POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

It should be a paid position is another discussion. That being said never having to worry about finances again is such a curse. Boy, what a curse. A curse I just couldn't live with.

But that isnt exactly the point is it?

Lets be honest, whether you like her or not she had zero choice in the matter. Now maybe she could use her position to better the world but she is under no obligation to do so. And she cant divorce him either...not while he is POTUS.

My gf and I argue about this a lot because she hates Melania and everything she stands for. I agree with her, but think that just because she is a gold digger and no desire to be a good role model doesnt disqualify her from being FLOTUS and doesnt make it ok to attack her in the way many do. It wasnt right to do that to Michelle or Laura or Hillary and it isnt here.

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

That is how right wing factions operate. The political right as it is actually practiced (in contrast with ideological conservatism which is typically just window dressing) amounts to picking out a few Other targets and then riling up the peasants with pitchforks. Appeal to fear and primal urges to violence. Tap the ape mind. Twas ever thus from Louis Napolean to Mussolini to Pinochet to Milošević. Trump is just the next demagogue to stir the hatred pot for his own gain.

Bingo and the Dems play into because they have the knowledge to know they are right. Problem is they forget people hate being wrong.

 

[E.J. Smith]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

Isn't that the point of political partisanship? When a Democrat is in the White House, conservatives get to take their shots, both high and low, and vice versa when a Republican occupies the seat. There is no need for conservatives here to take shots at Trump. Pretty much everything that can or should be said about him, and every link, no matter how silly, is already being made by those who lean left here. The same was true when Obama was in office. There wasn't a need for Kepler or you or others to beat the bushes looking for "TMZ level" stuff about him. There were plenty of others here doing it.

That is so intellectually and morally weak. To equate Obama and Trump as just more or less two sides of the same coin is ridiculous. A person could certainly disagree with Obama's policies and approach to governing but you can't argue that he was trying to abolish our system of government and the constitution itself.

Trump isn't a Republican, he's an Autocrat, capital letter if that helps it feel more like an organized thing to you, because it is. Trump isn't trying to work within the longstanding and agreed upon framework of governance - even at the far right end of it - he's trying to do away with framework altogether. He is an attack on self-determination, liberty, the rule of law, representative democracy itself.

I may have disliked the way Reagan and the Bushes used the government but I never felt like they were trying to dismantle it outright. Trump is. If you're waiting for a formal announcement on that, you're an idiot- would you stand in the road and wait for an announcement that the car 50 ft away from you going 40 mph hour is going to hit you before you actually did something? No, the situation is fairly obvious and self-explanatory. People committing reprehensible and criminal acts don't often announce "hey, we're committing criminal and reprehensible acts over here, just so you know..."

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

Bingo and the Dems play into because they have the knowledge to know they are right. Problem is they forget people hate being wrong.

Liberals' main problem is we come from academia so our default setting is honesty. Conservatives come from business so their default setting is lying (excuse me, "marketing"). So when we get into a bar fight we draw fine distinctions while the other side is shoving the broken bottle in.

Politics is dirty and vicious. It's war with less respect for the opponent. Nothing in our life experience of term papers and think tank policies prepares us for that reality. "Everybody has a plan until they get hit."

 

[St. Clown]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

No. He just needs to be ignored. If you're not a potential Democratic vote in 2018 and 2020 you're not worth talking too. That includes the wishy washy centrists. All that matters is turnout of your base. Period. If Hillary turned out the base she wins.

Wow.

 

[unofan]

I have been honest. Let me repeat what I've said before:
1. Trump needs to be impeached/removed from office.
2. I lean to the right, fiscally, in general.
3. I lean to the left on social issues, in general.

Just because I don't condemn Trump every chance there is, doesn't mean I'm defending him. Otherwise the opposite would be true, also. If I'm not defending him, does that mean I'm condemning him? No.

The interplay between 2 and 3 is what ultimately matters. I know few if any people who say "let's let the government spend unlimited funds without issue." Likewise, I know very few if any people who will say "it's ok to let the poor die in the streets."

But if you care more about 2 than 3, you're probably a Republican. If you care more about 3 than 2, you're more likely to be a Democrat. Because you can't be socially liberal if you aren't willing to provide funding to ensure those policies actually have force and effect. And if you're willing to provide funding, you're not strictly fiscally conservative, at least by the modern definition.

 

[unofan]

But that isnt exactly the point is it?

Lets be honest, whether you like her or not she had zero choice in the matter. Now maybe she could use her position to better the world but she is under no obligation to do so. And she cant divorce him either...not while he is POTUS.

My gf and I argue about this a lot because she hates Melania and everything she stands for. I agree with her, but think that just because she is a gold digger and no desire to be a good role model doesnt disqualify her from being FLOTUS and doesnt make it ok to attack her in the way many do. It wasnt right to do that to Michelle or Laura or Hillary and it isnt here.

Why couldn't she divorce him? Because it'd be improper for a sitting FLOTUS? If she didn't choose to do it, then who cares?

And if they didn't talk about it before he ran, that says more about their marriage than anything else.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

The interplay between 2 and 3 is what ultimately matters. I know few if any people who say "let's let the government spend unlimited funds without issue." Likewise, I know very few if any people who will say "it's ok to let the poor die in the streets."

But if you care more about 2 than 3, you're probably a Republican. If you care more about 3 than 2, you're more likely to be a Democrat. Because you can't be socially liberal if you aren't willing to provide funding to ensure those policies actually have force and effect. And if you're willing to provide funding, you're not strictly fiscally conservative, at least by the modern definition.

I think you understand now. I never claimed to be "strictly" fiscally conservative, including in the post I made and you quoted.

 

[unofan]

I think you understand now. I never claimed to be "strictly" fiscally conservative, including in the post I made and you quoted.

But you said you lean that way. So the question is which way do you lean more when push comes to shove, towards 3 or towards 2.

 

[JF_Gophers]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

I don't think the GOP is fiscally conservative, and hasn't been for a long time.

They hate paying to help the needy, and talk up less taxes, but they have no problem debt spending on things they want.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

Wow.

Truth hurts. That's exactly what the GOP did this time and they win. And remember, when history is written the winners write it.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

But that isnt exactly the point is it?

Lets be honest, whether you like her or not she had zero choice in the matter. Now maybe she could use her position to better the world but she is under no obligation to do so. And she cant divorce him either...not while he is POTUS.

My gf and I argue about this a lot because she hates Melania and everything she stands for. I agree with her, but think that just because she is a gold digger and no desire to be a good role model doesnt disqualify her from being FLOTUS and doesnt make it ok to attack her in the way many do. It wasnt right to do that to Michelle or Laura or Hillary and it isnt here.

Her having zero choice is not my problem. Mrs. Obama had a choice in the matter. So did both Mrs. Bush and Hillary Clinton. Just because she married an ape who gives her NO SAY in her life choices is irrelevant. That was her decision.

 

[The Rube]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

But you said you lean that way. So the question is which way do you lean more when push comes to shove, towards 3 or towards 2.

It's too complicated to choose either/or. Depends on the issue, or the fiscal program/subject, current needs of society/country, all that. Also, sometimes one has nothing to do with the other. For example, the LGBT issues of late. There's nothing fiscal about that, really, and on that issue, I definitely lean to the left.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

Looks like Franken and Klobuchar have discussed it (I'm reading between the lines) and Klobuchar is the one that's going to run.

http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-s-franken-won-t-run-for-president-in-2020/424089483/

Minnesota Sen. Al Franken is definitely not running for president in 2020.

“I got way, way, way too much to do right now to even think about that, other than to say, ‘No, I’m not going to do that,’” Franken told People Magazine in a story published Wednesday.

Minnesota’s other U.S. senator, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, has also been in the 2020 presidential mix. Unlike Franken, she has not categorically ruled out running.

 

[rufus]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

FLOTUS is a ceremonial role. Point to where it is codified in any document. Where it says "these are the roles and responsibilities.". You can't because there isn't one. It doesn't exist. Providing an office and staff (which is in charge of White House social events among other things) doesn't set up any sort of obligation to live in the White House or do any specific thing at all. We know this in part because Hilary lived in New York for the last year of Bill's term. I remember well how upsetting that was to Democrats then too.

If the first lady doesn't have roles and responsibilities, why should the taxpayers be paying for her office and staff? What does she need a staff for, anyway?

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

But that isnt exactly the point is it?

Lets be honest, whether you like her or not she had zero choice in the matter. Now maybe she could use her position to better the world but she is under no obligation to do so. And she cant divorce him either...not while he is POTUS.

My gf and I argue about this a lot because she hates Melania and everything she stands for. I agree with her, but think that just because she is a gold digger and no desire to be a good role model doesnt disqualify her from being FLOTUS and doesnt make it ok to attack her in the way many do. It wasnt right to do that to Michelle or Laura or Hillary and it isnt here.

I think I'm with Handy on this. It's a complex issue. But what I think it all boils down to is "What does Melania want?" If she doesn't want to take the role of a traditional FLOTUS but still wants to be married to Trump - for whatever reason, judgment aside - then we should respect that. It's her decision. Now, that doesn't mean she can't be compared to previous FLOTUSs, but attacking her because she doesn't want it seems a bit off to me.

Part of it is because we've had a string of extremely strong FLOTUSs: Michelle, Laura, Hillary, Barbara. Each had at least one cause they were passionate about.

Now, I'm not saying we can't comment on her or her marriage. We just have to be careful how we go about it.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

If the first lady doesn't have roles and responsibilities, why should the taxpayers be paying for her office and staff? What does she need a staff for, anyway?

Might want to run for President someday.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

The interplay between 2 and 3 is what ultimately matters. I know few if any people who say "let's let the government spend unlimited funds without issue." Likewise, I know very few if any people who will say "it's ok to let the poor die in the streets."

But if you care more about 2 than 3, you're probably a Republican. If you care more about 3 than 2, you're more likely to be a Democrat. Because you can't be socially liberal if you aren't willing to provide funding to ensure those policies actually have force and effect. And if you're willing to provide funding, you're not strictly fiscally conservative, at least by the modern definition.

Nailed it. It was someone on this site that brought that up when I said it a couple years back. Maybe even before 2012. It totally shook my worldview and eventually changed how I voted. In 2012 I don't think I voted for more than one Republican on the ballot. In 2004 and 2008 I'll bet it was closer to 50:50.

I realized I couldn't reconcile 2 with 3. I felt much stronger about 3, so I started voting that way. Ultimately, I started becoming an advocate for issues like women's rights by joining the women's leadership forum at work, I also took a leadership position for my division's volunteering organization and became more active in not just participating in but also organizing the volunteering opportunities, donating to various causes, etc.

2 and 3 are conflicting positions. Once a person realizes that, they'll find their true self.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

It's too complicated to choose either/or. Depends on the issue, or the fiscal program/subject, current needs of society/country, all that. Also, sometimes one has nothing to do with the other. For example, the LGBT issues of late. There's nothing fiscal about that, really, and on that issue, I definitely lean to the left.

But it's not. On nearly all issues, 2 conflicts with 3. The simplicity lies within the complexity.

If you identify as LGBT, you are significantly more likely to suffer from substance abuse, depression, and anxiety. You're also significantly more likely to be homeless. How can you be fiscally conservative and cut programs that address these issues and still call yourself progressive on LGBT issues?

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.10 - Stage Two in Perpetuity

Why couldn't she divorce him? Because it'd be improper for a sitting FLOTUS? If she didn't choose to do it, then who cares?

And if they didn't talk about it before he ran, that says more about their marriage than anything else.

Well they have a pre-nup anyways...and if Hillary didnt divorce Bill and Jackie didnt divorce John no FLOTUS will ever do it. It just wont happen. And you know it...