All Things "The Trump Admin is Objectively Ineffective"

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
I don’t know anyone who prefers Pete for his gayness. Yes, his highest elected office is mayor. The current President did not have that level of experience, so it’s tough for Trump supporters to make that point. He’s a combat veteran, something that Trump does not have in his portfolio.
Becoming a business billionaire is quite a bit more experience than getting elected as a mayor.

Now Obama- there was a guy who had done nothing.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
12,910
Reaction score
473
Points
83
I don’t know anyone who prefers Pete for his gayness. Yes, his highest elected office is mayor. The current President did not have that level of experience, so it’s tough for Trump supporters to make that point. He’s a combat veteran, something that Trump does not have in his portfolio.
I respect anyone’s service to the country. However, there are a lot more combat veterans than there are billionaire businessmen. Though one is service to the country and the other self-serving, Trump’s experience is far more rare and potentially valuable.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
Becoming a business billionaire is quite a bit more experience than getting elected as a mayor.

Now Obama- there was a guy who had done nothing.
He didn’t exactly create Microsoft. He took a pile of money and turned it into a bigger pile of money, or a pile of money and debt. Assuming it’s as he claims, he had a pretty good head start on his signature achievement.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
Becoming a business billionaire is quite a bit more experience than getting elected as a mayor.

Now Obama- there was a guy who had done nothing.
US Senator. Illinois state Senator.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
18,090
Reaction score
293
Points
83
I respect anyone’s service to the country. However, there are a lot more combat veterans than there are billionaire businessmen. Though one is service to the country and the other self-serving, Trump’s experience is far more rare and potentially valuable.
No argument there. Having a long business background certainly can be a positive. The lack of any political background is an issue however. A lot of republicans tout this as a good thing. Sure....it can be seen as better than a career politician.....but absolutely ZERO political background has had Trump looking silly quite often.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,297
Reaction score
294
Points
83
B
Now Obama- there was a guy who had done nothing.
US Senator. Illinois state Senator.
Barry was nominated and elected because he was black. There's not much arguing that. His qualifications otherwise were null.

Warren is getting traction and may win the nomination because she's a woman. Nothing more. Nobody would care what she has to say otherwise.

Mayor Pete is getting his 5 minutes because he is gay. If you think a young white mayor of some no-where town in Indiana would be getting traction otherwise, you're being disingenuous and dishonest.

Not saying any of those is necessarily wrong, but let's be honest about it at least.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
I’ll differ. I’d say being black kept more votes away from Obama that it earned him. I’d say the same for Pete. But if you are correct, I won’t cry, it means the arc of history is moving in a direction the GOP needs to pay better attention to.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,332
Reaction score
543
Points
113
I don’t know anyone who prefers Pete for his gayness. Yes, his highest elected office is mayor. The current President did not have that level of experience, so it’s tough for Trump supporters to make that point. He’s a combat veteran, something that Trump does not have in his portfolio.
Dude, cmon. There is zero chance he would have ever run or get attention if he wasn’t gay.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
You can’t be serious.
I am. I’m 51. I remember when I was in high school, people told F AG jokes and N I Gg er jokes with no shame. If you told me in 1985 that we’d have a black President in my lifetime, I’d have considered that a pipe dream. So if you tell me that he was elected BECAUSE he was black, I have to wonder why you think this is true. And even Obama was OK with climbing the ladder in front of the gays.

So, other than a perspective that the Christian White Male is the most persecuted individual in America where do you base this stuff? I’m a Christian White Male, and my life is AWESOME.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
The idea that inclusion diminishes you is about the most anti Christian thing I can imagine, let alone anti American. I’m not all about waving my military service like a flag, but it cured me of a lot of prejudice. It is the closest to a meritocracy we have. I wish every I could experience that and understand that in all these groups you think are out to get you, there are among their numbers some who are willing to die for you while you argue on the internet and watch Netflix.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
But really for a black man to be elected BECAUSE HE IS BLACK, given the numbers..you’d need Every one of the black people 12 percent and the 31 percent that are Democrats and have no intersection. That 52 percent, an he got 51. Maybe it wasn’t ENTIRELY the black thing.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
Scientific estimates of the gay population are around 5 percent. Not a flag I’d fly to win votes. You are are telling me that’s a clear plus five?)
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
12,910
Reaction score
473
Points
83
The idea that inclusion diminishes you is about the most anti Christian thing I can imagine, let alone anti American. I’m not all about waving my military service like a flag, but it cured me of a lot of prejudice. It is the closest to a meritocracy we have. I wish every I could experience that and understand that in all these groups you think are out to get you, there are among their numbers some who are willing to die for you while you argue on the internet and watch Netflix.
It’s great that you had that life experience. There are other life experiences that cause these otherwise unusual intersections of life, like participation on a college football team, which was my experience and my experience in graduate business school. Granted, these folks weren’t likely to lay down their life for me, but you develop bonds that are probably more normal than military experiences.
 

Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,305
Reaction score
41
Points
48
I am. I’m 51. I remember when I was in high school, people told F AG jokes and N I Gg er jokes with no shame. If you told me in 1985 that we’d have a black President in my lifetime, I’d have considered that a pipe dream. So if you tell me that he was elected BECAUSE he was black, I have to wonder why you think this is true. And even Obama was OK with climbing the ladder in front of the gays.

So, other than a perspective that the Christian White Male is the most persecuted individual in America where do you base this stuff? I’m a Christian White Male, and my life is AWESOME.
Everyone just said they wanted to be apart history. I’m only 37 so my generation hasn’t seen any real racism. So that might be why we have such different perspectives.
 

Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,305
Reaction score
41
Points
48
The idea that inclusion diminishes you is about the most anti Christian thing I can imagine, let alone anti American. I’m not all about waving my military service like a flag, but it cured me of a lot of prejudice. It is the closest to a meritocracy we have. I wish every I could experience that and understand that in all these groups you think are out to get you, there are among their numbers some who are willing to die for you while you argue on the internet and watch Netflix.
I’m not sure if you’re talking to me, but I’m an Iraq war vet. So I’ve worked with all kinds of people.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
12,910
Reaction score
473
Points
83
But really for a black man to be elected BECAUSE HE IS BLACK, given the numbers..you’d need Every one of the black people 12 percent and the 31 percent that are Democrats and have no intersection. That 52 percent, an he got 51. Maybe it wasn’t ENTIRELY the black thing.
I don’t think you can put this theory to numbers. It’s more of a guesstimate.

However, I would theorize what S2 is saying like this. The minority black population was far more motivated to vote for Obama than any other segment of society has been motivated to vote for any candidate ever, so he got an exceptionally high turnout among the 13% of that voting segment.

Secondly, the Democrat Party is highly associated with the minority black population. The enthusiasm that Democrats would have for a minority candidate, either gender based or racial based, would be high and also result in a high turnout among Dems, being the woke party that they are. Then there’s the white guilt, also likely Dem voters and would include Republicans. They’re on board in high percentages.

The only group that would vote against Obama for being black are the racists.

I take all those groups I mentioned first compared to the racists, and think it was a decent net positive for Obama. It would’ve worked for Hillary too, if she wasn’t so unlikeable.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
Everyone just said they wanted to be apart history. I’m only 37 so my generation hasn’t seen any real racism. So that might be why we have such different perspectives.
I’m smiling.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
I don’t think you can put this theory to numbers. It’s more of a guesstimate.

However, I would theorize what S2 is saying like this. The minority black population was far more motivated to vote for Obama than any other segment of society has been motivated to vote for any candidate ever, so he got an exceptionally high turnout among the 13% of that voting segment.

Secondly, the Democrat Party is highly associated with the minority black population. The enthusiasm that Democrats would have for a minority candidate, either gender based or racial based, would be high and also result in a high turnout among Dems, being the woke party that they are. Then there’s the white guilt, also likely Dem voters and would include Republicans. They’re on board in high percentages.

The only group that would vote against Obama for being black are the racists.

I take all those groups I mentioned first compared to the racists, and think it was a decent net positive for Obama. It would’ve worked for Hillary too, if she wasn’t so unlikeable.
Fair post. She’s awful.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,487
Reaction score
1,272
Points
113
I don’t know anyone who prefers Pete for his gayness. Yes, his highest elected office is mayor. The current President did not have that level of experience, so it’s tough for Trump supporters to make that point. He’s a combat veteran, something that Trump does not have in his portfolio.
There's no set resume to be President, as we've seen by the incompetent fool we have now. Pete is a veteran, he has executive experience. Most importantly, he has reasonable ideas and can articulate them. I could care less that he's gay. All that said, he's not my first choice, but he's far better than most of the Dem field.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,297
Reaction score
294
Points
83
But really for a black man to be elected BECAUSE HE IS BLACK, given the numbers..you’d need Every one of the black people 12 percent and the 31 percent that are Democrats and have no intersection. That 52 percent, an he got 51. Maybe it wasn’t ENTIRELY the black thing.
I doubt it had THAT much to do JUST with black voter turnout; more significantly, it had to do with the Dems desire to elect the first black man Prez. Hey, it worked, I even voted for him the first time. Just like I'm sure female voter turnout in 2016 for Hilldawg was extremely high. If Warren would have been the first woman candidate, it might have worked out well for her but Hillary f'd that up royally by being the most despicable candidate in the history of the US.
 

Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,305
Reaction score
41
Points
48
I doubt it had THAT much to do JUST with black voter turnout; more significantly, it had to do with the Dems desire to elect the first black man Prez. Hey, it worked, I even voted for him the first time. Just like I'm sure female voter turnout in 2016 for Hilldawg was extremely high. If Warren would have been the first woman candidate, it might have worked out well for her but Hillary f'd that up royally by being the most despicable candidate in the history of the US.
Dems have to own the the intersectional nominations/candidates. It reminds me of Miguel Estrada, when they derailed a more than qualified justice just because he was Hispanic. If Republicans had appointed the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice they might lose their stranglehold. Sad
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
4,396
Reaction score
199
Points
63
Wow do I have a typo in that math. Should really proof read more.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
Fair post. She’s awful.
She is awful (good admission there- congrats) but she is just doing what has worked in the past for her so well with the Democrat base. Vast right wing conspiracy, vast Russian conspiracy, Russian bots, always blaming her failures on others. It always worked in the past because the media loved her. Now they don't because she fumbled the ball for them. This is what happens when the media doesn't cover for you.
 
Top Bottom