Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 237: You Never Go Ass to Monmouth

(+) Yeah! (+)

red sox 777 posted...

The retraining thing was the part that was incredibly tone deaf.

Which is why they showed that part every time they played that clip.

What's that? They didn't show it ever? Oh.

Oooohhhhh...
---

As for Deblasio..... I actually like this one. Unfortunately it fits his trend of heavyhanded government but yeah, automation is a huge threat. The "it's always worked out before" argument is exactly analogous to climate change. If you start 5000 steps from the Grand Canyon and the first 4999 steps don't result in anything bad, it doesn't mean you should take step 5000.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

red sox 777 posted...

The retraining thing was the part that was incredibly tone deaf.

Which is why they showed that part every time they played that clip.

What's that? They didn't show it ever? Oh.

Oooohhhhh...

They didn't have time to show the whole clip, because they were too busy covering Trump's latest tweet.
---

This is actually the sort of pathetic thing that third world dictators do:

https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1169760554401062912?s=21

Looking forward to the State Department issuing a shopped photo of Trump dunking on Dennis Rodman
---

What do our right-leaning posters here think about the GOP potentially canceling primaries to limit any challenge to Trump?

---

Jakyl25 posted...

What do our right-leaning posters here think about the GOP potentially canceling primaries to limit any challenge to Trump?

That is totally against the spirit of the Republican Party, which calls for survival of the fittest and is embodied in winner take all contests. Whoever came up with this at the RNC should be voted out of office.
---

red sox 777 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

What do our right-leaning posters here think about the GOP potentially canceling primaries to limit any challenge to Trump?

That is totally against the spirit of the Republican Party, which calls for survival of the fittest and is embodied in winner take all contests. Whoever came up with this at the RNC should be voted out of office.

What if its Mitch?
---

red sox 777 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

What do our right-leaning posters here think about the GOP potentially canceling primaries to limit any challenge to Trump?

That is totally against the spirit of the Republican Party, which calls for survival of the fittest and is embodied in winner take all contests. Whoever came up with this at the RNC should be voted out of office.

The RNC claims they have nothing to do with it (not that their word is worth much). The reporting Ive seen indicates that it was the Trump campaign that pushed for this, so I look forward to your vote for his Democratic challenger in 2020...!
---

Yeah, Republican leaders at the state level have been reading statements prepared for them by the Trump campaign.
---

Mitch would never propose such foolishness. The Trump campaign might, but let's remember, at the Trump campaign, there is no central coordination so that the center (Trump) can avoid any accountability. It's like a Mafia operation.
---

JFC:
https://twitter.com/steventdennis/status/1169999248177487872?s=21

(This is the woman who split the nutjob vote with Arpaio in the 2018 AZ GOP primary)
---

Supporting the troops:

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1169845206742519808?s=21
---

Trump administration weakens fuel efficiency standards (a weakening that car companies were opposing!), but Ford, Honda, Volkswagon, and BMW are working with California on adhering to standards that are stronger than the weakened Trump ones (California has the right to enforce stricter standards under the Clean Air Act).

so the doj launched an antitrust probe into the automakers

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/06/climate/automakers-california-emissions-antitrust.html

Seems to have done some damage already, it scared away Mercedes-Benz which was going to join in but were advised not to after learning of this.
---

An antitrust probe...into multiple companies?

---

Jakyl25 posted...

An antitrust probe...into multiple companies?

Yes, for collusion. That's exactly the kind of thing within the scope of the anti-trust laws.
---

How dare you collude to be better for the environment!

Next thing you know they will be colliding to make safer cars!
---

I mean Democrats were the ones making collusion out to be the worst crime in the world.
---

Apparently "States RIghts" don't really matter to Republicans. Otherwise they'd let California have their stricter laws. Or do states rights only matter for things like Abortion?
---

Ashethan posted...

Apparently "States RIghts" don't really matter to Republicans. Otherwise they'd let California have their stricter laws. Or do states rights only matter for things like Abortion?

A cabal of multinational car companies colluding to set emissions standards across all 50 states is squarely within the purview of the interstate commerce clause.
---

Are they actually trying to enact stricter laws, or is it just an agreement with these companies saying "our cars will do better than the regulated emissions standard"?
---

It appears that Trump is using the military to prop up his Scottish resort:

https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1170125847673626627?s=21
---

These problems could be avoided if the US paid the President a reasonable salary and he agreed to forego profiting from his office in return. Have Republicans negotiate for the US and we can probably get Trump's services for 1 billion USD per year. Democrats would probably give away 5 billion a year.
---

He would still find a way to profit using the office.

My kids own the resorts, not me! Not until Im out!

---

red sox 777 posted...

These problems could be avoided if the US paid the President a reasonable salary and he agreed to forego profiting from his office in return. Have Republicans negotiate for the US and we can probably get Trump's services for 1 billion USD per year. Democrats would probably give away 5 billion a year.

Didnt Trump turn down his salary and said he only wanted a $1 salary?
---

pyresword posted...

Are they actually trying to enact stricter laws, or is it just an agreement with these companies saying "our cars will do better than the regulated emissions standard"?

Under the clean air act states have the right to enforce statewide air pollution standards. When the Trump administration rolled back the Obama-era rules, California and 13 other states said they would keep to the higher standards.

In theory, this means if automakers decided to do the bare minimum under the weakened standards, they wouldn't meet the old higher ones and would need a separate lineup of vehicles for the higher standard states. (Alternatively, they could voluntarily stay at the higher standards anyway and that'd work country-wide.)

A month-and-a-half or so back they reached an agreement in principle with California where California agreed to weaken the Obama era rules a bit, but not nearly as dramatically as the Trump administration had done. (For instance. Obama-era regs required them to hit 54.5 mpg by 2025. The California deal was 51 mpg by 2026. The Trump rollback was 37 mpg.) Presumably the auto companies would then use this standard they negotiated nationwide so they wouldn't have to worry about needing separate lineups to meet different standards

But really the article covers all this.
---

Maniac64 posted...

red sox 777 posted...

These problems could be avoided if the US paid the President a reasonable salary and he agreed to forego profiting from his office in return. Have Republicans negotiate for the US and we can probably get Trump's services for 1 billion USD per year. Democrats would probably give away 5 billion a year.

Didnt Trump turn down his salary and said he only wanted a $1 salary?

His salary is only 400k. He probably makes more than that from one golf outing at his resorts.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

It appears that Trump is using the military to prop up his Scottish resort:

https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1170125847673626627?s=21

If they cut the room rates to the normal amount of a hotel then what is the issue? It's says they had cheaper room rates and free golf. Lol. Unless you are trying to argue they were propping up the Scottish airport they paid gas too.

---

Corrik7 posted...

If they cut the room rates to the normal amount of a hotel then what is the issue? It's says they had cheaper room rates and free golf. Lol. Unless you are trying to argue they were propping up the Scottish airport they paid gas too.

Because hes using the office of the President to enrich himself

---

Something Ive wondered based on your comments lately Corrik:

Do you value loyalty over honesty?

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Because hes using the office of the President to enrich himself

Idk how much he enriched himself. If anything it sounds like he did them a favor and gave them an excursion. But, I don't know the exact details yet. I am saying what's it matter if they discounted the rates to normal room rates elsewhere.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Something Ive wondered based on your comments lately Corrik:

Do you value loyalty over honesty?

Gimme an example. Because a lot of times I don't think your "honesty" is unbiased honesty.

---

I mean like do you have your friends backs even if they do awful shit

Would you help your buddy hide an affair from his wife?

---

Corrik7 posted...

But, I don't know the exact details yet. I am saying what's it matter if they discounted the rates to normal room rates elsewhere.

Because the money goes to him, even if its discounted

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

But, I don't know the exact details yet. I am saying what's it matter if they discounted the rates to normal room rates elsewhere.

Because the money goes to him, even if its discounted

Yeah but if the taxpayers aren't paying any extra, why does it matter?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

I mean like do you have your friends backs even if they do awful shit

Would you help your buddy hide an affair from his wife?

I almost always will take my friends back unless the shit is extremely egregious
And, a buddies affair is not my business. That is between him and his wife. Unless she is my friend also.

---

red sox 777 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

But, I don't know the exact details yet. I am saying what's it matter if they discounted the rates to normal room rates elsewhere.

Because the money goes to him, even if its discounted

Yeah but if the taxpayers aren't paying any extra, why does it matter?

But they are.

Their stay in Scotland is far out of the way of their normal route, and setting aside the travel expenses from the airport to the resort, theyve paid $11 million in fuel at the commercial airport there compared to refueling at a base where the fuel is already paid for.

Also, and this is kind of the point: All the money spent at the resort literally benefits Trump directly.
---

https://twitter.com/JoshRudes/status/1170004423139037184

Even worse: Trump is attempting to extort Ukraine into giving him dirt on Biden by withholding military aid
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://twitter.com/JoshRudes/status/1170004423139037184

Even worse: Trump is attempting to extort Ukraine into giving him dirt on Biden by withholding military aid

Reliably told???? Oh my God, the scandal of the century. Lock. Him. Up.
---

It's a WaPo editorial board piece. They would not have made that statement without having multiple sources, which is the same standard applied to any reporting in a reputable news article. You're basically just yelling "fake news!" for them using anonymous sources, just like Trump always does for accurate reporting.
---

Politicians and TV networks must be loving this Alabama thing.

Completely distracted anyone from having to talk about gun control.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

It's a WaPo editorial board piece. They would not have made that statement without having multiple sources, which is the same standard applied to any reporting in a reputable news article. You're basically just yelling "fake news!" for them using anonymous sources, just like Trump always does for accurate reporting.

I mean WaPo's fact checker is apparently full of shit so..!

---

NOAA backs Trump's Alabama warning, though nobody with a rational mind ever truly cared anyways.

---

Corrik7 posted...

nobody with a rational mind ever truly cared anyways

Corrik stop with this pathetic gaslighting.

Giving people incorrect information in times of emergency and then deliberately confronting experts on the issue in ways which will undermine public trust in the institutions designed to keep people informed are both things with dangerous consequences in the real-world and you should know that as well as anybody else.

Even if it turned out that the reality was some tin foil hat conspiracy where Trump was the good guy all along and this was a twisted campaign by meteorologists to make Trump look bad, that still doesn't mean it was irrational for people to care about the issue.
---

Corrik7 posted...

NOAA backs Trump's Alabama warning, though nobody with a rational mind ever truly cared anyways.

It's extremely obvious that they were directed to make such a statement by Trump (hence the fact that no one was willing to put their name on it, and that the union for the actual NOAA workers is saying that they're "disgusted" by NOAA leadership: https://www.thedailybeast.com/noaa-left-federal-weather-workers-shocked-and-irate-by-backing-trump-union-head-says )

I don't know how you can continue giving such a proven liar the benefit of the doubt at every single turn
---

Using anonymous sources requires that the journalists have extremely strong ethics and discernment. The modern media has neither. Maybe the NYT v Sullivan decision has some role in this trend - media just has to avoid out and out lies now to avoid a libel suit.
---

pyresword posted...

Corrik stop with this pathetic gaslighting.

Giving people incorrect information in times of emergency and then deliberately confronting experts on the issue in ways which will undermine public trust in the institutions designed to keep people informed are both things with dangerous consequences in the real-world and you should know that as well as anybody else.

Even if it turned out that the reality was some tin foil hat conspiracy where Trump was the good guy all along and this was a twisted campaign by meteorologists to make Trump look bad, that still doesn't mean it was irrational for people to care about the issue.

And, again. No one with a rational mind truly cared.

Oh, no! The President said a state that might get affected by a hurricane could get affected by a hurricane. Zomg the horror!

Like, truly think about what you actually are in an uproar over. Lol. Like...

And, then people point to the ridiculous Obama controversies like tan suit or whatever (which I don't think really anyone cared about on this site) to act like your silly outrage is justified. Um, don't you all seem to think you are so much smarter than republicans and the poor non-college educated voters? You sound just as ridiculous as the ridiculous Republicans you chastise.

---

You realize this is only a story because of how much Trump cared about it, right?
---

Yes Corrik other people's lives and livelihood and the possibility of them getting impacted is something which matters to me, and I think communicating relevant dangers accurately to those who might be affected is something that is important. I'm not (aside from the statement below this) saying anything about what Trump should have said or shouldn't have said or who's at fault or whatever, all I'm saying is that this is an issue worth caring about.

Personally, I will mention that I'm upset by Trump's reaction and not so much by the fact that he said the hurricane might hit Alabama.
---

https://twitter.com/pres_nwseo/status/1170115531388719105?s=21

Let me assure you the hard working employees of the NWS had nothing to do with the utterly disgusting and disingenuous tweet sent out by NOAA management tonight #NOAA

From the President of the NWS Employees Organization

---

Corrik7 posted...

And, again. No one with a rational mind truly cared.

At least you admit Trump does not have a rational mind!

---