Bass Pro Shops   Daveys Locker Sportfishing  Newport Landing Sportfishing  The Fishing Syndicate  Carver Covers  Tight Lines Guide Service  Salamander Sinkers  Team 57 fishing  Bob Sands Fishing Tackle 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Could Trump become President for Life?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Thooget of Humilityland
    Posts
    11,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Quagga View Post
    You know what I'd love to know? What all the Confederate flag-waving, gun-toting modern Patriots would do on response to such a Trump takeover. Probably baaaaah like the sheep they are.
    https://www.urbandictionary.com/defi...=circle%20jerk

  2. #12

    Default

    Yes, in theory we aren't supposed to be taking sides arbitrarily, DS, but as long as I have followed this board, it seems to me that you have generally landed on the same side as me ;) and several others including Lady Quagga, ETucker, and Brent, to name a few. And in reality that is not surprising, because the lines have been drawn politically and are far from being arbitrary. One side it seems to me is interested in the greater good and social and economic progress and fariness, while the other side is interested in gaining and keeping power, self-enrichment and self-aggrandizement, to the detriment of the general welfare or society's progress or sense of fairness.

    To put it more neutrally, both sides represent coherent world views which include interlinked sets of premises and conclusions. Accepting an idea from one side tends to lead to accepting other ideas from the same side, since they tend to follow logically from that sides' premises.
    Last edited by Natural Lefty; 06-12-2018 at 06:07 PM.

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkShadow View Post
    Oh, and here we go, and I promised I wasn't going to do this.

    Etucker,

    What power do you think "The Republican congress" has to "check" Trump?

    I hope you're not even thinking of the "I" word.

    (Although a part of me thinks you actually are.)
    They are running interference for him in the Russian probe. (think Nunez) Plus their setting the ground for Trump to fire Mueller and letting Trump get away with it.

    We didn't even touch on the ethic violations. His family is getting rich off of his Presidency. (think Jared and the 600 million dollar loan) Or his Hotels and Golf courses etc. Congress does nothing to stop any of this!
    Last edited by etucker1959; 06-12-2018 at 06:54 PM.

  4. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Lefty View Post
    Yes, in theory we aren't supposed to be taking sides arbitrarily, DS, but as long as I have followed this board, it seems to me that you have generally landed on the same side as me ;) and several others including Lady Quagga, ETucker, and Brent, to name a few. And in reality that is not surprising, because the lines have been drawn politically and are far from being arbitrary. One side it seems to me is interested in the greater good and social and economic progress and fariness, while the other side is interested in gaining and keeping power, self-enrichment and self-aggrandizement, to the detriment of the general welfare or society's progress or sense of fairness.

    To put it more neutrally, both sides represent coherent world views which include interlinked sets of premises and conclusions. Accepting an idea from one side tends to lead to accepting other ideas from the same side, since they tend to follow logically from that sides' premises.
    The problem with this response is that by far the majority of this country is in the middle but those 2 sides that are constantly bickering represent the polarized sides and not this country as a whole. You all are all so lost in your bickering that although in most cases the best solution for almost all problems is somewhere in the middle. If the left wasn't so infiltrated by extremist groups like the environmentalists and on the right they have the hardcore NRA insanity and others this country might actually be able to function again.

    The most underrepresented group is probably the largest, the middle, and it's because most of us can't stand this debate crap, it's a complete waste of time and energy.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Yo' couch!
    Posts
    2,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seal View Post
    The problem with this response is that by far the majority of this country is in the middle but those 2 sides that are constantly bickering represent the polarized sides and not this country as a whole.
    Wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by seal View Post
    The most underrepresented group is probably the largest, the middle, and it's because most of us can't stand this debate crap, it's a complete waste of time and energy.
    Wrong again.

    Quote Originally Posted by seal View Post
    If the left wasn't so infiltrated by extremist groups like the environmentalists and on the right they have the hardcore NRA insanity and others this country might actually be able to function again.
    Your reference to environmentalists as extremists belies your claims of being a centrist.

    There's been no infiltration - the polarization has always been there. That it appears more pronounced can be attributed in part to a) the misguided egalitarian premise of the internet and b) the enabling rhetoric of megalomaniacal demagogues like the current president.

  6. #16

    Default

    Both Dark Shadow and Seal are correct in theory, but theories like these are flawed and the reality often departs from the theory.

    I would posit in fact that the most underrepresented group in politics are progressives currently. Why? There are several reasons, and there are studies and surveys to back this information up but I don't have time now to post it all. Anybody can look them up though before I do.

    One reason is that politics has been moving to the right for decades -- not the public, but the politicians themselves. In contrast, the public has moved in the opposite direction, becoming gradually more liberal. Politicians don't seem to realize this, especially Republican politicians, as an interesting study showed that politicians as a whole think their constituents are considerably more conservative than they actually are, and this is especially true of Republican politicians. Thus, they keep promoting more and more conservative policies that clashes with the views of most citizens. The public is now well to the left of where the typical politician is, especially on economic issues.

    Another issue is regarding the polarization of politics. As Lady Quagga notes, it is not really the case that most people are "in the middle" politically. Although the two major political parties are unpopular now and political independents are a larger group than either Democrats or Republicans, they are generally not neutral. Some independents like me are more progressive than the Democratic Party as a whole, some are more conservative than the Republicans, and some are somewhere in between, but very few voters are neutral. Polls show that political polarization has in fact continued to increase over these past few decades. As a result, there are more progressive minded people than in the past, but there are still relatively few progressive minded politicians, although that may be changing some. Meanwhile, there are still many people with very conservative ideology who act as ideological opposites to the liberal faction. There are relatively few people actually "in the middle," although of course some people are more in the middle of the spectrum than others.

    Thus, a shift to the center of popular opinion, would mean a considerable leftward shift in politics. Polls showing the majority of Americans favoring just about every progressive position indicate this to be the case.

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkShadow View Post
    NL,

    I think the problem with this entire thing is the fact that you're apparently supposed "to take sides."

    I have sided with many issues that the "right" has brought on, especially when it comes to the fiscal side.

    I have sided with many issues that the "left" has brought on.

    It isn't about choosing sides. It's about choosing your stances on the individual issues and reaching a compromise. The reason we're in this mess is because it seems you're apparently supposed to be partisan and choose a side, even though there may be negatives with the "side' that you are choosing.

    It's not black and white.

    When 'someone' on my side makes an asinine statement, I think it's duty on "our side" to call that guy out.
    Amen brother!
    The great Forrest Gump said it best "stupid is as stupid does" and that applies to both sides of the messed up aisle.
    The left is as wacked as the right in some instances. My biggest problem with the Republicans is the conceding everything to the rich. I'm not rich and barring a lottery winner I won't be. I do well enough for my family to live comfortable, but rich wouldn't begin to describe it. I'm looking out for me and my family and unless you're making hundreds of millions, you'd be smart to do the same. I'd be willing to pay even more taxes for a guarantee of clean air and water, but WILL NOT be ok with giving another red cent to the filthy rich . Our government is being taken over by corporations and the mega rich and this has to be stopped before it's too late. I also want my grand kids to have clean air and water. Then maybe we can get back to bipartisan politics, but for now SCREW THE REPUBLICANS! And I used to be one. SMDH

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Thooget of Humilityland
    Posts
    11,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brent View Post
    My biggest problem with the Republicans is the conceding everything to the rich.
    My biggest problem is poor white America thinking that the Republicans are for them.

    Here's a good analysis, by the one and only, Dave Chapelle:


  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Quagga View Post
    Your reference to environmentalists as extremists belies your claims of being a centrist.
    Ok so that's not a valid example? My reference to the right sides NRA was not extreme enough of an example to show impartiality? You have cherry picked it seems to me. I will readily admit to the far left being annoying to me but if you think I have a wood for Trump and the right you'd really be off in your analysis of me.

    Oh and your "wrong" rebuttal? Maybe your conflating being a member of the individual parties as not being in the "middle". You can have a party affiliation without being completely in agreement with that parties platform so being in the middle in my mind does not necessarily equate to being an Independent if that is where you are coming from.

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seal View Post
    Ok so that's not a valid example? My reference to the right sides NRA was not extreme enough of an example to show impartiality? You have cherry picked it seems to me. I will readily admit to the far left being annoying to me but if you think I have a wood for Trump and the right you'd really be off in your analysis of me.

    Oh and your "wrong" rebuttal? Maybe your conflating being a member of the individual parties as not being in the "middle". You can have a party affiliation without being completely in agreement with that parties platform so being in the middle in my mind does not necessarily equate to being an Independent if that is where you are coming from.
    Well said Seal

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •