Senate The US Politics discussion

I still want to know what all this "dirt" is that everyone is "providing" without actually providing. From my standpoint, there should be a dirt hill to the moon based on all dirt promised, but I see nothing (nothing not previously known and certainly a lot of what is known is not exactly "dirt" IMHO).

 

I don't know what this is, but here you go. And I ain't buying no suicide explanation.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/republican-donor-kills-himself-talking-021051687.html

 

I'm not one to cry out "Fake News" but are we sure this is actually a legit article? I know it's Yahoo, but things feel off about this story.

 

They can't, they're an essential distraction / smokescreen to deflect attention away from Trump so if I was being cynical, nope, they're not disappearing - they might try to, but Republican Whoever will invoke the name as a look-over-there tactic again and again.

 

My problem with this article is the note found that says "NO FOUL PLAY WHATSOEVER" is the most Trump thing ever.

 

This.

You just demonstrated why the left cannot be taken seriously. And why political correctness is doomed to failure from the left. On one side we are told that we can't criticize Hillary or Warren based on looks because that's sexist. Then you go ahead and criticize Trump based on those same qualities. You pretend moral outrage when your guys are attacked then attack using the same tactics you just railed against.

The left has become the world's most unfunny joke.

Another example? Criticizing Soros is anti-semetic. But Kushner is fair game.

This is why the 2018 and 2020 elections will continue to reject Democrats.

Oh, wait. That happened because I'm a racist.

Stay clueless.

 

Well I can't vote in Michigan, so it doesn't matter. But I would be liable to support anyone who is conservative and not a politician. Pat Sayjack. James Woods. Ect. And why not? People want Clooney or Bauldwin to run. Why would it be so out of the question for famous conservatives to run?

 

James Woods!

really?



People want Clooney and Baldwin to run as they appear to be compassionate and have the good of all at heart

James Woods is just a horrible person from what I've read of him

 

as long as Jerry Lewis is the vice-president I'll be happy

 

Yes, but someone like Zuckerberg is smart enough to stay away from politics.

 

A Trump supporter is trying to tell people what is clueless? Seems off from my perspective. The facts are there man.

 

See? What you are missing is perspective. From Your perspective Woods is an ass and Baldwin is a genius. I understand that.

What you don't understand is this:
Listen to Woods or Kid Rock. Notice how they make you feel. Notice what you think about them.

Now understand:
That's exactly how I feel when I hear Baldwin or Clooney talk their politics.

From you're perspective, I would imagine, anyone who doesn't like to hear your guys obviously doesn't like people who understand how real people should think. The people who don't like hearing from Clooney or DeVito only want to hear things from a narrow point of view.

You can't seem to understand that many people think the exact same thing when they hear people insult James Woods or Pat Sayjack.

And from your perspective, I bet you thought Hillary was a shoe in. Your perspective is wrong. That fact is there. Trump is the US president and I knew all along that's how it would turn out.

 

currently Presidenting at the golf course.

so much winning

 

I get the point of perspective, don't get me wrong. Echo chamber and all that.

I know nothing of Kid Rock so can't comment but as far as I can tell I've never heard Clooney or Baldwin talk politics as such but I have heard them speak and typically what I hear is people who don't want the disabled or "different" be treated any differently to anybody else ("Normal" people as some would put it)


The last thing I read from Woods was him passing scorn and derision on a family who let their son dress how he wanted and at gay pride day it was a dress and rainbow make up (iirc). That is not something that appears to come from a Clooney or a Baldwin but does come from the types of people you want to be in charge.


Clooney and Baldwin appear to be open minded and welcoming

Trump, Woods et al are not.



And yes again, I get echo chamber. I get that people saying things that I agree with will resonate better with me, but the like of Trump and Woods just spew bile, I can see no positives in the majority of what they say.



From a UK perspective, I typically lean Lib Dems or Labour with very little leaning towards the Conservative party. Here I will disagree with a lot of what the Tories say BUT the critical thing here is that I still get where their coming from, there is no inherent nastiness or bile, just a differing in opinions in how to get there.

I don't feel queasy reading something by a Tory supporter. I read something by Trump or similar and typically I just feel an immense sadness that you have such an ignorant vile narrow minded person in charge of your nation.


I know you've had a hard upbringing but you continually strike me a someone with some compassion and a modicum of intelligence but when it comes to Trump and your general politics you are massively blinkered. You would never vote Democrat under any circumstances from what I can see; whereas I would vote Tory if the policies they put forwards were ones I could support.

 

All I wanted to do was make you think a bit outside your box.
I'd vote for a Democrat in a heart beat if he supported boarder enforcement, lower taxes for everyone, free market health care, traditional marriage, law enforcement, ect. Find me that guy (or gal) and I'll put the sign in my yard today!

And of course I have compassion. It's a hallmark of a conservative. I know guys like Ender Sai love to say we are selfish, given our anti tax and spend base, but millions of studies show just the opposite. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/19/giving-back-_n_3781505.html And as a center-right nation, we are consistantly at the top of charitable giving. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Giving_Index

It's easy to mistake my views as lacking of compassion. But t hat's not their origin. I honestly believe that people from all backgrounds would be happier or more satisfied if the policies I support were successful.

 

if you want to see who won't let the Clinton's go head on over to chelsea's twitter page , scroll down just a bit, and see what was said about her and her mother on Fox last night

 

Why is "free market healthcare" a value? Why is making the world fit into your ideological framework more important than helping people?

I don't care how healthy care is structured, so long as sick people get help to get better and live their lives to the fullest. If that's a full communist system administered by a resurrected Karl Marx as Secretary of HHS, fine. If it's the Pope praying for everyone, that's great too. If you can make it work with a private enterprise system so hardcore even Ayn Rand calls it harsh, I'm all onboard.


Millions of people are suffering. I'd rather not sacrifice their livelihoods for the sake of being right about some dumb argument. We have ways to project the likely outcomes of these plans. Show us a model that gets to the goal of universal coverage, and then we can talk.

 

When it comes to health care, those who cannot afford it should be subsides by the government. It is a moral duty to ensure people don't die because they're denied access to basic health care. It is a human right and should be mandatory for any decent, moral country.

A government doesn't descend into communism, if it grants the poorest free health care.

 

Medicaid (for now) and Medicare already grant the poorest "free" healthcare. Stopping at the poorest doesn't work; it helps result in healthcare costs taking up a much larger and faster-growing share of the economy than it would if we had universal single-payer with the power to negotiate prices.