American Politics Thread: Orange is the new POTUS (Archive)

[DuffMan]

If any Trump supporters who believed the draining the swamp lie, don't feel like complete idiots by now, they may not have the intelligence to have those feelings.

White House eyeing fossil fuel lobbyist for energy adviser job

Fossil fuel industry lobbyist Mike Catanzaro is under consideration to serve as an energy adviser on the National Economic Council, sources told POLITICO, an appointment that would test President Donald Trump’s promise to limit the number of lobbyists who serve in his administration.
Catanzaro, who was a registered lobbyist as of last month, is a partner at the firm CGCN Group. His clients include American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, an industry trade group; natural gas company Devon Energy, renewable energy company NextEra Energy; and fossil fuel companies Noble Energy and Hess Corporation, among others, according to lobbying disclosure records.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...obbyist-234773

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

We have gone too many pages without a Trump tweet. Where are the Trump Tweets??

From the realDonaldTrump twitter account:
'Trump administration seen as more truthful than news media'

This may have been posted previously but it is golden.

[wittynickname]

moved this to where it's more appropriate

Anecdotally, to fill this spot, my 75 year old coworker today looked at me like I was an insane person because I said I thought Michelle Obama carried herself beautifully as a First Lady.

His response was that she looked like a linebacker and thus couldn't possibly have been ladylike, not like that Melania, what a class act.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

moved this to where it's more appropriate

Anecdotally, to fill this spot, my 75 year old coworker today looked at me like I was an insane person because I said I thought Michelle Obama carried herself beautifully as a First Lady.

His response was that she looked like a linebacker and thus couldn't possibly have been ladylike, not like that Melania, what a class act.

lol "The greatest generation" Michelle Obama carried herself just fine as first lady. Her husband did some stupid things but what politician doesn't.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Nope. Look at the Civil Rights movement in the U.S. All of the gains of black Americans in legislation and public opinion occurred during the era of MLKs peaceful marches and civil disobedience. The race riots of 1967 and the rise of the Black Panthers sparked white flight, a sharp reduction in public sympathy for the black community, and the election of Richard Nixon to two terms in office.

That to me is selective interpretation of history, as the race riots of the civil rights era were a regular event at least since 1962, which is before for example MLK:s biggest show, the march on Washington in 1963. While I wouldn't contest that the riots of 1967-68 in the US brought backlash for the black rights movement, you'll still easily find civil rights activists from that era who feel that those riots were ultimately important to bring about change beyond legislation.

The role of riots is of course contested among civil rights activists, and for good reason, but generally the history of civil rights fights is very much also a history of riots, to a point where it's almost impossible to tell them apart completely. In the US famous examples would be the Stonewall riots which launched the gay rights movement and the Rodney King riots which brought major changes to the LA police force and probably effected policing in the US in general.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

lol "The greatest generation" Michelle Obama carried herself just fine as first lady. Her husband did some stupid things but what politician doesn't.

He said Laura Bush was a much better First Lady. My response was that Laura Bush didn't do anything as a First Lady. Michelle actually attempted to achieve good as a First Lady, she was vocal and active and visible.

I can understand disagreeing with policy (I certainly didn't agree with everything, the drone program especially is a massive black mark on the Obama administration) but this guy constantly rails about how happy he is to finally have "class" back in the White House.

The Obamas were nothing if not classy. But there's that subtle, subconscious racism that creeps up again, because for the Obamas to go 8 years scandal free, with two teenage daughters, is quite an achievement. The idea that Melania is the epitome of class while Michelle Obama was not is absolutely preposterous.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Itse

That to me is selective interpretation of history, as the race riots of the civil rights era were a regular event at least since 1962, which is before for example MLK:s biggest show, the march on Washington in 1963. While I wouldn't contest that the riots of 1967-68 in the US brought backlash for the black rights movement, you'll still easily find civil rights activists from that era who feel that those riots were ultimately important to bring about change beyond legislation.

The role of riots is of course contested among civil rights activists, and for good reason, but generally the history of civil rights fights is very much also a history of riots, to a point where it's almost impossible to tell them apart completely. In the US famous examples would be the Stonewall riots which launched the gay rights movement and the Rodney King riots which brought major changes to the LA police force and probably effected policing in the US in general.

also the Tulsa race riots: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa_race_riot

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

He said Laura Bush was a much better First Lady. My response was that Laura Bush didn't do anything as a First Lady. Michelle actually attempted to achieve good as a First Lady, she was vocal and active and visible.

I can understand disagreeing with policy (I certainly didn't agree with everything, the drone program especially is a massive black mark on the Obama administration) but this guy constantly rails about how happy he is to finally have "class" back in the White House.

The Obamas were nothing if not classy. But there's that subtle, subconscious racism that creeps up again, because for the Obamas to go 8 years scandal free, with two teenage daughters, is quite an achievement. The idea that Melania is the epitome of class while Michelle Obama was not is absolutely preposterous.

racists. when he says class, he means white, back in the whitehouse.

[Kybosh]

As a general rule, I usually just smile and nod when one of my elders says something totally crazy.

Speaking of which, why do we frequently elect such elderly individuals to seats of power? For example, Trump is 70 and Clinton is 69. Scientifically our minds are not as agile or flexible at that age so I question society's reasoning here.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

He said Laura Bush was a much better First Lady. My response was that Laura Bush didn't do anything as a First Lady. Michelle actually attempted to achieve good as a First Lady, she was vocal and active and visible.

I can understand disagreeing with policy (I certainly didn't agree with everything, the drone program especially is a massive black mark on the Obama administration) but this guy constantly rails about how happy he is to finally have "class" back in the White House.

The Obamas were nothing if not classy. But there's that subtle, subconscious racism that creeps up again, because for the Obamas to go 8 years scandal free, with two teenage daughters, is quite an achievement. The idea that Melania is the epitome of class while Michelle Obama was not is absolutely preposterous.

Out of curiosity, do you ever call your work colleagues like this out on their racism?

I guess you're just hitting your head against the wall, but to be forced to silently listen to the stupidity of your colleagues would destroy me. I don't think I would be very popular at your workplace.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

As a general rule, I usually just smile and nod when one of my elders says something totally crazy.

Speaking of which, why do we frequently elect such elderly individuals to seats of power? For example, Trump is 70 and Clinton is 69. Scientifically our minds are not as agile or flexible at that age so I question society's reasoning here.

That's an odd statement given that we have had Obama elected in his 40's prior to the Orange Leviathan.

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

That's an odd statement given that we have had Obama elected in his 40's prior to the Orange Leviathan.

Oh, sure, there's been Obama, Trudeau and such but I'd venture a guess that the vast majority of world wide policy makers are far older statistically. Just pondering.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

Oh, sure, there's been Obama, Trudeau and such but I'd venture a guess that the vast majority of world wide policy makers are far older statistically. Just pondering.

It's usually as a result of successfully navigating the internal party structure and laying the groundwork for leadership over years or decades of party service.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

Out of curiosity, do you ever call your work colleagues like this out on their racism?

I guess you're just hitting your head against the wall, but to be forced to silently listen to the stupidity of your colleagues would destroy me. I don't think I would be very popular at your workplace.

I won't flat out tell them they're being racist, because work would get really awkward, but I do like to challenge them on it. When he says she "didn't carry herself" like a First Lady, I ask why he feels that way?

"Well she just looked like a linebacker!"

Last week he was talking about how elegant Melania is and how much of a contrast it is. I countered that she was a model, but Michelle was a lawyer, that Michelle did everything a First Lady needed to do. He complained that she went on Ellen and was silly and how much a disgrace that was to the position of First Lady. I countered that Trump is tweeting about SNL.

This is a man who at the heart and soul of the matter would never actively hate another person, outside of political ideology he's one of my favorite people to work with, but it's this misguided idea that a woman has to be a dainty little housewife to be the proper first lady that he can't shake. He wants a Laura Bush who stands quietly by and doesn't voice much opinion.

Also again, subtle racism that he would never grasp as racism. These are the people I talk about when I mention how racism is very subtle and unintentional. This isn't a guy who would advocate for the KKK, not even close, but at the same time he sees Melania Trump as an ideal First Lady (while she hides in a penthouse in NYC at taxpayers' expense) and saw Michelle Obama as a disgrace (while she was advocating for childrens' health and initiatives to get women education both here and abroad, etc). He doesn't grasp that his opinion is shaded with racism, but it's absolutely there.

(This man's wife, however, is an avid Fox News viewer and is openly racist, so it's unsurprising that he picks up on her views, even if he's not actively trying to)

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

He said Laura Bush was a much better First Lady. My response was that Laura Bush didn't do anything as a First Lady. Michelle actually attempted to achieve good as a First Lady, she was vocal and active and visible.

I can understand disagreeing with policy (I certainly didn't agree with everything, the drone program especially is a massive black mark on the Obama administration) but this guy constantly rails about how happy he is to finally have "class" back in the White House.

The Obamas were nothing if not classy. But there's that subtle, subconscious racism that creeps up again, because for the Obamas to go 8 years scandal free, with two teenage daughters, is quite an achievement. The idea that Melania is the epitome of class while Michelle Obama was not is absolutely preposterous.

And this is why I disagree with Cliff. Yeah it's great that 92% of Americans are okay with biracial marriages (except even that doesn't tell the whole story) but there is still deep current of subconscious racism in the American psyche that needs to be rooted out.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by rubecube

And this is why I disagree with Cliff. Yeah it's great that 92% of Americans are okay with biracial marriages (except even that doesn't tell the whole story) but there is still deep current of subconscious racism in the American psyche that needs to be rooted out.

I've been barking up that tree for months now.

There's a difference between KKK racism and my coworker's racism. My coworker won't ever put on a bedsheet and burn a cross, but he's going to tear down a strong, smart black woman because she doesn't look the part the way he wants her to.

That's still racism.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

Oh, sure, there's been Obama, Trudeau and such but I'd venture a guess that the vast majority of world wide policy makers are far older statistically. Just pondering.

In the US, mid-50s is kinda the norm for Presidents. Bill Clinton and Obama were two of the youngest presidents ever, while Reagan, Bush senior, and Trump are three of the oldest; the vast majority of US presidents have been in their 50s. In Canada we're a little weird in that we've got a much larger percentage 50 or younger, and 60 and older, with relatively few in their 50s. Not sure why that is. Though we're definitely skewing younger in recent years, as all of both Trudeaus, Mulroney, and Harper were in their 40s when first elected and Clark was 39.

edit: at a cursory glance UK seems to be similar with recent PMs trending younger with Theresa May an exception to a recent history of PMs beginning their position in their 40s or early 50s. Not including weird early english history of guys like Pitt the Younger.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

Oh, sure, there's been Obama, Trudeau and such but I'd venture a guess that the vast majority of world wide policy makers are far older statistically. Just pondering.

I dunno, When he first came into office Harper was also only in his 40's, So were Clinton, Merkel, Blair, Cameron.

[Senator Clay Davis]

"Oh #### we voted for Trump and he's actually following through on what we thought he wouldn't, thus seriously costing us". Though I don't get the California GOP or farmer desire to make them citizens. Once they're citizens you have to pay them minimum wage, which kind of defeats the purpose of using illegal labour. Or will those who become citizens this way be barred from that right?

Jeff Marchini and others in the Central Valley here bet their farms on the election of Donald J. Trump. His message of reducing regulations and taxes appealed to this Republican stronghold, one of Mr. Trump’s strongest bases of support in the state.

As for his promises about cracking down on illegal immigrants, many assumed Mr. Trump’s pledges were mostly just talk. But two weeks into his administration, Mr. Trump has signed executive orders that have upended the country’s immigration laws. Now farmers here are deeply alarmed about what the new policies could mean for their workers, most of whom are unauthorized, and the businesses that depend on them.

“Everything’s coming so quickly,” Mr. Marchini said. “We’re not loading people into buses or deporting them, that’s not happening yet.” As he looked out over a crew of workers bent over as they rifled through muddy leaves to find purple heads of radicchio, he said that as a businessman, Mr. Trump would know that farmers had invested millions of dollars into produce that is growing right now, and that not being able to pick and sell those crops would represent huge losses for the state economy. “I’m confident that he can grasp the magnitude and the anxiety of what’s happening now.”

Mr. Trump’s immigration policies could transform California’s Central Valley, a stretch of lowlands that extends from Sacramento to Bakersfield. Approximately 70 percent of all farmworkers here are living in the United States illegally, according to researchers at University of California, Davis. The impact could reverberate throughout the valley’s precarious economy, where agriculture is by far the largest industry. With 6.5 million people living in the valley, the fields in this state bring in $35 billion a year and provide more of the nation’s food than any other state.

The consequences of a smaller immigrant work force would ripple not just through the orchards and dairies, but also to locally owned businesses, restaurants, schools and even seemingly unrelated industries, like the insurance market.

Many here feel vindicated by the election, and signs declaring “Vote to make America great again” still dot the highways. But in conversations with nearly a dozen farmers, most of whom voted for Mr. Trump, each acknowledged that they relied on workers who provided false documents. And if the administration were to weed out illegal workers, farmers say their businesses would be crippled. Even Republican lawmakers from the region have supported plans that would give farmworkers a path to citizenship

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/09/u...d-workers.html

[northcrunk]

And that is why Republicans support illegal immigration. It's probably the only reason.