Forum Replies Created
-
Personally, I don’t see what the angst is all about. Don’t people realize that the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes in the Senate, like Obama had for 2 years? That means there will need to be major compromise and negotiation like we haven’t seen in many a year.
I doubt Trump uses executive orders to push his way through. Not like Obama did, anyways. He’s a populist not an idealist conservative.
I believe negotiation will now find its way back into our federal system.Obama went the executive order route less often than Dubya, Clinton, Reagan and every president going back to Benjamin Harrison. And Trump has promised to overturn all of them — at least until he met with Obama and changed his mind about some of them. But we’ll see. Overturning them is also using the power of executive orders.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php
As far as the lack of negotiation and compromise? That’s virtually entirely on the GOP, whose leaders said on Obama’s inauguration day that they would block everything he tried to do, and they were able to for the most part.
The Dems, in stark contrast to the GOP, are all too willing to compromise and negotiate. That’s one of their biggest faults as a party. Rolling over and playing dead for the other side of the aisle, caving in, basically always starting the negotiation process within the frame the other side creates. Drives me up a wall.
___________________________________________________
That’s not the history I’m looking at. Many times Obama blasted the GOP to get on his side before Congress even debated an issue. And Harry Reid did the same in the Senate. Did the GOP try to block things? Of course. Will the Dems try to block things now? Of course. But look at the tone the last 24 hours where there are reports that Trump is changing his tune some on major issues. It may make many in his camp angry, but it does show me that there is a willingness to negotiate. That’s important going forward.
I thought you agreed in another thread to look at the other’s POV?
NMR,
I read your point of view, considered it carefully, and I disagree. That’s all. And I said why. There is no evidence that Obama or the Dems were unwilling to compromise or negotiate. Again, IMO, they’re guilty of being all too willing to do that. And no American president in my lifetime has tried as hard as Obama to reach across the aisle. Again, he did this to a fault. It’s one of the worst things about the way he governed, IMO.
And the GOP didn’t just try to block things. They took unprecedented steps to do so, and broke every record for filibusters and holds in American history. The Dems don’t come within light years of the recent GOP for that. Think about it, NMR. The GOP refused to even allow hearings to replace Scalia! That’s never been done.
And to make it worse, they said “Let the people decide,” as if they hadn’t already. Obama was elected twice and his term runs four years, not three. And when Republicans thought Hillary was going to win, they changed their mind again about “let the people decide” and said they would block ALL of her nominees for SCOTUS.
Now we get, “The people have spoken,” cuz Trump won the Electoral College. Apparently, that only counts when a Republican is elected. If it’s a Democrat, it’s “We’re going to block everything they do,” despite the people’s vote.
_________________________________________
I’m sorry Billy. Those comments are in the extreme. So the GOP “always” does the wrong and the left/Dems/whatever term you want “always” is correct and fair. Now you’re trying to change how to use the votes that were cast. Disagreement is fine, but villifying the other side with extremes just doesn’t sit with me.
Here’s the facts on fillibusters. Looks like the Dems have had more than their share of them:
FillibustersThere it is. Obstructionism goes both ways.
So, I’m done with this. I’ll comment on your future posts if it appears you are using terms that are inclusive in arguement, but as it is, this feels like the “old board” to me. And I had enough of that to last me for a very long time.
And I assume you’re doing a caricature of me, because I’m the only one who mentioned that on this board. If so, nice touch. I’m beginning to get a better feel for how you tick.
So, just give it time. In a few days, I’ll likely be out of here and off doing other things, like finishing my novels, hiking, climbing and enjoying life beyond the political.
In short, X, you have no clue who I am.
This probably isn’t necessary cause you guys will handle things. BUT. I need to make the standard issue “statement.” This is all tip-toeing toward the edge. Remember the last huddle board fell apart because we let it fly and got into “sides bashing” (eg. “the left/right is universally [something bad]) and personal attacks. The new experiment is that we try to have an open public forum, where politics and social divisions among other things are uncensored topics, but we keep it within bounds.
BTW when it comes to that, I am a reformed basher myself and certainly not One With Answers.
Can we have clashing worldviews yet show just enough decent personal respectful restraint to make the experiment work? I think yes.
Hang on I have more but let me get my notes.
_____________________________________________________
A-ha. Thanks, zn, for that post. I left the previous board because I thought the posts didn’t emphasize issues and got into personal attacks, with no attempts to see the other’s POV. And it did seem to me your own “tone” changed, but I didn’t want to mention it, but you now confirm it. Thank you very much and I’m very willing to participate in such a board the way you are describing it. Being able to discuss in a civil matter is one thing that makes America great and what all should strive for.We know that voter fraud in the USA is so insignificant as to be completely inconsequential. The numbers are ridiculously low. We also know that courts keep overturning doctored up ways to disenfranchise voters, and that the fake concern over “voter fraud” is just an excuse to push disenfranchisement.
That;s all pretty clearly established.
I mean expect among rightie site blogiorialists. But then they’re just deeply partisan. The only people who buy their schtick are just as partisan.
Which is fine. Yes I see you as a political partisan, in politics discussions. I know full well there’s more to you than that. Just as there’s more to me than partisan bashing.
.
[/quote]
______________________________________
I had a friend in Indiana who voted twice. Once in the county he lived in 2 years previously and once where he currently lived. And he really didn’t know it was illegal.
And don’t worry, I have it covered. In fact I will be voting multiple times. I am extra motivated that way because if nothing else, the whole republican fake “voter fraud” campaign really pisses me off.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Here you go, zn. I’m sure you have this down pat. Probably expanded upon it as well.
I didn’t sign up for no 25 hour days.
How can they just add to time like that? Doesn’t that violate physics?
_______________________________________________________
That’s ok. You’ll just have to give it back next spring.
