Author Topic: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?  (Read 4648 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #45 on: August 14, 2019, 11:27:50 PM »

Offline trickybilly

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4298
  • Tommy Points: 488
As a dyed-in-the-wool far-left Trump-loathing anarchist, I agree with Roy: Mainstream, left-leaning media is giving WAAAAY too much platform for Mooch. His hot takes are infantile, his insight into Trump severely limited and his connection to the working class who voted for Trump completely non-existent.

He contributes literally nothing.
"Gimme the ball, gimme the ball". Freddy Quimby, 1994.

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #46 on: August 15, 2019, 03:57:28 PM »

Offline gift

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1992
  • Tommy Points: 182
..or him outwardly saying he "Hates (racial slurs)" for Republicans to turn on Trump, at this point. It's sad, but I think a disgusting immoral, racist minority of the great Republican Party is running it right now and the good people of that party don't have the gumption to take it back.

Yeah I don't think there is a single chance that if Trump did that the 'voting for Trump cuz Liberals made us by nominating Hillary' voters or the 'We just want the Supreme Court seats, we don't approve of Trump at all besides voting for him and doing nothing else to oppose him' voters would give a fat crap about Trump getting caught on video saying he hates minorities or using racial slurs. People already assume that about him.

Donald Trump retweeted a conspiracy theory accusing a former president of murder. People who continue to vote for Trump do not care about social norms anymore. What they want to get out of Trump is varying but what is uniting is that they're willing to look past his faults to do it, and they can't be shamed into changing their minds.

I'm starting to look at Trumpism as kind of a fever that has to run its course. Hopefully it's only 4 years, but if we don't take the whole cycle of antibiotics it could come back.
I disagree. I think there are quite a lot of people who are Republican that can go along with dog whistle racial comments but would draw a line on video and audio proof of Trump saying he hates two groups of people using the worst racial epitets. At that point, powerful guys like Senators Kennedy and McConnell or Congressman McCarthy would have to draw the line in order to get re-elected. And with the power in the Senate and House denouncing him, the turn would happen.

Here's an actual sitting President of the United States of America, 10 days after a pair of shootings that rocked the nation and prodded said sitting President to finally put in place some more stringent background checks, mocking a TV news personality saying the man was so 'crazy' he should be red flagged, using the actual reforms he wants enacted due to the 30 people left dead in said shooting.

Quote
Would Chris Cuomo be given a Red Flag for his recent rant? Filthy language and a total loss of control. He shouldnt be allowed to have any weapon. Hes nuts!

If you think there is a significant block of voters who can tolerate that, tolerate the other stuff Trump says on a weekly sometimes daily sometimes hourly basis, but Trump using a vulgar racial slur is a bridge too far, I cannot disagree hard enough. Those people do not exist en masse.
agreed. 

there are those here who proclaimed they voted for him as the lesser evil between him and Hillary who are still planning to vote for him in 2020 no matter who the Dems eventually put up.  there is no bar too low for many Trump voters.

I'll be voting for him again because, despite being a disgusting human being, I overall like what he has done for the economy, immigration, tax cuts and judicial nominations.  I think he's been much better in those areas than I suspect a Democrat would be.  I haven't minded his foreign policy, and he hasn't moved the country sharply rightward on certain social issues.

I give him low marks for fiscal responsibility, and personal dignity / morality.  He doesn't inspire, and he doesn't lead.  But, I'm not inspired by any of the Dems, either.  So, I'll be voting for him, and I won't be ashamed of it.  I just wish there was a better conservative candidate who was in line with both my positions and my values.

Before it is even remotely clear who the dem nominee is you declare yourself voting for someone whose values you readily admonish.  Candidates like Ryan, Delaney, Hickenlooper, Bullock, Harris and Biden are too far to the left for you to even consider?   Yours is probably the most frightening post I've seen in a long time.  A person who has expressed deep concern and dislike for Trump is going to vote for him regardless of the dem nominee.   

That sort of puts a knife into my hope that the country will acknowledge that a human being so brazen in his diviciveness, so plainly narcissistic, so readily willing to lie at every turn, so easily swayed to give credibility to unfounded conspiracies, so prone to bullying, so willing to deny science, so willing to ignore his own intelligence agencies warnings about Russia, so unclear and impulsive in his decision-making, so thin-skinned and reactive to any hint of disloyalty or criticism -- this is the man that a smart and decent mainstream conservative can't find a single dem in a field of 24 who is suitable to consider voting for against this abomination.  I appreciate the honesty -- but it leaves me pretty deflated.

Im a conservative. I support most conservative positions.  Trump has moved many of my policy goals forward, and the economy is booming.

Harris and Biden are quite left, and have almost no alignment with my policy positions.

Trump is the most extreme President weve had, but do you remember the Clinton years? How many were willing to vote for him despite being a liar and a bad human being? He was a womanizer and a man who committed perjury as President, but he was embraced.

I cant embrace Trump, but I do know that his policies are largely aligned with my preferences.  I absolutely hate his rhetoric, but honestly I equally hate the rhetoric of the left. I feel that Democrats as a whole have abandoned both the religious and the working poor, two groups that I have tremendous sympathy for (despite no longer belonging to either group).  Trump is divisive, but he only has traction because of the divisiveness and identity politics that came before him.. 

The only Democrat that Im aware of that I would support at the national level is Joe Manchin. If he ran, Id support him over Trump.  Trump was my last choice in the 2016 primaries, and Id take just about any Republican over him, from Kasich to Cruz (with Haley my favorite policy, morality, strength, guts.)

If you think it is the Democrats that have abandoned the poor, such that you are willing to vote for the Republicans (let alone Trump) ... I just don't know what to say.    GOP policies have done nothing to help the working poor and have indeed been all about fueling the growing class inequities in our country.

The methodical and relentless destruction of labor unions by the GOP is probably the most critical force pushing folks out of the middle class and into the 'working poor'.

Do you think its right to compel union dues and then spend those dues on political causes that might not be supported by the majority of workers?

This one is easy:  If the worker is benefiting from the compensation negotiated by the collective bargaining agreement, yes.

That doesn't make any sense. For instance, if an organization collectively bargains to get you a higher wage, they also get to take contributions from you and donate to a candidate who supports a low bar for military intervention in foreign affairs? Why is that agreeable to you?

If it is not acceptable to the members of the union they can vote for new leadership.

The leadership is chartered with supporting policies that benefit the union.   And that means supporting candidates who advocate for those policies.   The reality of politics is that while voters can be single-issue, politicians are always a mix of policies.  So unfortunately along with a union-favorable policy, a candidate may also support some other policy that an individual member doesn't like.  Too bad.  The union has to support candidates based on policies relevant to the union, not an individual member.

A union is no different than a corporation in this regard.  The corporations leadership is ultimately chartered with advocating for policies that benefit the corporation and shareholders as a whole.  An individual shareholder may not agree with the way the corporation donates money, but if they want the benefits of holding those shares then they either accept it or advocate for change in leadership or sell their shares.

Ok. Well, that's very different than your original statement.

Both answers are consistent with each other.

The outcome of your opinion is exactly the same and therefore consistent. However, the original response listed the reason as "the worker is benefiting from the compensation negotiated by the collective bargaining agreement", which was not the reason given later (theoretical representative and accountable leadership) and most likely required additional thought to come up with a better reason for arriving at the same conclusion. Not necessarily incorrect, but can indicate a search for confirmation of an already held opinion. We all do it.

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #47 on: August 15, 2019, 04:32:18 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4063
  • Tommy Points: 689
..or him outwardly saying he "Hates (racial slurs)" for Republicans to turn on Trump, at this point. It's sad, but I think a disgusting immoral, racist minority of the great Republican Party is running it right now and the good people of that party don't have the gumption to take it back.

Yeah I don't think there is a single chance that if Trump did that the 'voting for Trump cuz Liberals made us by nominating Hillary' voters or the 'We just want the Supreme Court seats, we don't approve of Trump at all besides voting for him and doing nothing else to oppose him' voters would give a fat crap about Trump getting caught on video saying he hates minorities or using racial slurs. People already assume that about him.

Donald Trump retweeted a conspiracy theory accusing a former president of murder. People who continue to vote for Trump do not care about social norms anymore. What they want to get out of Trump is varying but what is uniting is that they're willing to look past his faults to do it, and they can't be shamed into changing their minds.

I'm starting to look at Trumpism as kind of a fever that has to run its course. Hopefully it's only 4 years, but if we don't take the whole cycle of antibiotics it could come back.
I disagree. I think there are quite a lot of people who are Republican that can go along with dog whistle racial comments but would draw a line on video and audio proof of Trump saying he hates two groups of people using the worst racial epitets. At that point, powerful guys like Senators Kennedy and McConnell or Congressman McCarthy would have to draw the line in order to get re-elected. And with the power in the Senate and House denouncing him, the turn would happen.

Here's an actual sitting President of the United States of America, 10 days after a pair of shootings that rocked the nation and prodded said sitting President to finally put in place some more stringent background checks, mocking a TV news personality saying the man was so 'crazy' he should be red flagged, using the actual reforms he wants enacted due to the 30 people left dead in said shooting.

Quote
Would Chris Cuomo be given a Red Flag for his recent rant? Filthy language and a total loss of control. He shouldnt be allowed to have any weapon. Hes nuts!

If you think there is a significant block of voters who can tolerate that, tolerate the other stuff Trump says on a weekly sometimes daily sometimes hourly basis, but Trump using a vulgar racial slur is a bridge too far, I cannot disagree hard enough. Those people do not exist en masse.
agreed. 

there are those here who proclaimed they voted for him as the lesser evil between him and Hillary who are still planning to vote for him in 2020 no matter who the Dems eventually put up.  there is no bar too low for many Trump voters.

I'll be voting for him again because, despite being a disgusting human being, I overall like what he has done for the economy, immigration, tax cuts and judicial nominations.  I think he's been much better in those areas than I suspect a Democrat would be.  I haven't minded his foreign policy, and he hasn't moved the country sharply rightward on certain social issues.

I give him low marks for fiscal responsibility, and personal dignity / morality.  He doesn't inspire, and he doesn't lead.  But, I'm not inspired by any of the Dems, either.  So, I'll be voting for him, and I won't be ashamed of it.  I just wish there was a better conservative candidate who was in line with both my positions and my values.

Before it is even remotely clear who the dem nominee is you declare yourself voting for someone whose values you readily admonish.  Candidates like Ryan, Delaney, Hickenlooper, Bullock, Harris and Biden are too far to the left for you to even consider?   Yours is probably the most frightening post I've seen in a long time.  A person who has expressed deep concern and dislike for Trump is going to vote for him regardless of the dem nominee.   

That sort of puts a knife into my hope that the country will acknowledge that a human being so brazen in his diviciveness, so plainly narcissistic, so readily willing to lie at every turn, so easily swayed to give credibility to unfounded conspiracies, so prone to bullying, so willing to deny science, so willing to ignore his own intelligence agencies warnings about Russia, so unclear and impulsive in his decision-making, so thin-skinned and reactive to any hint of disloyalty or criticism -- this is the man that a smart and decent mainstream conservative can't find a single dem in a field of 24 who is suitable to consider voting for against this abomination.  I appreciate the honesty -- but it leaves me pretty deflated.

Im a conservative. I support most conservative positions.  Trump has moved many of my policy goals forward, and the economy is booming.

Harris and Biden are quite left, and have almost no alignment with my policy positions.

Trump is the most extreme President weve had, but do you remember the Clinton years? How many were willing to vote for him despite being a liar and a bad human being? He was a womanizer and a man who committed perjury as President, but he was embraced.

I cant embrace Trump, but I do know that his policies are largely aligned with my preferences.  I absolutely hate his rhetoric, but honestly I equally hate the rhetoric of the left. I feel that Democrats as a whole have abandoned both the religious and the working poor, two groups that I have tremendous sympathy for (despite no longer belonging to either group).  Trump is divisive, but he only has traction because of the divisiveness and identity politics that came before him.. 

The only Democrat that Im aware of that I would support at the national level is Joe Manchin. If he ran, Id support him over Trump.  Trump was my last choice in the 2016 primaries, and Id take just about any Republican over him, from Kasich to Cruz (with Haley my favorite policy, morality, strength, guts.)

If you think it is the Democrats that have abandoned the poor, such that you are willing to vote for the Republicans (let alone Trump) ... I just don't know what to say.    GOP policies have done nothing to help the working poor and have indeed been all about fueling the growing class inequities in our country.

The methodical and relentless destruction of labor unions by the GOP is probably the most critical force pushing folks out of the middle class and into the 'working poor'.

Do you think its right to compel union dues and then spend those dues on political causes that might not be supported by the majority of workers?

This one is easy:  If the worker is benefiting from the compensation negotiated by the collective bargaining agreement, yes.

That doesn't make any sense. For instance, if an organization collectively bargains to get you a higher wage, they also get to take contributions from you and donate to a candidate who supports a low bar for military intervention in foreign affairs? Why is that agreeable to you?

If it is not acceptable to the members of the union they can vote for new leadership.

The leadership is chartered with supporting policies that benefit the union.   And that means supporting candidates who advocate for those policies.   The reality of politics is that while voters can be single-issue, politicians are always a mix of policies.  So unfortunately along with a union-favorable policy, a candidate may also support some other policy that an individual member doesn't like.  Too bad.  The union has to support candidates based on policies relevant to the union, not an individual member.

A union is no different than a corporation in this regard.  The corporations leadership is ultimately chartered with advocating for policies that benefit the corporation and shareholders as a whole.  An individual shareholder may not agree with the way the corporation donates money, but if they want the benefits of holding those shares then they either accept it or advocate for change in leadership or sell their shares.

Ok. Well, that's very different than your original statement.

Both answers are consistent with each other.

The outcome of your opinion is exactly the same and therefore consistent. However, the original response listed the reason as "the worker is benefiting from the compensation negotiated by the collective bargaining agreement", which was not the reason given later (theoretical representative and accountable leadership) and most likely required additional thought to come up with a better reason for arriving at the same conclusion. Not necessarily incorrect, but can indicate a search for confirmation of an already held opinion. We all do it.

The first answer is in response to the question of whether a worker should have to pay for membership in a union when he wasn't happy with their political donations.  The answer was simple:  If he wants the benefit of the results of collective bargaining, then yes, he has to help pay for that collective bargaining.

The second answer was simply clarifying the realities of why a union ends up making donations to candidates that may have other causes that some members aren't happy with.   I didn't need to come up with that to confirm my already held opinion.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #48 on: August 26, 2019, 06:36:56 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14723
  • Tommy Points: 1598
I think dominos may be falling on the republican side.  Joe Walsh has entered the fray with a dedicated anti-Trump theme ("Be Brave" as in brave enough to stand up to, in Walsh's words, "the lunatic in office").   Mark Sanford still weighing a run.

I can't stand Walsh or Sanford, and though I like Bill Weld a lot, I don't see any the 3 posing a serious threat to Trump's nomination.  But could they wound him?   Maybe.

Where are you Mitt?  John?   Time to get in?

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #49 on: August 26, 2019, 07:53:41 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39152
  • Tommy Points: -27342
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
I think dominos may be falling on the republican side.  Joe Walsh has entered the fray with a dedicated anti-Trump theme ("Be Brave" as in brave enough to stand up to, in Walsh's words, "the lunatic in office").   Mark Sanford still weighing a run.

I can't stand Walsh or Sanford, and though I like Bill Weld a lot, I don't see any the 3 posing a serious threat to Trump's nomination.  But could they wound him?   Maybe.

Where are you Mitt?  John?   Time to get in?

Walsh and Sanford are just opportunists who will use this to earn a buck. Walsh is probably more racist than Trump, and Sanford might be in the same realm as Trump in terms of sleaze.

I dont think anybody with a future in the party will challenge him. Bill Kristol will inevitably back somebody, but I think contenders will sit this one out. I dont think well see anybody as strong as 2016 Bernie, a fringe candidate who gained interest from a fed up electorate.
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #50 on: August 26, 2019, 07:54:35 PM »

Offline mqtcelticsfan

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2120
  • Tommy Points: 225
I think dominos may be falling on the republican side.  Joe Walsh has entered the fray with a dedicated anti-Trump theme ("Be Brave" as in brave enough to stand up to, in Walsh's words, "the lunatic in office").   Mark Sanford still weighing a run.

I can't stand Walsh or Sanford, and though I like Bill Weld a lot, I don't see any the 3 posing a serious threat to Trump's nomination.  But could they wound him?   Maybe.

Where are you Mitt?  John?   Time to get in?

Yeah, Im only excited about these developments as a way for Trump to be harmed politically while the 5,000 Dems hurt the eventual nominee during these insane debates.

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #51 on: August 26, 2019, 08:07:58 PM »

Offline jambr380

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9270
  • Tommy Points: 1113
  • Feed me pills and happy meals
I think dominos may be falling on the republican side.  Joe Walsh has entered the fray with a dedicated anti-Trump theme ("Be Brave" as in brave enough to stand up to, in Walsh's words, "the lunatic in office").   Mark Sanford still weighing a run.

I can't stand Walsh or Sanford, and though I like Bill Weld a lot, I don't see any the 3 posing a serious threat to Trump's nomination.  But could they wound him?   Maybe.

Where are you Mitt?  John?   Time to get in?

Yeah, Im only excited about these developments as a way for Trump to be harmed politically while the 5,000 Dems hurt the eventual nominee during these insane debates.

Same here - would be great to see some moderate R voters see other R nominees hammer away at Trump. Maybe, just maybe, some of them will come to see Biden as a better candidate than Trump. Ds talking about how horrible Trump is just isn't doing the trick.

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #52 on: August 27, 2019, 07:45:05 AM »

Online Celtics4ever

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17732
  • Tommy Points: 1170
So far it has had minimal impact as he is a lesser player.

Quote
Walsh and Sanford are just opportunists who will use this to earn a buck. Walsh is probably more racist than Trump, and Sanford might be in the same realm as Trump in terms of sleaze.

Yep, they have zero chance, the same is true of Kasich, who build up a nice rainy day fund in Ohio by doing nothing to the roads and passing the buck.

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #53 on: August 27, 2019, 08:38:28 AM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25287
  • Tommy Points: 1163
  • What a Pub Should Be
Joe Walsh is an absolute scumbag.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #54 on: August 27, 2019, 01:54:39 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14723
  • Tommy Points: 1598
So far it has had minimal impact as he is a lesser player.

Quote
Walsh and Sanford are just opportunists who will use this to earn a buck. Walsh is probably more racist than Trump, and Sanford might be in the same realm as Trump in terms of sleaze.

Yep, they have zero chance, the same is true of Kasich, who build up a nice rainy day fund in Ohio by doing nothing to the roads and passing the buck.

You know were in agreement right?  I suspect we all know that no one (including Kasich or Romney) is likely to best Trump for the nomination.  Its possible that a coalition forms of independents and Never-Trump republicans to beat him, but that is an extremely unlikely scenario.  What I believe is possible though is that Trump can be damaged by a strong opponent.  Actually, I think a guy like Ben Sasse could do a great job.  Sasse is very bright, informed, and articulate and could make Trump look foolish.

I am not enamored of any of the top 3 Dems.  Of course Ill vote for any of them over Trump. Im really hoping for a surprise surge from Bullock (zero % chance...).   That said, Elizabeth Warren is by far running the best campaign IMO.  She is too liberal to not bring serious backlash and disapproval causing the hold your nose and vote for Trump people to turn out.   But her steadiness of message and her relentless work have impressed me.  Shes far far down on my list though. 

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #55 on: August 27, 2019, 02:02:00 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37995
  • Tommy Points: 6188
So far it has had minimal impact as he is a lesser player.

Quote
Walsh and Sanford are just opportunists who will use this to earn a buck. Walsh is probably more racist than Trump, and Sanford might be in the same realm as Trump in terms of sleaze.

Yep, they have zero chance, the same is true of Kasich, who build up a nice rainy day fund in Ohio by doing nothing to the roads and passing the buck.

You know were in agreement right?  I suspect we all know that no one (including Kasich or Romney) is likely to best Trump for the nomination.  Its possible that a coalition forms of independents and Never-Trump republicans to beat him, but that is an extremely unlikely scenario.  What I believe is possible though is that Trump can be damaged by a strong opponent.  Actually, I think a guy like Ben Sasse could do a great job.  Sasse is very bright, informed, and articulate and could make Trump look foolish.

I am not enamored of any of the top 3 Dems.  Of course Ill vote for any of them over Trump. Im really hoping for a surprise surge from Bullock (zero % chance...).   That said, Elizabeth Warren is by far running the best campaign IMO.  She is too liberal to not bring serious backlash and disapproval causing the hold your nose and vote for Trump people to turn out.   But her steadiness of message and her relentless work have impressed me.  Shes far far down on my list though.
I have always found it interesting that people find far left politicians unelectable but far right politicians as acceptable. If Warren gets the nod as the candidate, there will actually be people in the middle that prefer a racist, xenophobe, mysogynist, narcissist, compulsive liar, autocrat Trump with a possible slipping mental accuity over a genuinely intelligent, good person that happens to have very liberal leanings. I just do not get that.

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #56 on: August 27, 2019, 02:52:30 PM »

Online slamtheking

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21160
  • Tommy Points: 9133
So far it has had minimal impact as he is a lesser player.

Quote
Walsh and Sanford are just opportunists who will use this to earn a buck. Walsh is probably more racist than Trump, and Sanford might be in the same realm as Trump in terms of sleaze.

Yep, they have zero chance, the same is true of Kasich, who build up a nice rainy day fund in Ohio by doing nothing to the roads and passing the buck.

You know were in agreement right?  I suspect we all know that no one (including Kasich or Romney) is likely to best Trump for the nomination.  Its possible that a coalition forms of independents and Never-Trump republicans to beat him, but that is an extremely unlikely scenario.  What I believe is possible though is that Trump can be damaged by a strong opponent.  Actually, I think a guy like Ben Sasse could do a great job.  Sasse is very bright, informed, and articulate and could make Trump look foolish.

I am not enamored of any of the top 3 Dems.  Of course Ill vote for any of them over Trump. Im really hoping for a surprise surge from Bullock (zero % chance...).   That said, Elizabeth Warren is by far running the best campaign IMO.  She is too liberal to not bring serious backlash and disapproval causing the hold your nose and vote for Trump people to turn out.   But her steadiness of message and her relentless work have impressed me.  Shes far far down on my list though.
I have always found it interesting that people find far left politicians unelectable but far right politicians as acceptable. If Warren gets the nod as the candidate, there will actually be people in the middle that prefer a racist, xenophobe, mysogynist, narcissist, compulsive liar, autocrat Trump with a possible slipping mental accuity over a genuinely intelligent, good person that happens to have very liberal leanings. I just do not get that.
Me either.  I asked why people were so against Warren in a separate thread and never did get a satisfactory explanation.

she's smart and has ideas to move the country forward.  her track record fighting the financial institutions that have lived off screwing over the little guy should be enough by itself to gain her traction with most people.  The Consumer Protection Bureau exists thanks to her efforts. 

of course, if Moscow Mitch is still running the Senate after the 2020 elections, I doubt much of her agenda, if any, would get passed by the Senate.  Certainly none of the items scaring those proclaiming Trump is a better option.  even if the Dems take the Senate, I think what Dems focus on accomplishing is getting basic Dem agenda items passed before moving on to more extreme items on the platform.

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #57 on: August 27, 2019, 03:22:24 PM »

Offline heyvik

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1428
  • Tommy Points: 57
So far it has had minimal impact as he is a lesser player.

Quote
Walsh and Sanford are just opportunists who will use this to earn a buck. Walsh is probably more racist than Trump, and Sanford might be in the same realm as Trump in terms of sleaze.

Yep, they have zero chance, the same is true of Kasich, who build up a nice rainy day fund in Ohio by doing nothing to the roads and passing the buck.

You know were in agreement right?  I suspect we all know that no one (including Kasich or Romney) is likely to best Trump for the nomination.  Its possible that a coalition forms of independents and Never-Trump republicans to beat him, but that is an extremely unlikely scenario.  What I believe is possible though is that Trump can be damaged by a strong opponent.  Actually, I think a guy like Ben Sasse could do a great job.  Sasse is very bright, informed, and articulate and could make Trump look foolish.

I am not enamored of any of the top 3 Dems.  Of course Ill vote for any of them over Trump. Im really hoping for a surprise surge from Bullock (zero % chance...).   That said, Elizabeth Warren is by far running the best campaign IMO.  She is too liberal to not bring serious backlash and disapproval causing the hold your nose and vote for Trump people to turn out.   But her steadiness of message and her relentless work have impressed me.  Shes far far down on my list though.
I have always found it interesting that people find far left politicians unelectable but far right politicians as acceptable. If Warren gets the nod as the candidate, there will actually be people in the middle that prefer a racist, xenophobe, mysogynist, narcissist, compulsive liar, autocrat Trump with a possible slipping mental accuity over a genuinely intelligent, good person that happens to have very liberal leanings. I just do not get that.
Me either.  I asked why people were so against Warren in a separate thread and never did get a satisfactory explanation.

she's smart and has ideas to move the country forward.  her track record fighting the financial institutions that have lived off screwing over the little guy should be enough by itself to gain her traction with most people.  The Consumer Protection Bureau exists thanks to her efforts. 

of course, if Moscow Mitch is still running the Senate after the 2020 elections, I doubt much of her agenda, if any, would get passed by the Senate.  Certainly none of the items scaring those proclaiming Trump is a better option.  even if the Dems take the Senate, I think what Dems focus on accomplishing is getting basic Dem agenda items passed before moving on to more extreme items on the platform.

I haven't see that thread but would LOVE to see the replies. This is where the Right has a lock step strategy in branding and it starts with the bully - Trump. He labels and it sticks. Anyone OTHER than Joe Biden is a seen as a Socialist even if they aren't. Its a strategy that works and it is repeated ad naseaum in Right wing circles.

Its almost like its 2016 again where you will have Trump vs possibly Warren and the arguments will be - her heritage, her possibly being a socialist, and outward features vs. a known liar and a possible felon once out of jail - amongst other more despicable traits. I don't understand it either.

to Slam: can you post a link to the Warren thread?

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #58 on: August 27, 2019, 03:33:42 PM »

Online Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4562
  • Tommy Points: 382
Me either.  I asked why people were so against Warren in a separate thread and never did get a satisfactory explanation.

The standard reasons why "conservatives" are against any democrat.  She is going to take their guns away.  She is going to open the boarders and let in criminal immigrants.  Heck, she may even impose Sharia law.  She is absolutely going to take money from good god fearing, hard working Americans and give it to lazy welfare types.  And of course because she is a socialist.

All perfectly honest reasons to be against her, right?

Re: Scaramucci Breaks from Trump: First Domino?
« Reply #59 on: August 27, 2019, 07:12:51 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14723
  • Tommy Points: 1598
So far it has had minimal impact as he is a lesser player.

Quote
Walsh and Sanford are just opportunists who will use this to earn a buck. Walsh is probably more racist than Trump, and Sanford might be in the same realm as Trump in terms of sleaze.

Yep, they have zero chance, the same is true of Kasich, who build up a nice rainy day fund in Ohio by doing nothing to the roads and passing the buck.

You know were in agreement right?  I suspect we all know that no one (including Kasich or Romney) is likely to best Trump for the nomination.  Its possible that a coalition forms of independents and Never-Trump republicans to beat him, but that is an extremely unlikely scenario.  What I believe is possible though is that Trump can be damaged by a strong opponent.  Actually, I think a guy like Ben Sasse could do a great job.  Sasse is very bright, informed, and articulate and could make Trump look foolish.

I am not enamored of any of the top 3 Dems.  Of course Ill vote for any of them over Trump. Im really hoping for a surprise surge from Bullock (zero % chance...).   That said, Elizabeth Warren is by far running the best campaign IMO.  She is too liberal to not bring serious backlash and disapproval causing the hold your nose and vote for Trump people to turn out.   But her steadiness of message and her relentless work have impressed me.  Shes far far down on my list though.
I have always found it interesting that people find far left politicians unelectable but far right politicians as acceptable. If Warren gets the nod as the candidate, there will actually be people in the middle that prefer a racist, xenophobe, mysogynist, narcissist, compulsive liar, autocrat Trump with a possible slipping mental accuity over a genuinely intelligent, good person that happens to have very liberal leanings. I just do not get that.

If the far right equivalent to Liz Warren is David Duke then I think you are not correct -- in that case, the far right person is not acceptable or electable.   

The thing is, I think logical minds could probably agree that David Duke is not the far right equivalent of Liz Warren.  However, I do think republicans and right-leaning independents are barraged by the notion that Liz and Bernie, as socialists, are the equivalent of the immoral White Supremacist or neo-Nazi.   

Bernie and Liz wear the progressive label as a badge of honor. And this label, which comes these days with promises of universal healthcare, universal college, Green New Deal, abolishing of the 2nd amendment, and so-called (even if untrue) "open borders".    The fear struck by these ideas to those on the right really is considered akin to the fear engendered by neo-Nazis.   I don't see this changing in 2020.  So it's my opinion that somehow Liz (if nominated) needs to convince the country that she is someone who can find common ground rather than stage an angry fight for ideological dominance: a progressive v. conservative "war".    There are  many dems / independents who would disagree with me. Likely dem voters seem quite split on whether to enter the fray as a deep ideological battle or to champion the Just Beat Trump approach and attempt to appeal to the getable voters in the middle. I support the latter idea.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required