| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TonyL222
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
Posts: 5140
Location: Reston, VA
Back to top |
 Posted: 08/18/15 4:58 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
Have you listened to Trump's lengthy interviews? Somehow I doubt it. The details of his immigration plan, for example, which would have been vanilla common sense 30 years ago, are pushing many of the other Republican candidates more towards the chaos of mass deportation and the socialist candidates even further toward the economic and social chaos of open borders. Pick your chaos -- preferably in terms of the long-term economic interests of legal American citizens.
|
Glenn you have to be pulling my leg. His immigration "plan" - the only thing he has JUST provided any detail for - is a joke. We are going to build a wall and Mexico WILL pay for it. We are going to have all illegals self deport. Right about now I'd make a joke about selling you the Brooklyn Bridge if you believe this, but that might be part of Trumps plan too.
Donald Trump's clueless immigration plan
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 5:42 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| Have you listened to Trump's lengthy interviews? Somehow I doubt it. The details of his immigration plan, for example, which would have been vanilla common sense 30 years ago, are pushing many of the other Republican candidates more towards the chaos of mass deportation and the socialist candidates even further toward the economic and social chaos of open borders. Pick your chaos -- preferably in terms of the long-term economic interests of legal American citizens. |
So who besides Bernie Sanders (who's really kind of socialist-lite) are the socialist candidates? |
Sorry if I'm the first to break this to you: 2015 Hillary Clinton.
As a baseline, by any definition I grew up with, Obama has governed as a socialist. To the extent anyone can get a peep out of Hillary Clinton, there's no apparent difference between her and Bernie Sanders on social, economic and military issues. This website, for example, suggests that there's not much difference between Clinton and Sanders on ideology and that both are somewhat more leftist than even the socialist Obama. |
I don't know what definitions you grew up with, but Obama's not remotely a socialist by any rational definition. (Here's one definition of socialism, from Merriam-Webster online: "a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies.") Socialism would be nationalizing health care, rather than continuing to have private doctors, hospitals and insurance companies. Socialism would be bailing out GM by taking control, rather than selling the relatively small ownership interest the government took as soon as possible. (The government's shares in GM were sold in 2013, and its shares in the former GMAC were sold in 2014.) Socialism would be taking control of the oil companies, or Internet service providers. Nothing like that has happened or even been proposed by President Obama. And Hillary's positions are somewhat to the left of Obama's, but not nearly enough to make her a socialist.
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 5:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| [As a baseline, by any definition I grew up with, Obama has governed as a socialist. |
Umm, what? If we are just making up definitions for words to fit some partisan rhetoric, then this could be an interesting, if completely pointless, discussion.
Forget that Obama has never tried to socialize any means of production, his policies have been center-left at most.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rich-rubino/barack-obama-a-socialist-_b_3129376.html
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66927
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 6:07 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Bernie Sanders describes himself as a socialist without meeting BeK's definition
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 6:29 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| Bernie Sanders describes himself as a socialist without meeting BeK's definition |
He doesn't call himself a socialist. He calls himself a "democratic socialist" which is something entirely different. In fact, when he uses the term he uses it as a synonym for a supporter of social democracy.
So to call him a simply a "socialist" misrepresents what his beliefs are by associating him with the traditional forms of socialist economic control.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
TonyL222
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
Posts: 5140
Location: Reston, VA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 6:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| Bernie Sanders describes himself as a socialist without meeting BeK's definition |
That wasn't BeK's definition. It was Merriam-Webster. Also, Sanders calls himself a "Democratic Socialist."
Stop Calling Bernie Sanders a Socialist
| Quote: |
| I think [democratic socialism] means the government has got to play a very important role in making sure that as a right of citizenship all of our people have healthcare; that as a right, all of our kids, regardless of income, have quality childcare, are able to go to college without going deeply into debt; that it means we do not allow large corporations and moneyed interests to destroy our environment; that we create a government in which it is not dominated by big money interest. I mean, to me, it means democracy, frankly. Thats all it means. |
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 6:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Politics are perception, these are just labels, and Bernie Sanders is not an ideology but a human being. And all Debbie Wasserman was doing was trying not to lose that more left leaning base that supports Sanders and Elizabeth Warren etc., FOR Hillary._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66927
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 7:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| Bernie Sanders describes himself as a socialist without meeting BeK's definition |
He doesn't call himself a socialist. He calls himself a "democratic socialist" which is something entirely different. In fact, when he uses the term he uses it as a synonym for a supporter of social democracy.
So to call him a simply a "socialist" misrepresents what his beliefs are by associating him with the traditional forms of socialist economic control. |
Sometimes he just says "socialist". Sometimes its "Social Democrat" and sometimes its "Democratic Socialist". He's loose with his terminology, so why can't Glenn be the same?
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 7:42 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| Bernie Sanders describes himself as a socialist without meeting BeK's definition |
He doesn't call himself a socialist. He calls himself a "democratic socialist" which is something entirely different. In fact, when he uses the term he uses it as a synonym for a supporter of social democracy.
So to call him a simply a "socialist" misrepresents what his beliefs are by associating him with the traditional forms of socialist economic control. |
Sometimes he just says "socialist". Sometimes its "Social Democrat" and sometimes its "Democratic Socialist". He's loose with his terminology, so why can't Glenn be the same? |
Because language matters, pilight. Come on.  _________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19763
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 7:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| Politics are perception, these are just labels, and Bernie Sanders is not an ideology but a human being. And all Debbie Wasserman was doing was trying not to lose that more left leaning base that supports Sanders and Elizabeth Warren etc., FOR Hillary. |
I love Obama, I really do.
But painting Hillary Clinton as a centrist is one of the oddest things he's done in his campaign. Because it was just patently false. Bill is moderate..Hillary? Not so much.
He's more to the middle than she is.
And her problem is as simple as...she can't say she's as liberal as she really is..because most Americans are more to the center..but that could lose her voters during the primaries.
Still, that's not really an issue. Sanders isn't Obama. And at the end of the day, the more liberal democrats..who swear they won't vote for Hillary...will watch the first debate and instantly feel the need to vote for Hillary.
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15744
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
PUmatty
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16361
Location: Chicago
Back to top |
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15744
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 8:03 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PUmatty wrote: |
| Howee wrote: |
| cthskzfn wrote: |
| because too many americans are political nitwits. |
....is the Long and Short of it, really. 
| justintyme wrote: |
| The reason he leads the pack is that he is so different from all the other candidates. He appeals to the people who are fed up with the establishment and career politicians and they find his bombastic, mince-no-words style refreshing. |
Bingo. Refreshingly different, and entertaining, too. The only thing I enjoy about this debacle is the fact that he must be giving the Koch Bros. apoplectic fits.
However: UNTIL he provides Realistic, Workable Solutions to Hyper-Real Problems, spare us all from the "He just might....!" talk. |
Plenty of candidates don't present realistic, workable solutions. |
Oh, DEFINITELY....And I don't get my knickers in a twist over THEM, either.
But typically, the Frontrunners have some 'believable' ideas backing their Leading Planks....I just haven't heard HIM speak of anything remotely viable re: immigration solutions.
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 8:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| Bernie Sanders describes himself as a socialist without meeting BeK's definition |
He doesn't call himself a socialist. He calls himself a "democratic socialist" which is something entirely different. In fact, when he uses the term he uses it as a synonym for a supporter of social democracy.
So to call him a simply a "socialist" misrepresents what his beliefs are by associating him with the traditional forms of socialist economic control. |
Sometimes he just says "socialist". Sometimes its "Social Democrat" and sometimes its "Democratic Socialist". He's loose with his terminology, so why can't Glenn be the same? |
Pretty sure Glenn said "by any definition..."
With Sanders, you can look to see what he supports to see what the most accurate definition for his political ideology is. So when he calls himself a "socialist" you know that he is talking about his belief in "social democracy".
This is a far cry from the the "socialist" tag that Republicans throw around like some sort of boogieman. When someone says "by any definition" suddenly believing in collective bargaining, social equality, and the welfare state, becomes conflated with the Soviet "the state's coming for all your shit" style socialism.
So that was mostly my point to begin with. We can call things whatever we want, but without defining exactly what we mean by it (like Sanders does) the conversation becomes pointless.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9634
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/18/15 8:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| TonyL222 wrote: |
Glenn you have to be pulling my leg. His immigration "plan" - the only thing he has JUST provided any detail for - is a joke. We are going to build a wall and Mexico WILL pay for it. We are going to have all illegals self deport. Right about now I'd make a joke about selling you the Brooklyn Bridge if you believe this, but that might be part of Trumps plan too. |
His plan page clearly talks about a lot more than building a wall and getting Mexico to pay for it.
What I would criticize is that he talks in the plan about limiting H1-B visas - visas that every Silicon Valley CEO is always howling about needing more of (even the ones who lay off American workers and replace them with H1-Bs). And yet today he came out in favor of giving work visas to all the people who come here from foreign countries on student visas and get educated in US universities so they can work in Silicon Valley where he says they are needed. It appears that he has gotten phone calls from the elite in Silicon Valley and they are getting him to turn. It is notable that when the companies began off-shoring manufacturing and even phone support jobs to China and Inda, it was said that we would do the more skilled jobs. And now it has become the norm to import people to do the skilled jobs - without even lip-service given towards making it so that Americans get the jobs in the future.
It also says
"Nationwide e-verify. This simple measure will protect jobs for unemployed Americans. "
But there is no mention of jailing employers who hire illegals. They are somehow seen as apparently doing nothing wrong, or nothing worth punishing. Not just by Trump, but by the majority of people who are against illegal aliens.
This opinion piece originally cluelessly said that you couldn't get the money for a wall from Mexican tariffs because their trade with the US was only 384 million a year, not enough to pay for a wall. He has corrected it to 294 billion and now says we don't want to disrupt trade with them. But we export less to them. The goods trade deficit with Mexico in 2013 was 54 billion. It is calculated that illegals sent 22 billion back to Mexico in that same year.
Last edited by tfan on 08/19/15 5:00 am; edited 5 times in total |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8231
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
|
TonyL222
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
Posts: 5140
Location: Reston, VA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/19/15 6:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
| TonyL222 wrote: |
Glenn you have to be pulling my leg. His immigration "plan" - the only thing he has JUST provided any detail for - is a joke. We are going to build a wall and Mexico WILL pay for it. We are going to have all illegals self deport. Right about now I'd make a joke about selling you the Brooklyn Bridge if you believe this, but that might be part of Trumps plan too. |
His plan page clearly talks about a lot more than building a wall and getting Mexico to pay for it.
|
I could sit down now and draft a detailed plan of how we could send humans to investigate life on Kepler 452b. The basis of the plan could be to use the Starship Enterprise with Warp Drive. I could fill it with minute details.
Mexico is not going to pay for OUR wall. 12 million illegals are not going to self-deport. Those are the linchpins of his "plan". Part of his plan - remove the on US Soil birthright path to citizenship - requires a Constitutional Amendment. Pure fantasy.
To me that just illustrates his "leadership" vision and style. "I say so" and it just magically happens. That works within the Trump empire (or people get fired). I don't beleive that will happen within the US government or on the world stage.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9634
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/19/15 8:42 am ::: |
Reply |
|
One thing on his immigration page I like is:
| Quote: |
| 2. A nation without laws is not a nation. Laws passed in accordance with our Constitutional system of government must be enforced. |
Illegal immigration is a rare and maybe unique law violation. Normally, if you are against, say drug laws or prostitution laws or some environmental regulation, because you feel prostitution, drugs or dumping chemicals in a lake are acceptable behavior, you campaign to have the law dropped so the activity is made legal. But in the case of illegal immigration, what people like about it requires that it remain illegal. They won't campaign to make more Mexican immigrants (say another 500K a year) a legal part of our immigration system, because that means employers don't get to pay "illegal wage rates". And they don't get to hire workers who have fewer options because they are here illegally. So we end up with a crazy situation where everyone is embracing an illegal act as OK behavior, while also wanting it to remain an illegal act.
Another nice thing on his web page is a link to an article talking about how Steve Jobs conned Obama. Jobs, like all Silicon Valley CEOs wants to hire unlimited amounts of foreign tech workers. He told Obama at a private dinner that Apple had 700,000 overseas manufacturing workers supported by 30,000 engineers. He said that if they could hire 30,000 engineers here (which he claimed they could not - and he was lobbying for Obama to make anyone who comes here and graduates a US college immediately employable) they could bring those 700,000 jobs manufacturing jobs back. Obama went back to Washington talking about those 30,000 jobs. To his credit he put in some US training with that in mind (even though the US already graduates 2 times more STEM majors than can find jobs in STEM fields), but from that and other meetings with the elite of Silicon Valley, Obama has become a champion of the H1-B program and other programs designed to get foreign tech workers into US companies.
However, as is pointed out on a website linked on Trump's plan page, Jobs' statements were pure bunk. Besides there not being any evidence Apple had ever been unable to hire any engineers it wanted in the US, the average electronic manufacturing wage in the US is 42K. In China, Apple's mfg. contractors pay workers $4,800 a year. If Apple brought all those jobs back they would increase their manufacturing costs by 26 billion which would wipe out the majority of their profits. CEOs if they do anything, try to keep profits up. Jobs had no intention to ever bring those jobs back and never needed to hire 30,000 engineers to support those workers in the US. He wanted maximum access to foreign engineers for his US current US facilities.
| TonyL222 wrote: |
Mexico is not going to pay for OUR wall. |
I don't know if he seriously expects them to pay for it, but he isn't just saying he is going to ask them for the money. He wants to increase fees on Mexican guest visas and worker visas and other border crossing related issues and will also consider tariffs on their imports. And he also says he will impound money wired to Mexico by illegals. The last one seems undoable for legal challenge reasons.
But either way, it is possible to build a wall regardless of who pays for it so whether or not he can get Mexico to pay for it, he can still have it built.
| Quote: |
12 million illegals are not going to self-deport. Those are the linchpins of his "plan". |
Self-deporting is never mentioned on his website section for his immigration plans. He did talk about deportation (I don't think he ever said self-deportation - that would require going after employers which he hasn't said a word about) in an interview with NBC, but it is not seen on his page except with regard to working with gang task forces to find and deport illegal alien gang members.
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/19/15 9:42 am ::: |
Reply |
|
I can't link to them now but there are two articles on the immigration question above the fold on the NYTimes right now. The main article is about how the Republican candidate's are being 'forced' to the right by Trump's harsh stance on illegals, and what that means for their chances to win next year and going forward. And the second accompanying article is about the use of the term 'illegals', and what that says about whomever uses the term and what it means to people who are being described as such.
Once again, the comments rule. Five or ten years ago it kind of went like this. New York Times would publish an article, rarely was a comments section even attached. But when there was you would see comments that sounded like what typical New York Times readers would naturally be thinking, usually something in line with the paper's perspective on things.
Now? It's different. People who still sound and self identity as Times reader types, often honestly far more articulate than I am, are slapping back at the thrust of the paper's articles on so many of these social economic issues.
Anyway. mrs jammer calls._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
TonyL222
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
Posts: 5140
Location: Reston, VA
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/19/15 9:56 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan, if Trump's immigration plan sounds the least bit viable to you, then there's not much to be said. I'm not gonna argue with your opinion on it. I stand by my opinion that his plan is fantasy BS.
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/19/15 10:04 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Regarding Trump himself. And I should comment here early in the AM before I burn myself and my time out watching Morning Joe, but whatever Donald Trump has done in his life, he's now done something else and something much bigger, and especially after dropping this position paper document into the record and Into the hearts and minds of millions. He is now a movement. Like George Wallace, Ross Perot, and the two other, better examples, I've forgotten because I'm not ready to be awake today. Not her but like Elizabeth Warren, etc. I'm drawing a blank here. Anyway. From this point forward whatever happens (that proves to be his undoing) is going to leave behind yet another large and angry faction who will permanently identify themselves and their politics with Trump. He's there already, is my point._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/19/15 10:09 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| TonyL222 wrote: |
| tfan, if Trump's immigration plan sounds the least bit viable to you, then there's not much to be said. I'm not gonna argue with your opinion on it. I stand by my opinion that his plan is fantasy BS. |
Well, Tony, tfan said this.
[quote="tfan"]One thing on his immigration page I like is:
| Quote: |
| 2. A nation without laws is not a nation. Laws passed in accordance with our Constitutional system of government must be enforced. |
So you can't even have a conversation with someone who says that? You might want to avoid the comments section of the NYTimes on the immigration issues because those folks are bringing it.  _________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17
Last edited by jammerbirdi on 08/19/15 10:31 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/19/15 10:29 am ::: |
Reply |
|
The Donald is closing the gap on Hillary.
Per the CNN/ORC poll, in July Clinton lead the head-to-head matchup by 16 pts, 56-40.
Now, it is down to 6 pts, 51-45.
Give him another month and he'll be in the lead.
So maybe people are in the mood for something new and different rather than reheated leftovers like another Clinton or Bush.
|
|
norwester
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6368
Location: Seattle
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/19/15 10:43 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Any out-of-party comparisons right now are meaningless. It's the season for Democrats to sit back and watch the Republicans tear one another apart. The fact that Trump is at the forefront of people's minds right now and being seen as someone putting forth solutions and speaking to issue they're concerned about is not surprising.
With some careful planning and execution, Trump could become a possible threat, I guess. But there are a bunch of skeleton's in that closet that won't speak to a moderate/left base, in my opinion.
_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
|
|
|
|
