What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is awful

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

Ok, I will admit that my use of the phrase "executive order" was hastily written. If you go strictly by "executive orders" then as you point out Obama's numbers are at or below several recent Presidents.

But that is part of the problem. All Presidents, including Obama, know that "executive orders" are counted. They have to be. They are numbered, and published. Presidents are very attuned to this, which is why you see Presidents like Obama use things like "executive memoranda" or "executive notices" which are not published, are not counted, but are simply fiats from the oval office that from now on this is how government contractors will work, and this is how we're going to handle a certain aspect of Obamacare, etc...

So, yes, from a purely "executive order" counting methodology, Obama's numbers are not any higher than anyone elses. But he has admitted that he has chosen to go it alone and issue memoranda and other directives when he can't get a divided Congress to act, and that is the Presidential activity that concerns me most of all, because I don't trust Presidents of either party. The fact he is using Executive memoranda or notices instead of Executive orders only makes it less transparent, and more troublesome, in my opinion.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

Ok, I will admit that my use of the phrase "executive order" was hastily written. If you go strictly by "executive orders" then as you point out Obama's numbers are at or below several recent Presidents.

But that is part of the problem. All Presidents, including Obama, know that "executive orders" are counted. They have to be. They are numbered, and published. Presidents are very attuned to this, which is why you see Presidents like Obama use things like "executive memoranda" or "executive notices" which are not published, are not counted, but are simply fiats from the oval office that from now on this is how government contractors will work, and this is how we're going to handle a certain aspect of Obamacare, etc...

So, yes, from a purely "executive order" counting methodology, Obama's numbers are not any higher than anyone elses. But he has admitted that he has chosen to go it alone and issue memoranda and other directives when he can't get a divided Congress to act, and that is the Presidential activity that concerns me most of all, because I don't trust Presidents of either party. The fact he is using Executive memoranda or notices instead of Executive orders only makes it less transparent, and more troublesome, in my opinion.

You know, you can whine about this all you want but you're whining at the wrong thing. The Republicans are the ones who have decided not to Govern. If they'd do their ****ing jobs instead of investigating Hillary Clinton all the time this would be a non-issue.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

You know, you can whine about this all you want but you're whining at the wrong thing. The Republicans are the ones who have decided not to Govern. If they'd do their ****ing jobs instead of investigating Hillary Clinton all the time this would be a non-issue.

Hey now...they also tried to repeal ObamaCare 60 times as well! I mean they never tried to fix it or anything...but its still better than shutting down the Government...they would never do that ;)
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

You know, you can whine about this all you want but you're whining at the wrong thing. The Republicans are the ones who have decided not to Govern. If they'd do their ****ing jobs instead of investigating Hillary Clinton all the time this would be a non-issue.
Ok, so now I'm right, but it's justified???

Again, we can disagree about whether it's justified or not. Personally I think it's a road we are better off not traveling down, especially if there is a chance that someone like Donald Trump could become President.

Here is a link that may help. https://cei.org/10KC/Chapter-3
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

He didn't know how to use the machine.

Remember, he doesn't know how to read. ;) :D
https://youtu.be/7LFkN7QGp2c

Is Eric also illiterate? ;)

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">It turns out misogyny might be hereditary <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ElectionDay?src=hash">#ElectionDay</a> <a href="https://t.co/Mo9lzsuu24">pic.twitter.com/Mo9lzsuu24</a></p>— (((John Erso))) (@blackbear93) <a href="https://twitter.com/blackbear93/status/796082212659724289">November 8, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

How did Trump "strike a chord" with lower income whites? If he did they're idiots not racists. ;) And Bill's commentary doesn't suggest a vote for Trump makes sense since he offers nothing of substance to those folks. The level of contortion coming from the, "Not a Trump guy" contingent is very entertaining but must be very painful for them. :)

btw if they - and lower income blacks - are worse off than before it's not because of Obama - it's because the GOP did everything they possibly could to get in his way. Is that really something that doesn't register?

A growing victim mentality. Started with Rush, Fox and has grown beyond its limits. Now everyone else is to blame for my predicament - the rich, the minorities, immigrants, wall street, everybody. Nobody's accountable for their own predicament or their ability to get out of it. Sounds bizarre, but that seems to be the deal. That along with holdover conservatives who vote against any liberal they see...its the GOP this cycle and maybe going forward.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

A pretty good read from 538 about 538 to kill time until polls close and real results start coming in.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...of-outcomes-and-most-of-them-come-up-clinton/

That is very well put and backs up what I was saying about 538 the last few days. Nate isnt skewing things, he just has no way to account for things the polls cant tell him which makes things super volatile. Florida's large Latino turnout is a fact (we have seen the numbers) but since most of them were probably never polled by anyone (since they rarely voted previously) it is not something Nate can really add into his projections because they are just not accounted for in his data. In 4 years that will be different but for now he can only use the numbers he has.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

Is Eric also illiterate? ;)

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">It turns out misogyny might be hereditary <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ElectionDay?src=hash">#ElectionDay</a> <a href="https://t.co/Mo9lzsuu24">pic.twitter.com/Mo9lzsuu24</a></p>— (((John Erso))) (@blackbear93) <a href="https://twitter.com/blackbear93/status/796082212659724289">November 8, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Spectacularly awesome. Shopped?
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

That is very well put and backs up what I was saying about 538 the last few days. Nate isnt skewing things, he just has no way to account for things the polls cant tell him which makes things super volatile. Florida's large Latino turnout is a fact (we have seen the numbers) but since most of them were probably never polled by anyone (since they rarely voted previously) it is not something Nate can really add into his projections because they are just not accounted for in his data. In 4 years that will be different but for now he can only use the numbers he has.

And that's fine. There wouldn't be odds if he was to totally predict the future.

But he needs to stay true to his ultimate goal....that is not to average polls, but rather used a fact based approach to get to the best estimate out there of where the election is heading.The problem is not that he can't explain it. Its that he doesn't continue to take the next step...that is adding a third dimension - early voting. The fact he's not incorporating this new data point will likely cause him to be less accurate in the final days.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

Ok, so now I'm right, but it's justified???

Again, we can disagree about whether it's justified or not. Personally I think it's a road we are better off not traveling down, especially if there is a chance that someone like Donald Trump could become President.

Here is a link that may help. https://cei.org/10KC/Chapter-3

No I think Scooby and I agree with you, the problem is (right now) one party has decided they dont want to do anything. They especially dont want to do anything if a certain Black President puts forth the idea and act like petulant children being forced to go to Grandma's House anytime they are asked to. Well things need to be done, and if the Legislative Branch is going shirk their responsibility someone needs to be the adult in the room. If the Congrssional GOP wants to sit on their hands and not govern then Executive Orders are needed.

You (not you personally) dont get to be the "Party of No" and then whine because you didnt get a say in the decision. Just like you dont get to play the "Let the People Decide Who Should Choose the SC Justice" card and then, when your gambit blows up in your face come out and say "We still wont hold hearings!". That makes you a hypocrite and you lose your right to complain.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

My primary criticism of Obama is expansion of use of Executive Orders to essentially dictate law.

You can thank the GOP in Congress for that. Their admitted primary focus has been to make him a one-term president since Day 1. They have done nothing except pout. In order to keep government moving, he's had to resort to EOs.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

You can thank the GOP in Congress for that. Their admitted primary focus has been to make him a one-term president since Day 1. They have done nothing except pout. In order to keep government moving, he's had to resort to EOs.

Also, lets not forget any executive order does have to pass muster with the court system. Its not like he's the Pope handing down edicts that everybody has to follow with no recourse.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XXIV: Both candidates are the same, but here's why yours is aw

Obama's situation has been brutal. The GOP's primary goal has been to stonewall him at every turn. Note that they universally refused to vote on a SCOTUS nomination inspite of the fact it goes against the Constitution (which evidently they hold so dear). If any politician refuses to participate in governing they should be bypassed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top