1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Moderator1, Nov 12, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Ignore Trump's tweets! They are meaningless!



    Oh.
     
  2. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    I wanted to follow up on this before the thread meandered elsewhere ... lots of times I’m not actually arguing for or against a particular position when I post. Rather, I’m clarifying (or trying to clarify) the actual contours of the debate. As re: abortion, for example, the notion that the “life/health of the mother” rule is actually an exception is nonsense. As the law stands there are virtually no barriers to abortion up to the moment of delivery (i.e., 39.999999999999 weeks) simply because the “life/health” rule is, practically, no rule at all. Thus, to say that one does not support unlimited abortion but only “abortion law as it currently stands” is to obfuscate in a dishonest fashion. That’s how politicians roll, of course, but we don’t have to play that game.

    Similarly, to say that good people can’t disagree about climate change is silly. There’s tremendous disagreement among the climate-change partisans whom you actually prefer ... are they not all good people (to you)? I don’t actually have to be arguing the larger point(s) with them to nevertheless take issue with some of their nonsense.

    This facet of board debates seems to have escaped you (and it certainly has others); some of us (me and @Dick Whitman in particular) really can be arguing some facet of some argument while nevertheless holding a different position overall. I’m widely derided as a Nazi (or rape) sympathizer simply because I’ll not concede some narrow point as re: how to deal with rapists and Nazis and still be a decent human being. I’ve not once made an argument for/against net neutrality, yet I’ve been excoriated for merely attempting to clarify what it is and what it promises (alternatively, what it isn’t and what it threatens). I can handle this ... I don’t, after all, have to visit/post here ... but it’s disappointing, I have to admit.
     
  3. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    If you are a GOP Senator or Representative and plan to run again - you kind of HAVE to vote for the tax bill. A no vote will take you out of the primary, and I doubt will win you enough votes to make up for the loss of support from the base where you to somehow survive the primary challenge. Throw in the donors who will throw money at your primary opponent...
    So we're talking McCain, Flake, Corker...

    Also understand that those donors poised to to well with the tax bill may also may help provide a comfortable transition to civilian life...
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2017
  4. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    What transition to civilian life? These dudes and dudettes are all over 60 with a munificent pension for life. They can and will adorn corporate boards as do-nothing directors for handsome compensation or they will become that most useless specimen of American life, university presidents. And that will be true whether or not they vote for the tax bill. Elected representatives just can't let go of the life. It's addictive. They are convinced the survival of the Republic is dependent on their continued presence in office and worst of all, they're sincere. Look at Conyers, 88 and not all there upstairs. All he knows is he has to be in Congress.
     
  5. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Damn snowflake.

     
  6. Smallpotatoes

    Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

  7. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    Gee, I just can't understand why the Golden State Warriors and South Carolina women's basketball team decide not to go to the White House.

    For the life of me, I JUST DON'T GET IT
     
  8. RickStain

    RickStain Well-Known Member

    There is a lot of interesting stuff to unpack in the history of thoroughly white families passing down tiny fractional Indian lineage stories.

    We aren’t having that conversation when Warren is brought up as a lame-ass attack, but it is there somewhere.
     
  9. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Trump is an idiot.

    That out of the way:

    Isn't the criticism of Warren that, even if does have some Native American ancestry, that it was uncouth to try to leverage it in the admissions/hiring process?
     
  10. Slacker

    Slacker Well-Known Member

  11. Smallpotatoes

    Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

    If that's what her family told her, I don't get why it's up to her to check out the claim.
    The idea that she somehow benefited from being Native American is ridiculous, too. It's not as if minorities have all sorts of privileges.
    One of the most ridiculous birther claims was that Obama applied to college as a foreign student because it would have given him a break on admissions and financial aid. Aside from being impossible because he attended an American high school and received U.S. financial aid (making him ineligible for foreign student status) admissions for foreign students is usually very competitive and colleges like them because they pay full sticker price.
     
  12. Big Circus

    Big Circus Well-Known Member

    Isn’t the consensus that she didn’t do that?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page