The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

VectorVictor said:
Hell, you'll probably need to go back to the 1960s or earlier to find Republicans who were moderate in nature and temperament, valued intellectualism, and worked with others to find consensus ideas for our country. 

The seeds for the current-day extremism can be traced back to the Nixon days, manifested themselves somewhat during the Reagan years (in spite of Reagan being a moderate--see the Bork nomination), and went full bloom during the GB Bush years. Trump politics is merely reaping what was sewn all those years prior.
Click to expand...






The EPA and OSHA started under Nixon.

 
VectorVictor said:
Hell, you'll probably need to go back to the 1960s or earlier to find Republicans who were moderate in nature and temperament, valued intellectualism, and worked with others to find consensus ideas for our country. 

The seeds for the current-day extremism can be traced back to the Nixon days, manifested themselves somewhat during the Reagan years (in spite of Reagan being a moderate--see the Bork nomination), and went full bloom during the GB Bush years. Trump politics is merely reaping what was sewn all those years prior.
Click to expand...
However too many of those Republicans were only interested in being the loyal opposition.  When the party started to get a back bone and communicate some conservative principles that kind of upset the norm in DC.  I'm ok with that - we need 2 strong parties with strong ideas and positions.  However the most recent group seemed to have thrown all reason out the door and are very partisan.      I think the GOP overreacted to Obama's election and became more partisan. 

 I  DO understand the Dems reaction to Trump - note:  I didn't say overreaction. 

 
TGHusker said:
Good points VV.   Maybe it is time some high profile Repubs like Kasich burn their GOP card and run as independents or seek to grow the libertarian party and bring it into the mainstream.

Perhaps the best thing for the GOP would be a whole sale, country wide defeat so that the more moderate guys can gain control of what is left over of the party.  And by moderate, I'm talking conservative by 2000 standards. 
Click to expand...


Absolutely. The only way to reform the party is for them to be absolutely crushed for the next several elections by the rest of us not in the cult.

Anything else reinforces that Trumpism was the correct way to go, and fealty to such an awful human being will be rewarded.

 
Re: Beto and his lack of policy chops...

Have we considered that perhaps America is so impossibly disinterested in anything but the most basic policies that we need a charismatic figurehead who makes us feel good?

This seems to hold true for the last few presidents we've elected, to varying degrees. W was the guy you wanted to have a beer with. How much of Obama was policy difference and how much was the crippling unpopularity of W's economy and the GOP itself during the Great Recession? And Trump speaks for himself. I refuse to believe people actually voted on policies like a border wall or a Muslim ban rather than they voted against Hillary Clinton.

Viewed through that prism, his chances are as legitimate as anyone else, because he may be the most charismatic of the bunch. But he'd have to get through the primary, where policy choices DO matter.

 
Danny Bateman said:
Re: Beto and his lack of policy chops...

Have we considered that perhaps America is so impossibly disinterested in anything but the most basic policies that we need a charismatic figurehead who makes us feel good?

This seems to hold true for the last few presidents we've elected, to varying degrees. W was the guy you wanted to have a beer with. How much of Obama was policy difference and how much was the crippling unpopularity of W's economy and the GOP itself during the Great Recession? And Trump speaks for himself. I refuse to believe people actually voted on policies like a border wall or a Muslim ban rather than they voted against Hillary Clinton.

Viewed through that prism, his chances are as legitimate as anyone else, because he may be the most charismatic of the bunch. But he'd have to get through the primary, where policy choices DO matter.
Click to expand...
I don't think you're wrong.  And it is why my cynicism in the American public is growing at a rate that makes me sad and angry.....

 
funhusker said:
I don't think you're wrong.  And it is why my cynicism in the American public is growing at a rate that makes me sad and angry..... 
Click to expand...


You and me both, brother.

There are definitely people out there that care about policy and ideas first and foremost. I'm just worried that they are the definitive minority.

 
funhusker said:
I don't think you're wrong.  And it is why my cynicism in the American public is growing at a rate that makes me sad and angry.....
Click to expand...
I would love to hear the "eyerollers" thoughts on how the American electorate is engaged and informed.  To be clear, my comment wasn't partisan.  American voters are swayed by simple s#!t.  Hell, the biggest news the last 36 hours is that Booker is dating a movie star.  My god...

 
Maybe Senator Harris is just a politician after all

https://news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-herbalife-accused-of-exploiting-latinos-090000896.html

But as the attorney general of the nation’s largest state — and therefore one of the most powerful law enforcement officials in the nation — Harris declined to investigate Herbalife, the nutritional supplement company that has been accused of fraudulent marketing practices. Documents exclusively obtained by Yahoo News show that in 2015, prosecutors in the San Diego office of the California attorney general sent Harris a lengthy memorandum that argued for an investigation into Herbalife and requested resources in order to undertake such an investigation. Similar investigations into Herbalife were already taking place elsewhere.

About three weeks after the San Diego letter was sent, Harris received the first of three donations to her campaign for the U.S. Senate from Heather Podesta, the powerful Washington lobbyist whose ex-husband Tony’s firm, then called the Podesta Group, had worked for Herbalife since 2013. Heather Podesta’s own lobbying firm, Heather Podesta and Partners, would soon be hired by Herbalife, too.

Harris did not pursue an investigation, even as the Federal Trade Commission proceeded with an investigation of its own, which had been opened the previous March and which suggested that sufficient grounds for such scrutiny did exist. In fact, the San Diego letter had meticulously laid out those grounds, pointing out that Herbalife presented itself to the public as a lawful enterprise, but that it could nevertheless be “engaged in less obvious conduct” that potentially harmed both Herbalife distributors and Herbalife customers. Allegations of such conduct, by 2015, had become commonplace in media reports.

Harris never gave a reason for declining to investigate Herbalife, but the decision stands in contrast to her oft-expressed promise to fight for ordinary Americans for whom the 21st century economy seems to hold little promise. Those are the very same Americans, critics say, that Herbalife recruited — and exploited.
Click to expand...

 
AGs have to select cases they go after, and if my memory serves from listening to Preet in NY, they have to look at evidence and severity vs others on the board.  Not excusing her, but I'd be interested in their office's load and focus at that time.  And no AG has to define or defend what cases they do or don't take.  

 
TGHusker said:
But as the attorney general of the nation’s largest state
Click to expand...


I know it is from the article TGH...

but "nation's largest State" is a bit misleading. Anyone heard of Texas or Alaska? I understand it has the largest population, but that attitude is exactly why there are those of us who view anything that comes out of California with disdain and suspicion.

As to your point TGH...they are ALL just politicians :dunno

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top