Trump is rocking it!

[DangerousDave]

I don't always agree with Trump, but think of what kind of shape we would be in, if Hillary was in office. For me, Trump was the lesser of the two evils. I think if Hillary were in office we would be seeing national gun registration or a federal tax on each firearm purchased. We all know where she stands on gun control.

 

[spec4]

So do we know what the context of his not supporting "assault weapons" was" A lot of times quotes are incorrectly used or alters to sway public opinion. The Dems are experts at it.

Not being a political animal, I can see and have seen Trump say a lot of silly stuff due to his political naivette. Wish he didn't but there it is. After seeing how he handles the socialist left, I overlook the other stuff which really doesn't affect me anyway. He drives the libs nuts. Never saw that in my life, and I'm old. Therefore in my mind I figure he is doing good things.

 

[jamil]

I don't always agree with Trump, but think of what kind of shape we would be in, if Hillary was in office. For me, Trump was the lesser of the two evils. I think if Hillary were in office we would be seeing national gun registration or a federal tax on each firearm purchased. We all know where she stands on gun control.

I think if Hillary were in office normal people wouldn't have any voice. Insane social justice would usurp mainstream in a much more dominant way than it has. I think a lot of sane folks (aka non-woke) would maybe give up trying. And, of course we'd have all the anti-gun stuff pushed much harder.

 

[patience0830]

I have a question for the panel.

In all the ranting and yelling and blind loyalty, what could we do better. I mean Red wants the Gov. to dissolve and go away. To be replaced with what and at what cost.
Others want more Gov on this topic but scream about interference on that topic.

What to do. What to change. And at what costs.

WOW! Man with the hammer is deep thinking today.

Don't ban me, Bro.

I agree with your process, my friend. The "how to get there" is gonna be a long, slow, convince 'em one at a time process. Hope it doesn't slide too far, too fast for us to stay ahead of it.

 

[KG1]

I have a question for the panel.

In all the ranting and yelling and blind loyalty, what could we do better. I mean Red wants the Gov. to dissolve and go away. To be replaced with what and at what cost.
Others want more Gov on this topic but scream about interference on that topic.

What to do. What to change. And at what costs.

I'm just sitting back and giving a nod to Jamil's posts on this one. We can start with some consistency in warranted criticism no matter what our party affiliation is. Anything other that it is disingenuous and hypocritical.

 

[Denny347]

Never understood blind loyalty to a person OR a party.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I don't always agree with Trump, but think of what kind of shape we would be in, if Hillary was in office. For me, Trump was the lesser of the two evils. I think if Hillary were in office we would be seeing national gun registration or a federal tax on each firearm purchased. We all know where she stands on gun control.

Doubtful, there was no indication that she had the ability to do this.... at least then, NOW well, it's a new day in America. I could see some Democrat believing that they have the power to unilaterally do that.

 

[Denny347]

Doubtful, there was no indication that she had the ability to do this.... at least then, NOW well, it's a new day in America. I could see some Democrat believing that they have the power to unilaterally do that.

 

[jamil]

Doubtful, there was no indication that she had the ability to do this.... at least then, NOW well, it's a new day in America. I could see some Democrat believing that they have the power to unilaterally do that.

It's possible that with Hillary and the lack of a bat **** crazy delusional anti-trump left, the bat **** crazy democrats would never rise to prominence. But I'd say that with every school shooting, Hillary would erode away whatever she could get away with. Not sure if a national gun registry would be possible. You can tell what they're targeting to get done legislatively. They start trying to pin things like "common sense" to the ideas. Like universal background checks. There isn't much talk at all right now about a national registry. We don't have to start worrying about that until we start hearing them calling that common sense gun safety.

 

[jamil]

It's ignorable, if not eye-roll inducing.

 

[DangerousDave]

Pelosi is already threatening that if a Democrat wins in 2020 as president, that they can claim a National Emergency to push their gun control laws through.

 

[KG1]

Pelosi is already threatening that if a Democrat wins in 2020 as president, that they can claim a National Emergency to push their gun control laws through.

Good. I would encourage Pelosi to do all the motivational speaking that she wants. I hope she keeps it up.

 

[2A_Tom]

You can make everything be what you want by applying trivial technicalities for why something has to be the way you want.

Oh no, Trump's executive action isn't the egregious usurping of executive Power that Obama's was because blah, blah, blah, technicality, blah, blah blah.

C'mon. Think about it. Could it be that you think Obama's executive actions were egregious because they were opposed to your ideological side, and that overstepping executive authority really wasn't the reason? Do you really support Trump's use of executive actions because you want those things done? Is by any means necessary more justified when it's something you support? And it's only wrong when it accomplishes something you don't support?

Maybe when the next democrat is in office and employs a by-any-means-necessary strategy, you can once again see the principles which makes that wrong.

Obama's executive actions mostly = less freedom and more regulation.

Trump's executive actions mostly = more freedom and less regulation.

 

[Leadeye]

I have a question for the panel.

In all the ranting and yelling and blind loyalty, what could we do better. I mean Red wants the Gov. to dissolve and go away. To be replaced with what and at what cost.
Others want more Gov on this topic but scream about interference on that topic.

What to do. What to change. And at what costs.

I would start by opening the books to the public of everybody who does business with the government. There might be some sort of exemption for black DARPA type stuff, but if you're a beltway law firm, everybody gets a look at where you're money comes from and who you're talking to. Consulting firms, contractors, everybody, don't like those terms, don't do business with the government.

It's public money, and everybody should be able to.....

Always follow the money

 

[churchmouse]

I would start by opening the books to the public of everybody who does business with the government. There might be some sort of exemption for black DARPA type stuff, but if you're a beltway law firm, everybody gets a look at where you're money comes from and who you're talking to. Consulting firms, contractors, everybody, don't like those terms, don't do business with the government.

It's public money, and everybody should be able to.....

Always follow the money

That would be a serious start at pulling the plug on the swamp.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Obama's executive actions mostly = less freedom and more regulation.

Trump's executive actions mostly = more freedom and less regulation.

Both claims are false.

 

[bwframe]

NeverTrumpers slinging around "loyalty" as a poor trait of those who support our president don't seem to have an alternative.

Other than of course disillusioning and poisoning the middle ground voters into not voting, throwing their vote away or even voting for the enemy.

 

[jamil]

Obama's executive actions mostly = less freedom and more regulation.

Trump's executive actions mostly = more freedom and less regulation.

You can make everything be what you want by applying trivial technicalities for why something has to be the way you want.

Fact check = true.

 

[Ingomike]

You can make everything be what you want by applying trivial technicalities for why something has to be the way you want.

Oh no, Trump's executive action isn't the egregious usurping of executive Power that Obama's was because blah, blah, blah, technicality, blah, blah blah.

C'mon. Think about it. Could it be that you think Obama's executive actions were egregious because they were opposed to your ideological side, and that overstepping executive authority really wasn't the reason? Do you really support Trump's use of executive actions because you want those things done? Is by any means necessary more justified when it's something you support? And it's only wrong when it accomplishes something you don't support?

Maybe when the next democrat is in office and employs a by-any-means-necessary strategy, you can once again see the principles which makes that wrong.

Not all executive orders are equal, I thought many BHO eo's were wrong and thought it right for DJT to eo to remove them. It is in no way hypocritical to be opposed to eo's in the first place and support their use to remove previous eo's. As for the wall eo, that too is different in that the President is exercising a law, duly passed 40 years ago, not just pulling rabbits out of hats. I hope that both sides come together and repeal this law. It is mind boggling to me just how much power lazy congresses have given away over the years, they literally write a law as an outline of the goal and have the agencies fill in the details. That to me is not Constitutional...

MM

 

[ditcherman]

Not all executive orders are equal, I thought many BHO eo's were wrong and thought it right for DJT to eo to remove them. It is in no way hypocritical to be opposed to eo's in the first place and support their use to remove previous eo's. As for the wall eo, that too is different in that the President is exercising a law, duly passed 40 years ago, not just pulling rabbits out of hats. I hope that both sides come together and repeal this law. It is mind boggling to me just how much power lazy congresses have given away over the years, they literally write a law as an outline of the goal and have the agencies fill in the details. That to me is not Constitutional...

MM

That's what needs to be burnt down, rooted out, whatever. If they just did their jobs and weren't worried about reelection and made the hard calls...