feeling you're more opposed to hyperbole than trump and the trumpist movement itself. If you say that isn't the case, sorry, I think that's how your posts come across. 

[Scott]

A great deal of leeway has been given in this rather broad topic, but continued sniping at one another is not going to be tolerated and will earn suspensions.   

 

It's obvious some people like to argue for the sake of arguing.  

 

 

[iReason]

EPA completes purge of scientists from its scientific advisory board

 

"Scott Pruitt had already moved to replace much of the scientific review boards at the EPA with industry lobbyists."

 

"The Environmental Protection Agency has dismissed at least five members of a major scientific review board, the latest signal of what critics call a campaign by the Trump administration to shrink the agency’s regulatory reach by reducing the role of academic research."
 

"And with that minor test run over, Pruitt has moved on to a wholesale purge of scientists from his supposedly scientific agency."

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/6/21/1673807/-EPA-completes-purge-of-scientists-from-it-s-scientific-advisory-board?detail=facebook

 

Your former Big Oil lobbyist hard at work Trumpeteers.