Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

US Politics Hamsterwheel v2.0

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

US Politics Hamsterwheel v2.0

Old 30th Jul 2019, 03:54
  #19181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: 49th parallel
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by breid View Post
Being honest, I can only think of one famous American mayor that is a republican from memory alone. His name is Rudy Guiliani, who famously cleaned up NYC with his no nonsense get tough approach. He is....a republican. Regardless of his future poilitical affiliations, if you honestly google his record, you will see what works to clean up a city ridden with crime and falling apart(and there were sections like that in the early '80's). I remember driving through the Bronx as a kid which looked like some sort of war zone(likely exaggerated) and Times square was full of drug dealers. Much improved now and the crime dropped precipitously.

.
Well. Meadowrun wouldn't know that. He is, after all, a transplanted Brit. Of the left-wing persuasion. Quite a few of them in Canada. Unfortunately.
`
PacWest is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2019, 04:01
  #19182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 716
Originally Posted by PacWest View Post
Well. Meadowrun wouldn't know that. He is, after all, a transplanted Brit. Of the left-wing persuasion. Quite a few of them in Canada. Unfortunately.
`
I think Guiliani did an overall good job in New York.
punkalouver is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2019, 04:20
  #19183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 64
Posts: 59
Yes he would. Been to NYC many times starting in the 60s. Never a problem.
I try not to apply personal labels. They always paint with too broad a brush and mostly inaccurately.

You folks (US) should perhaps enact a law establishing shorter campaign lengths.
Jul19 to Nov20 is 17 months from elections. Polls and debates are already under way and what do they indicate from 17 months away -
Not a single thing. Zip. Campaigning really detracts from the work of running a country.

My big fear is that the current insanity will become the norm, then you're really up the creek, standing on your head in a canoe, without a paddle.
meadowrun is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2019, 13:47
  #19184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 591
Meadow, just about everyone in the US agrees that shorter campaigns would be a good thing.

Now just how would you go about that? It's that inconvenient old Constitution again, with its messy First Amendment. We don't take kindly to being told what, when, and where we can speak -- even politicians.
obgraham is online now  
Old 30th Jul 2019, 14:50
  #19185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,116
Originally Posted by punkalouver View Post
I think Guiliani did an overall good job in New York.
So did John Gotti
lomapaseo is online now  
Old 30th Jul 2019, 16:56
  #19186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 961
Originally Posted by obgraham View Post
Meadow, just about everyone in the US agrees that shorter campaigns would be a good thing.

Now just how would you go about that? It's that inconvenient old Constitution again, with its messy First Amendment. We don't take kindly to being told what, when, and where we can speak -- even politicians.
One of those places where ob and I stand shoulder-to-shoulder. Freedom of speech is messy and inconvenient at times - but still infinitely better than the alternative.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2019, 18:55
  #19187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 64
Posts: 59
It's done elsewhere without infringing on what let's generously call - the inalienable human right to freedom of speech.
Doesn't necessarily have to be enshrined in a constitution and I do recognize the freedom is unrecognized or trampled on quite heartily by some counties "governments".

How do you separate that rally, rally, hoot and holler campaigning from consulting with constituents to take heed of their concerns and fold that into the governing bit of your duty?
It's that time allotted to working for the people of America - not working for the party. It can be done and methinks a great deal of nut and bolts productivity would be gained.
meadowrun is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2019, 02:30
  #19188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,475
Originally Posted by obgraham View Post
Meadow, just about everyone in the US agrees that shorter campaigns would be a good thing.

Now just how would you go about that? It's that inconvenient old Constitution again, with its messy First Amendment. We don't take kindly to being told what, when, and where we can speak -- even politicians.
I also agree with the sentiment, OB captured my concerns however. The price we pay for the 1st is an eternal election cycle.


West Coast is online now  
Old 31st Jul 2019, 03:50
  #19189 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: U.S.A
Age: 51
Posts: 401
ďWhere are these "60K dead civilians" that Trump has done?Ē

My reference to 60,000 dead was Yemen.
oicur12.again is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2019, 07:13
  #19190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 961
On the "long-campaign" issue - another point in the Constitution is that the States shall set their own voting procedures, for the most part.

And Iowa and New Hampshire jealously guard their status as "first in the nation" for nominating caucuses or primaries to choose the Party nominees. It is written into NH state law that the Secretary of State shall set the date of the primary to ensure that it occurs at least a week before any other such election. Maintaining first position is one of the few things NH Dems and Pubs almost certainly agree on.

That has led to a certain amount of "election creep" over the decades - the NH primary was March 13 in 1956, and had moved up to January 8 by 2008 (it has dropped back a bit since). And other states also have moved up their state votes, because if a state is last to vote, the outcome may have already been mathematically decided before they even get their say. Getting noticed by the candidates and the press depends on being "relevant," and garnering headlines early in the process datelined "Ames" or "Des Moines" or "Manchester." A power play.

There are also campaign finance issues, since there is some legal connection between when a candidate can start serious fund-raising, and when they officially declare they are a candidate. The sooner you declare, the longer you have to raise money. But the longer you need to spend money (chicken-and-egg).

Finally, of course, a mainstay of the media is the "let's you and him fight" paradigm. The longer the election cycle, the more conflicts they can report and the more eyes they can attract. Not to mention the ads they can sell. If professional sports teams could charge fans by the minute - the games would last a lot longer, too.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2019, 12:47
  #19191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,475
“Election creep”

An appropriate term. Another driver is the 24 hour news cycle giving oxygen to those running. If someone gonna stick a microphone in front of you 24 months out, of course you’re going to press your agenda.

West Coast is online now  
Old 1st Aug 2019, 03:26
  #19192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 716
Originally Posted by chuks View Post
"It's racist because you choose to interpret it that way." (That would be Trump's remarks about one part of Baltimore, one inhabited mostly by Blacks and represented by Elijah Cummings, that "no human being would choose to live there.

Here we have just been shown an image of Trump with two black icons, Rosa Parks and Muhammed Ali, as if that were proof positive that Trump could not possibly be any sort of racist. If you want to zero in on just that image, ignoring Trump's long, disgraceful, and continuous history of racism, well ... that is your prerogative. When I look at the huge, steaming pile of orange-tinted crap that is Donald Trump then I see a racist, because, yes, I choose to interpret it that way.

Not that he is merely a racist! There is much, much more that is deeply wrong with Donald Trump. I would not want to sell the man short. Here, though, if we want to argue about Trump being a racist then how, West Coast, would you interpret what he said about that one district in Baltimore, that "no human being would choose to live there"?
(Keep in mind that it was not Baltimore as a whole that Trump condemned, but just that one district represented by Elijah Cummings. Or, as Trump would have it, Elijah Cumming. Dr. Freud, please call your office ....)
More likely the people who call just about everything as racist.

Did you see CNN the other day. They say that Trumpís use of the word infested/ infestation is racism against people of colour.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...wn_people.html

And you actually believe this kind of stuff Chuks?

Last edited by punkalouver; 1st Aug 2019 at 19:56.
punkalouver is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2019, 06:12
  #19193 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,005
On the "long-campaign" issue - another point in the Constitution is that the States shall set their own voting procedures, for the most part.
https://continentaltelegraph.com/pol...rimary-ballot/
ORAC is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2019, 06:18
  #19194 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,005
On a separate issue - which does have political implications - the vanishing American middle class which is mentioned as so terrible in the media so much.

Yes, itís vanishing, but not for the reason you think.......

https://continentaltelegraph.com/bus...ting-too-rich/



ORAC is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2019, 14:06
  #19195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,475
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
On a separate issue - which does have political implications - the vanishing American middle class which is mentioned as so terrible in the media so much.

Yes, itís vanishing, but not for the reason you think.......

https://continentaltelegraph.com/bus...ting-too-rich/




I've never put much trust in simply lookinh at income as an indicator of ones wealth. The upper end of middle class, 100K, in Biloxi Mississippi you're living like a king. The same amount in SOHO and you have a tiny apartment, likely with a roommate. Geographical variations must be factored in.
West Coast is online now  
Old 1st Aug 2019, 16:27
  #19196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 961
That is a very poor chart - no way that $100,000 is "high household income" in the US. (Republican Mitt Romney, during the 2012 campaign, joked that the upper edge of the middle class was $5 million a year. )

That chart may be based on raw census data of how many households get how much - the definitions of high/middle/low are bollocks from the AEI (American Enterprise Institute - see lower right corner) - a partisan "rich people's" propaganda machine.

Leaving aside jokes, Romney put the upper edge of "middle-class" at $200,000 to $250,000 pa. Investopedia starts "upper income" in the US at around $187,800 depending on state (I agree with WC that geography matters): https://www.investopedia.com/financi...s-are-you.aspx

And a household of 4 could feel "stressed" even at that level. "Stressed" is hardly the American Dream.

I think "comfortable middle class" means "able to pay median house mortgage" with 25% of gross income. Which means $71000 a year gross. Below that, the stress cuts in - until one is past the "high expenses" years (empty nest - age 55+). Median US household income is $59,039. Not good.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2019, 20:38
  #19197 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 591
Interesting bit of news today: A year or more ago, Trump decided to pull out of the UNRWA, which sends money to the "Palestinians", (1/3 of it US cash) on the grounds that it was a corrupt organization mostly devoted to fighting Israel.

I recall some here jumping on Trump for "abandoning those poor Palestinian children and favoring the Israeli thugs", as the usual line when it comes to the Middle-East situation.

Well, well. Now Switzerland, Netherlands, and Belgium have frozen their payments too. Seems the outfit was rife with corruption, nepotism, retaliation, and sexual misconduct.

Another instance of Trump being correct in his judgement and willing to take the heat.

But still, he's a racist, RussiaRussia, and Stormy Daniels.
obgraham is online now  
Old 1st Aug 2019, 21:49
  #19198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not where I want to be
Age: 65
Posts: 225
No worries, press release from our foreign dept.:
‘The UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) is in a critical financial situation and is facing a severe funding gap. That is why we like last year are disbursing the whole of our core contribution of NOK 125 million to UNRWA at the beginning of the year,’ said Minister of Foreign Affairs Ine Eriksen SÝreide.
Norway is a significant donor to UNRWA. In addition to its core contribution of NOK 125 million, Norway will also provide humanitarian funding. In 2018, Norway contributed NOK 294 million to UNRWA’s work
Roughly 14 and 33 million USD.

Then again, this: "Seems the outfit was rife with corruption, nepotism, retaliation, and sexual misconduct." Reminds me of something, but old age is setting in.
Per
Ancient Mariner is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2019, 22:13
  #19199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 591
Here's my proposal, AM:
I won't be critical of what Norway chooses to do with its money, so long as you aren't critical of what Americans choose to do (or not do) with theirs.
obgraham is online now  
Old 2nd Aug 2019, 04:34
  #19200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,475
Originally Posted by obgraham View Post
Here's my proposal, AM:
I won't be critical of what Norway chooses to do with its money, so long as you aren't critical of what Americans choose to do (or not do) with theirs.
Thereís quite a bit of our money spent on Norway for its defense. Guess AM could talk about that sum of US money as it affects Norway and of course is an endless source of irritation.

Not entirely sure why.
West Coast is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.