Jump to content

Donald Trump 2018

TheFlyingBoat

By TheFlyingBoat
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28,794

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

More lanes doesn't make traffic move more quickly, it actually increases traffic. This example cuts right to the heart of how government just paying for more stuff because we think it should help frequently backfires. So yes, actually, an inefficient solution may very well be an inherently bad idea.

It makes traffic move more quickly at first. What happens is that increased traffic flow leads to new development around that expanded artery. New businesses and new residences. Things conservatives traditionally call growth and prosperity. Then they expand again and the cycle continues. 

The alternative to expanding existing roads is to build new roads. To diversify. To make sure the load is distributed over a broader network. Development builds up around them too. Maybe instead of having a few really big service stations on the few bloated major superhighways, we have a whole lot of medium sized ones all spread out so that if something goes wrong with one, it won't bring the whole system crashing down. None of them are the profit center that their superhighway counterparts are, but collectively they're better for the long term stability and security of the network and everyone using it. 

It's been my observation that conservatives tend to favor the former scenario over the latter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 44.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    3593

  • retread

    1324

  • Brisketexan

    1195

  • jimmyjazz

    1186

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

M12BH
M12BH

SInce y'all seem to be my clearinghouse for all things political, let me tell a story.  A couple of them, actually.  Three, if you want to be specific. When I was 14 I went with a family frien

ConferenceRoom
ConferenceRoom
brown water
brown water

Slocum’s Razor

Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26,511

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

It makes traffic move more quickly at first. What happens is that increased traffic flow leads to new development around that expanded artery. New businesses and new residences. Things conservatives traditionally call growth and prosperity. Then they expand again and the cycle continues. 

The alternative to expanding existing roads is to build new roads. To diversify. To make sure the load is distributed over a broader network. Development builds up around them too. Maybe instead of having a few really big service stations on the few bloated major superhighways, we have a whole lot of medium sized ones all spread out so that if something goes wrong with one, it won't bring the whole system crashing down. None of them are the profit center that their superhighway counterparts are, but collectively they're better for the long term stability and security of the network and everyone using it. 

It's been my observation that conservatives tend to favor the former scenario over the latter. 

Demand inducement talk not going away. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lagunamadre

Lagunamadre 1,975

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, Washpark said:

President Donald Trump said Russia was no longer interfering in US elections — the second time in three days that he has contradicted the conclusions of America intelligence agencies.

 

https://www.ft.com/content/c6a3dbca-8ab1-11e8-b18d-0181731a0340

He will come out tomorrow, read off a script, and say he meant to say "Russia was YES longer interfering in US elections, you see when I said no, I meant yes. And while we are on the topic, what I meant to say is they DON'T let you grab them by the pussy. Good, all cleared up, great." 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85,450

Posted
Posted (edited)

"For the People"

vs.

"Better off Now"

I prefer: "You're fucked. We're all going to die."

Honorable mention: "What difference does it make? Thanks Putin."

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jiggy-Z

Jiggy-Z 3,433

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

He will come out tomorrow, read off a script, and say he meant to say "Russia was YES longer interfering in US elections, you see when I said no, I meant yes. And while we are on the topic, what I meant to say is they DON'T let you grab them by the pussy. Good, all cleared up, great." 

giphy.webp

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32,395

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Foosters said:

Shit, I'm a criminal defense attorney in East Los Angeles, and I rarely come across MS-13.

It's kind of amazing how in less than 20 years Team R has convinced the public at large that A) Al-Qaeda or the Taliban is coming to personally attack them and their families, and B) MS-13 is now going to do the same, and were able to use these threats as a means to stay in power, even if the threats were far-fetched (think MS-13 is gonna end up in Rapid City?)

 

Wonder what the next ethnic and/or religious based organization is going to be used in this purpose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5,503

Posted
Posted

And this fuckery will be drowned by all the other crap, but for fuck's sake :Trump loyalists at VA shuffling, purging employees before new secretary takes over.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-loyalists-at-va-shuffling-purging-employees-before-new-secretary-takes-over/2018/07/18/a4462aae-892d-11e8-8aea-86e88ae760d8_story.html?utm_term=.2ed7e3698e38

Let's just purge anyone with any knowledge of how to take care of veterans.  More important that government employees serve the orange toddler king.

 

Quote

Ahead of Robert Wilkie’s likely confirmation to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs, Trump loyalists at the agency are taking aggressive steps to purge or reassign staff perceived to be disloyal to President Trump and his agenda for veterans, according to multiple people familiar with the moves.

The transfers include more than a dozen career civil servants who have been moved from the leadership suite at VA headquarters and reassigned, to lower-visibility roles. The employees served agency leaders, some dating back more than two decades, in crucial support roles that help a new secretary.

None say they were given reasons for their reassignments.

The moves are being carried out by a small cadre of political appointees led by Acting Secretary Peter O’Rourke who have consolidated power in the four months since they helped oust former Secretary David Shulkin.

The reshuffling marks a new stage in a long estrangement between civil servants and Trump loyalists at VA, where staff upheaval and sinking morale threatens to derail service to one of the president’s key constituencies, according to current and former employees.

Among those reassigned is an experienced scheduler who Wilkie told colleagues he wanted to work for him once he is confirmed by the Senate, according to former and current employees.

Other career senior executives with institutional knowledge of VA’s troubled benefits operation also have been sidelined, some to other cities, according to multiple people who asked not to be identified because of the issue’s sensitivity. A high-ranking executive appointed during the Obama administration to a six-year term quit last week after clashing with Trump aides. Even some Trump appointees have been pushed out for challenging the leadership group.

These are people who served multiple administrations,” said one employee who was moved, “but they only want them to serve the Trump administration. You can’t run a department like that.”

At a House hearing on Tuesday, a visibly irritated Rep. Elizabeth Esty (D-CT.) pressed O’Rourke to explain why he has “removed, demoted or reassigned” a “significant number of career employees.”

O’Rourke called his actions “well-planned and designed moves” to improve “efficiency and effectiveness.” He acknowledged that changes were not based on poor performance.

He said he is encouraging other VA leaders to follow suit.

Esty countered that she suspects “loyalty concerns”are behind the transfers.

“To be clearing out that many people during the time of an acting secretary is disturbing,” she said. “You’re going to lose institutional knowledge.”

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105,184

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Oh, I see Trump as a necessary evil.  We are going to get a shitload of bad blood out of our system over the next 10-20 years because of his presidency.

It will be painful and suck but America will come out stronger as a people because of it. 

Sure -- it's red devil chemo.  There's only two options: it clears out the cancer....or it kills you.  The coin is still tumbling up in the air, we'll see how it lands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chad Fuck

Chad Fuck 17,699

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

Well this thread has gone to shit.  Can one of y'all debating education policy create a thread and move the discussion there?  I don't need to filter through actual policy discussion when I'm really here to see what stupid thing the Dotard did next.

Mother fucking this.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2,951

Posted
Posted

I find the policy tak interesting although I'm not as well-informed as many in here. You'd have to wonder how many voters actually think about the wonky details (to them at least) in the last 10 pages. I mean, Trump got elected repeating "The Wall will be so beautiful." That 35-40% is gone and not reachable. I wonder how many of the remaining voters are reachable with specific, D or R policy planks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29,700

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

To get someone's vote, you need to tell them a story. They need a vision.

"THIS MAN IS SO AWFUL!" is not going to win anything. Anyone who didn't vote for Hillary in 2016 is not going to vote for a Democrat in 2020. They'll toss some virtue signalling votes in a mid-term, but when the presidential election comes calling they will find the 2020 Democrat candidate too progressive and will either (1) come home for the Supreme Court or (2) virtue signal some more with another Gary Johnson vote.

I didn't vote for Hillary in 2016; instead, I voted Stein. Of course, I have the luxury of living in Texas where the Electoral College essentially disenfranchises my presidential vote. Hell, I voted Nader in '96 & '00. All that said, I did vote Obama in '08 and '12 and would happily vote for another liberal(ish) Democratic candidate if I believed in him/her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2,951

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This was incredible.  Any other White House would have been like, “Of course we’re not doing that dumb shit.”

They're going to let the GRU help Mueller. The least we can do is reciprocate...

Edited by retread
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23,367

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Sure -- it's red devil chemo.  There's only two options: it clears out the cancer....or it kills you.  The coin is still tumbling up in the air, we'll see how it lands.

The only certainty is the coin will have plenty of blood on it when it hits the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 33,045

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, retread said:

I find the policy tak interesting although I'm not as well-informed as many in here. You'd have to wonder how many voters actually think about the wonky details (to them at least) in the last 10 pages. I mean, Trump got elected repeating "The Wall will be so beautiful." That 35-40% is gone and not reachable. I wonder how many of the remaining voters are reachable with specific, D or R policy planks?

They're not reachable but you can keep a number of them home and away from the polls by peppering them with reminders "It's been two years. Trump has been President and the Republicans have been in control of Congress. There is no progress on our wall! DON'T SUPPORT THESE LIARS AND UNAMERICAN CHARLATANS!"

Political ad paid for by Americans For The Wall

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TornACL

TornACL 7,722

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This was incredible.  Any other White House would have been like, “Of course we’re not doing that dumb shit.”

Art of the Deal!

Trump is the kind of guy who pays sticker price for a car, and then writes a blog about how to negotiate tough with those scumbag car salesmen to get a good deal via firm handshakes and tough talk.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105,184

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, TornACL said:

Art of the Deal!

Trump is the kind of guy who pays sticker price for a car, and then writes a blog about how to negotiate tough with those scumbag car salesmen to get a good deal via firm handshakes and tough talk.

Quote

I negotiated the best car deal, the absolute best.  Lots of people are saying it.  I knew, but I bet you didn't know, lots of people don't know, with that TruCoat, if you don’t get it you get oxidation problems it’ll cost you a heck of a lot more than $500.  The TruCoat is $500 -- many people say it's worth more than that, many times that amount.  I got Putin to do something that they've never done before. But seeing as it's special circumstances and all, he says he can knock a hundred dollars off that TruCoat.  I told you -- I get the best deals.  Everyone knows it.  Art of the Deal, the best deals.  Hillary couldn't have gotten them to knock a hundred dollars off the TruCoat.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bookman

Bookman 4,639

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Anastasis said:

The 129MM Americans who voted in 2016 were given shitty choices by shitty parties, one of which in particular cultivated a culture of right out fucking nonsense among their base after many of years of demonstrating at every chance they got that they had no true principles and couldn't govern their way out of a paper bag.  The other was captured by a political dynasty, held the finger on the scale during the primary, and took for granted the fact that a coalition of voters who pinned their votes on "Hope and Change" but got neither would show up and pull the lever.  But yeah, its the 129MM's fault. 

I suppose that makes you feel better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...