Trump's Team

[Horn6721]

? Mr D
If by Trump's politics you mean lowering every taxpayer's taxes including corporate taxes,reducing some regulations that gave hamstrung especially small businesses, putting American interests first(first not exclusionary ),repealing AND replacing obamacare,making a more serious attempt to control the borders, maybe even doing the things Clinton promised in 95
Then yes I like those politics. And I am sure there are more things I will like.
Will I like everything he does or says? No and i will not hesitate to say so.
So your snarky remark is not accurate,rude but not accurate.

 

[Joe Fan]

Nice contrast --

On Friday, Eric Trump raised more than $16M for St. Jude’s Children Hospital
https://www.nytimes.com/subscriptio...exp=close_door_90_10_jun2016&campaignId=67LWR


Meanwhile, about 20 celebs (Jane Fonda, Jamie Lee Curtis, Judd Apatow, Patricia Arquette, Christopher Guest, Tim Robbins ....) are planning a telethon-style fundraiser tp raise money for abortions on inauguration day, Jan 20.
http://www.clickondetroit.com/entertainment/celebrityfilled-telethon-set-for-inauguration-day

 

[Mr. Deez]

? Mr D
If by Trump's politics you mean lowering every taxpayer's taxes including corporate taxes,reducing some regulations that gave hamstrung especially small businesses, putting American interests first(first not exclusionary ),repealing AND replacing obamacare,making a more serious attempt to control the borders, maybe even doing the things Clinton promised in 95
Then yes I like those politics. And I am sure there are more things I will like.
Will I like everything he does or says? No and i will not hesitate to say so.
So your snarky remark is not accurate,rude but not accurate.

What's remarkable is that you're actually proving how right my snarky comment was.

 

[NJlonghorn]

Nice contrast --

On Friday, Eric Trump raised more than $16M for St. Jude’s Children Hospital
https://www.nytimes.com/subscriptio...exp=close_door_90_10_jun2016&campaignId=67LWR


Meanwhile, about 20 celebs (Jane Fonda, Jamie Lee Curtis, Judd Apatow, Patricia Arquette, Christopher Guest, Tim Robbins ....) are planning a telethon-style fundraiser tp raise money for abortions on inauguration day, Jan 20.
http://www.clickondetroit.com/entertainment/celebrityfilled-telethon-set-for-inauguration-day

They are raising money for three organizations, one of which dedicates a tiny sliver of its resources to abortion.

 

[Horn6721]

Mr D
I have never said Trump was the best. Since there were only 2 candidates with any realistic chance to win I decided Trump was the better choice.
Just curious of the policies or plans I listed which would you not want to see come to fruition?

 

[Mr. Deez]

Mr D
I have never said Trump was the best. Since there were only 2 candidates with any realistic chance to win I decided Trump was the better choice.
Just curious of the policies or plans I listed which would you not want to see come to fruition?

I didn't say you claimed he was the best. What I'm getting at here is that his qualifications, experience, etc. don't actually matter to you - certainly not enough to make a difference. His politics are what mattered to you, and you prove that by redirecting the discussion away from qualifications and experience and toward his politics. Whatever his background was, you'd rationalize it to support the decision you had already made based on politics, as you did before you redirected the discussion. That's why I stand by the snarky comment. If Trump was a gay porn star but otherwise said the same things he did in the same manner he said them, it would not have affected your vote at all. You'd rationalize it. I'm not sure how, but you would. Maybe you'd say his experience dealing with sleazy and dishonest people made him qualified. Maybe you'd say that only a very smart and creative guy could screw around with thousands of filthy dudes and not get a STD. You'd have to get creative, but you'd do whatever it took.

 

[Joe Fan]

They are raising money for three organizations, one of which dedicates a tiny sliver of its resources to abortion.

That is some misinformation if you are saying only a tiny sliver of what PP does is abortion. Fact check: false

 

[NJlonghorn]

That is some misinformation if you are saying only a tiny sliver of what PP does is abortion. Fact check: false

I've heard in the past that abortion comprises about 3% of Planned Parenthood. I've heard critiques saying the true number is 90+%, but the analysis sounded like hocus-pocus. I just searched found this NYT article, and it looks like both sides are twisting the data. It is hard to quantify based on information that is available publicly, but a fair number could be anywhere between 15% and 50%. Not a "tiny sliver" in any case.

So, I'll revise my statement to say that they are raising money for 3 organizations, one of which devotes half or less of its focus to providing abortion services. I still don't see anything wrong with that, so long as abortion is legal.

 

[Horn6721]

MrD
You are correct , you did not say I thought Trump was the best you said "and you'd come up with a rationale for why that makes him a perfect fit for the White House."

No I would not nor do I think he is a perfect fit. He is a better fit.
What I do think is that between the 2 candidates ( one of whom WAS going to become POTUS) he had more relevant and successful experience including with world leaders.
For sure I did like his stated policies better than hers.

I will ask again
Which of the policies I listed do you not want to see come to fruition?
here from my question above:
lowering every taxpayer's taxes including corporate taxes,
reducing some of the more onerous regulations that have hamstrung many businesses especially small businesses,
putting American interests first(first not exclusionary but merely first)
,repealing AND replacing obamacare,
making a more serious attempt to control the borders, maybe even doing the things Clinton promised in 95

 

[Mr. Deez]

MrD
You are correct , you did not say I thought Trump was the best you said "and you'd come up with a rationale for why that makes him a perfect fit for the White House."

No I would not nor do I think he is a perfect fit. He is a better fit.
What I do think is that between the 2 candidates ( one of whom WAS going to become POTUS) he had more relevant and successful experience including with world leaders.
For sure I did like his stated policies better than hers.

OK, nitpick over the semantics if you want. The point is that the experience wouldn't have mattered. He could have spent the last 40 years calling himself Richard Tickler, and you would have considered him a "better" fit and voted for him. Furthermore, if HRC's and Trump's politics were reversed, I think you'd find a rationale why you preferred her experience over his. The tail is wagging the dog.

Nevertheless, what encounter did Trump have with a world leader that most impressed you and convinced you that he was qualified to be President?

I will ask again
Which of the policies I listed do you not want to see come to fruition?

Are you just asking because you're curious? It's not really relevant to the discussion, but I'll answer it anyway.

lowering every taxpayer's taxes including corporate taxes,

So long as it's part of a plan to balance the budget or at least get the deficit under control, I'm all for it.

reducing some of the more onerous regulations that have hamstrung many businesses especially small businesses,

I'd have to know the specific regulations at issue to form a firm opinion, but I'm generally favorable to this.

putting American interests first(first not exclusionary but merely first)

That's a slogan and far too open to interpretation to form an opinion on it. If you have something specific, feel free to ask.

,repealing AND replacing obamacare,

I'm all for repealing it, but I'm not a fan of passing a repeal without also adopting a replacement at the same time. I think that's asking for trouble. That doesn't mean it has to happen overnight. Obamacare can be phased out, and the replacement can be phased in, but the legislation should be passed at the same time and preferably in one bill. What will I think of the replacement? Depends on what's in the bill.

I also think this is the GOP's and the insurance industry's last chance on healthcare reform. If the replacement sucks, we'll have single payer or something like it within ten years.

making a more serious attempt to control the borders,

Obviously a good thing.

maybe even doing the things Clinton promised in 95

Can't comment. I don't know what promise Clinton made in 1995 that has you excited.

 

[Joe Fan]

I've heard in the past that abortion comprises about 3% of Planned Parenthood. I've heard critiques saying the true number is 90+%, but the analysis sounded like hocus-pocus. I just searched found this NYT article, and it looks like both sides are twisting the data. It is hard to quantify based on information that is available publicly, but a fair number could be anywhere between 15% and 50%. Not a "tiny sliver" in any case.

So, I'll revise my statement to say that they are raising money for 3 organizations, one of which devotes half or less of its focus to providing abortion services. I still don't see anything wrong with that, so long as abortion is legal.

Here is something easy to watch (if you dont mind numbers) on PP's oft repeated 3% claim

 

[Seattle Husker]

Sen. Chuck Schumer's response to Senate Majority leader Mich McConnell's need to move forward with confirmations despite their ethics filings not being completed. Notice the date and based on all reporting so far, the Dems completed all the filings before the hearings.

 

[nashhorn]

Here is something easy to watch (if you dont mind numbers) on PP's oft repeated 3% claim

MAKES ME SICK.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Sen. Chuck Schumer's response to Senate Majority leader Mich McConnell's need to move forward with confirmations despite their ethics filings not being completed. Notice the date and based on all reporting so far, the Dems completed all the filings before the hearings.

That's pretty clever. I see no reason to hold Trump nominees to a different standard than we held Obama nominees. Of course, this will ring hollow if Reid blew off McConnell's letter. I honestly don't remember how this went.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Cory Booker is beginning his 2020 presidential bid. Link.

 

[Joe Fan]

Cory Booker is beginning his 2020 presidential bid. Link.

 

[Horn6721]

Mr D
Thank you for going back and answering my questions.I asked because I wanted to know. I will not agree with him on everything nor will anyone. I wanted to know on what you would agree
I will give you a short answer for now on Trump's dealings with world leaders. I considered the number of nations Trump has properties and businesses especially the number of Muslim countries. In those countries in particular agreements would have involved the leaders of those countries.(Turkey Indonsia Qatar Dubai UAE etc)
Having Teresa May of what is sufely our most important ally make a trip to USA to meet with Trump even before inauguration is pretty telling. The premier of Japan likewise. There have been beads of eastern Europe countries speak with respect and afmiration. Do not even need to mention BiBi.

Btw when I say putting our interests first a prime example would be the debacle Iran deal. GITMO another.

 

[horninchicago]

Funny, Sessions is engaged in listening to him and Reid has his head down like he wants to be anywhere but there.

 

[Joe Fan]

Funny, Sessions is engaged in listening to him and Reid has his head down like he wants to be anywhere but there.

lol

 

[Mr. Deez]

I will give you a short answer for now on Trump's dealings with world leaders. I considered the number of nations Trump has properties and businesses especially the number of Muslim countries. In those countries in particular agreements would have involved the leaders of those countries.(Turkey Indonsia Qatar Dubai UAE etc)

Two things. First, do you think that he met with the actual leaders of these countries incident to setting up his business interests? For example, he set up a golf course in Scotland. Do you think he dealt directly with David Cameron in making that deal? I seriously doubt it. Most likely he dealt with local Scottish officials and didn't go any higher than that. (Hell, do you think foreign businessmen who want to open golf courses or hotels in the United States meet with the President of the United States?) Furthermore, he probably never dealt with any of them personally. He probably hired a high-powered Scottish law firm to make the arrangements for him.

Second, do you think setting up a foreign business is similar to international diplomacy at the highest levels? Surely you don't.

Having Teresa May of what is sufely our most important ally make a trip to USA to meet with Trump even before inauguration is pretty telling. The premier of Japan likewise.

What I think you're seeing is a lot of countries wanting to figure out what the hell his policy is going to be toward them. Obama was not a good ally to Britain, and Trump openly backed Brexit. I am hopeful that our relations with them will improve, but that's not going to be easy to do without weakening relations with the rest of Europe.

There have been beads of eastern Europe countries speak with respect and afmiration.

Most normal world leaders speak with respect and affirmation toward an incoming President of the United States. It's very much in their interests to do so. Most of Eastern Europe wasn't happy to see Trump win, and it wasn't because of the PC globalist reasons that Western Europe wasn't happy to see him win.

Do not even need to mention BiBi.

Again, no surprise. Obama was the most anti-Israel American President in history and by a long way.

Btw when I say putting our interests first a prime example would be the debacle Iran deal. GITMO another.

That doesn't explain much. There are rationales for why the Iran deal and closing GITMO are in our best interests. I don't buy them, but they do exist.

 

[Joe Fan]

Liberal's caught again be nasty hypocrites

Madison works at MTV News and MTV Speed Dial

 

[NJlonghorn]

Obama was the most anti-Israel American President in history and by a long way.

Obama was the President who most strongly disagreed with his counterpart in Israel on the biggest issue in Israel, settlement of the occupied territories. This doesn't make him anti-Israel. In fact, if Obama is anti-Israel, then so are the 40ish percent of Israeli Jews who agree with Obama on the issue.

 

[Horn6721]

If you read my post I specifically mentioned muslim countries where the heads do get involved in businesses coming into their country. Doing business in closed muslim countries is different than doing business in our country don't you think?

Do I think business negotiations and diplomatic are exactly alike? No but I think if you have dealt with heads of state for business reasons you have a good grasp and if you negotiate/compromise for a living you have a better grasp. than say a Senator.
as an aside and not to imply my experience is in anyway similar but I changed industries went 180 from one to another. I found quite a lot of similarity in negotiating and figuring out how to get things done. I also had a lot to learn which I did. I expect the same of any successful competitive person.

There is something about being in negotiations where your business and money are on the line that encourages one to learn how to compromise while tilting the result your way.

You say there are rationales to suggest the Iranian deal and releasing known terrorists that go back and kill more Americans are in our best interests. Then you go on to say;
"I don't buy them, but they do exist."
That seem like you would have liked those deals/actions to be more in Our best interests, something Trump has said he would work to do.

In looking over your answers you agree with more of the Trump policies I listed than disagree. No one will ever agree 100%.

 

[Seattle Husker]

That's pretty clever. I see no reason to hold Trump nominees to a different standard than we held Obama nominees. Of course, this will ring hollow if Reid blew off McConnell's letter. I honestly don't remember how this went.

It appears as if saner heads are prevailing so far. Pompeo and DeVos have been delayed until next week. Not sure about the plan for the other 2 that as of earlier this week haven't submitted the required disclosures.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Obama was the President who most strongly disagreed with his counterpart in Israel on the biggest issue in Israel, settlement of the occupied territories. This doesn't make him anti-Israel. In fact, if Obama is anti-Israel, then so are the 40ish percent of Israeli Jews who agree with Obama on the issue.

I shouldn't have used the term "anti-Israel," because it's very loaded. I guess my point is that no US President has more vocally and defiantly clashed with and been less deferential to an Israeli leader. And it goes deeper than the settlement issue. That's what's in the news right now, but they've been clashing for a while.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I shouldn't have used the term "anti-Israel," because it's very loaded. I guess my point is that no US President has more vocally and defiantly clashed with and been less deferential to an Israeli leader. And it goes deeper than the settlement issue. That's what's in the news right now, but they've been clashing for a while.

Conversely, has any Israeli leader ever disrespected a sitting POTUS more than Bibi? The question is, which came first?

Of course, it should also be noted that looking only at funding/aid, no POTUS has been more generous with Israel than Obama.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Conversely, has any Israeli leader ever disrespected a sitting POTUS more than Bibi? The question is, which came first?

Considering Israel's reliance on the US, I can't fathom a reason why BiBi wind disrespect the President just for shits and giggles.

Of course, it should also be noted that looking only at funding/aid, no POTUS has been more generous with Israel than Obama.

Is that due to new spending programs on Israel or the normal spending increases that come every year?

 

[NJlonghorn]

no US President has more vocally and defiantly clashed with and been less deferential to an Israeli leader. And it goes deeper than the settlement issue. That's what's in the news right now, but they've been clashing for a while.

Conversely, has any Israeli leader ever disrespected a sitting POTUS more than Bibi? The question is, which came first?

This sums the issue up perfectly. Obama and Netanyahu have very different opinions on what is best for Israel, and neither is willing to back down to the other -- that's pretty much it.

 

[Seattle Husker]

This sums the issue up perfectly. Obama and Netanyahu have very different opinions on what is best for Israel, and neither is willing to back down to the other -- that's pretty much it.

I suspect this all boils down to Iran. At least one media source (Frontline?) reported that Bibi favored another air strike against Iran to further diminish their nuclear capabilities and was within hours of launching. Washington D.C. stepped in to kill the plan knowing it would kill planned or ongoing secret negotiations. This was before the negotiations were public.

Clearly Obama and Netanyahu were diametrically opposed to each other on Iran. That likely bled into other dealings.

I'm of the opinion that we don't let Israel drive our foreign policy. They have been a historically terrific ally but if we are at odds on strategy, the dog rules over the tail.

 

[Horn6721]

I am if the opinion the US should not use taxpayer money to try to take down a leader of an ally.