Do you find you concentrate on everything Trump, and are not really interested in discussing anything in regard to current problems the country is experiencing?
Are you incapable of thinking or discussing current political problems, other than those that involve Trump?
When faced with a long list of current problems America is experiencing do you immediately shut down, and deflect the subject back to Trump?
Do you feel there is any way you can or will discuss current problems America is experiencing other than the problems that include Trump?
Lastly, what tops your list when it comes to political concerns?
Sharlee, I like the pretty image.
Trump IS among the current problems this country is facing. And, until he is dead, in prison or foresworn to remove himself from politics, he remains fair game.
Every GOP politician has to get his approval and kiss his ring in the primaries. Who has ever on either side had THAT kind of power?
Trump remains at the center of most of our intensive and fundamental structural problems as a society. The Republican Party and its attempts to initiate minority rule is a close second.
My biggest concern is that the democratic process that I was born into here in America remains intact. Because Trump and the Republicans seem to have little loyalty toward it. If these principles are not guarded then every other consideration has relatively little significance.
That is my take on it.
I see your point, and much of it is true in my view. We have a split party, but I believe like you that Trump does wheeled power in the party. The more the Democrats push against Trump, the deeper most Republican dig in. Are the Dema doing the Republicans a favor? (Yet to be seen). I feel many of us were on our way to supporting someone new.
I don't feel the majority of Republicans feel that Trump threatens America's democracy. In fact, many feel he is our only chance to get back
There is no doubt we are all in a "pickle".
We need new candidates, for the betterment of the Nation.
Thanks for commenting, we share some of the same concerns.
"Lastly, what tops your list when it comes to political concerns?"
I am closely following the RPM Act. From the Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) is their statement of what the RPM Act is.
Q. What is the RPM Act?
A. The Recognizing the Protection of Motorsports (RPM) Act is common-sense, bi-partisan legislation that is being considered by Congress in 2021 to protect law-abiding citizens who convert their personal vehicles solely for use in racing competitions. It also protects citizens’ rights to purchase emissions-related parts intended to be installed on their racing vehicles. The RPM Act was first introduced in 2016 and the necessary steps for Congressional passage have been taken. Hearings have been held, there is widespread bi-partisan support, and the bill is well positioned to be approved by the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate and signed into law in 2021. It is vital that you urge your member of Congress to support and pass the RPM Act.
The full article: Recognizing the Protection of Motorsports Act (RPM Act) FAQ
There were senate hearings on the 7th I believe.
Antron Brown to testify in Senate hearing today
https://www.nhra.com/news/2022/antron-b … ring-today
You provide me with a smile. I can't imagine this conversation could divert to Trump. Plus I learned something. I had not heard of the bill and had a look... But it may... LOL
It goes without saying I would support this bill. However, I see it sitting in the House thus far. Will you need a Republican majority in the House to push it along, and get it passed?
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-con … 1&r=81
05/18/2021 Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change.
Action By: Committee on Energy and Commerce
05/17/2021 Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Action By: House of Representatives
05/17/2021 Introduced in House
Action By: House of Representatives
So will the Democrats hold it up due to their huge push for all that is Green?
Thank you for joining in.
Thanks for the link. Yeah, the green push may affect it. We'll see. One has to consider this is not just cars. It is motor cycles and trucks too.
I don't know enough about emissions to comment. I do know there are several different ideologies on Global warming. Yet, I feel we will come to better methods of cleaner energy over time. I guess the little guy may need to give up a sport or two, while some defeat the little guy's a good deed to fly around in private jets, and cool and heat huge homes.
I am of the school that we get what we vote for, either positively or negatively. Many of the roots of our problems originates in the home environment. Many people are in the situation they are in because of poor planning by their families of origin & themselves once they are grown. One has to be brutally truthful in his/her assessment of his/her life situation. One has to learn to plan-thinking what type of life they want. Does one want a life of consistent struggle or a great life with little struggle. Oftentimes, people who go the easy route have it hard in life while those who go the difficult route have it easy.
American or rather Western society & culture are metaphorizing at an advanced rate. Things will never return to what they once were. Social classes are metaphorizing especially the middle class. Those in middle class with the in-demand mindset will progress into the upper middle, even upper class; conversely, those in the middle class who refuse to update their skillsets or have irrelevant skillsets will descend into the lower class. One has to be relevant in order to succeed in the 21st century.
When people enter into marriage & plan to have children, they should consider if their lifestyle could afford children. Studies show that it costs about $300,000 to raise a child from infancy to 18, more so if the child pursues tertiary levels of education. Many people can't afford this. If one can't afford to raise children in an environment which affords the greatest opportunities, DON'T have children.
To digress, young people must major in subjects which produce the most lucrative results. Liberal arts, humanities, & social sciences are totally irrelevant. The majors w/the most lucrative outcomes are medicine, health, & STEM. If a young person majors in liberal arts & the humanities, h/she will have a VERY BLEAK socioeconomic future of struggle-oftentimes performing jobs that a high school graduate would perform. With more advanced computerization & the rise of AI, more basic technical jobs will be phased out. Folks, it is beyond the usual politics- America is advancing & if one wants to thrive, one has to keep pace.
Climate Change, everything else is a sideshow.
The Climate Crisis is the biggest threat to civilization all over the world.
And the only thing to stop it is to change capitalism. Chaging an economy based on growth into an economy based on sustainability.
Apparently Lindsey Graham did not read the tea leaves from Kansas and decided a national bill on abortion would be in the best interests of the GOP heading into the midterms.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-senate-rep … 33856.html
He is walking a tightrope. We will need to wait to see if his strategy works.
This man is like a flip-flopping catfish. If it doesn't work, he will just do a 180 and pretend he's on the other side of the issue. The man changes opinions and allegiances like underwear.
Thanks, the office pool has my stay at around nine days until I get banned again. Might as well change the name of this forum to HubFoxPages.
I don't understand why certain people keep getting banned? I have had the most sarcastic, snide and condescending comments leveled at me and yet those folks live to snipe another day.
Yep, your timing is good. Cred was pulling overtime and his nib was showing the wear. Nine days should help him out. ;-).
Yes, and you can bet that I am always prepared to hold the line until reinforcements are here to assist.
Yeah, but your nib was getting dull. Some recent exchanges bordered on 'mutual admiration societies.' You haven't really sally forthed in weeks. Hells bells, I even cut you some slack on that thing about Trump's sinister plans for the 'mishandled' documents.
Now you can take a breath and pop on a sharp new nib. When Valeant leaves us again, in 9 days, (that's my pool pick, (ok, I hedged with 9+)), you'll be rested and ready.
If I did not watch my "nib", I would 'disappear' just as so many of my left leaning compatriots have.
I will only attack ideas, savagely if need be, while leaving the flesh and bone intact.
So, I speak loudly, but carry a small shtick.
I won't tell anyone you are really a Conservative posing as a Lib.
That will be our little secret.
"So, I speak loudly, but carry a small shtick."
I'll take 8, it won't take him a week to get his blood boiling and insults flinging.
It wasn't insults that led to my last ban. It was the infamous 'bickering' for calling out easily provable falsehoods. And even worse, I was the one who reported being insulted, then they banned me for what they said was 'bickering' even though I was the one who reported the thread as they instruct us to do.
Getting banned for "bickering" in a political forum is nuts. But so is reporting insults. That old 'kitchen' saying comes to mind. In your case, the 'heat' is part of the deal, on HP's side, if they don't want the 'heat' they shouldn't have the 'kitchen.'
Disagree, one can get their point across without personal insults. However, I do give credit for passion. In my view, the passionate have more to offer in most conversations. They can sit at the kitchen table, and endure the heat until all hell breaks loose. So, although it is clear we are oil and vinegar, and you most certainly get under my skin --- I welcome you back. You certainly have a passion for all that is political.
True, but one can be insulted by another challenging their slate of alternative facts. Which so often happens in these forums.
You and I are definitely on opposite sides of a similar coin in our feelings for the political parties. Some occasional common ground, but more often not.
But it's good to be back. Some of these forum topics inspire Hub content, so it's good to see what the other side thinks.
Speaking of which - just out of curiosity and going off political topic for a second - how many Hubs has everyone published so far this year?
I think some have an innate trait to challenge others if they don't agree with their personal views. We have a stronger passion to defend a view. Today we also have the problem of a media that presents reports showing bias, they pick and choose facts to report, and this confuses facts in some cases.
We at times are presented with skewed facts.
Yes, we have different ideologies and get passionate over different
Yes, the topics as of late do inspire one to write. I think it is a positive
to have first-hand views of both sides. This forum has few users, but is a good place to learn, and take in other views.
Passion blurs good judgement and reason.
Much like bias, when one has too much of it, all that person's opinions and views are slanted, at best, disregarding of any information that challenges their beliefs and 'facts' at worst.
Ken, Could passion, or strong feelings work to also push one to do more research to prove their point? Do passionate people take on causes, and delve into a cause more readily than those without passion? Do they not stimulate conversations because of strong feelings?
I guess I look at passion a bit differently.
Passion may drive you to find the answers.
However, the more biased you are, the more you will only seek answers from those places that reaffirm your beliefs and biases.
Take as example Esoteric.
Take as example GA.
Which of the two do you feel approach their research with more passion?
Which would you say are more biased?
Which seems consumed by their beliefs and which seems more rational and prone to considering new facts and information?
Isn't the fact that GA aligns with your own beliefs a bias in itself when evaluating these two individuals?
Hahaha, I doubt GA would appreciate your perspective that he holds my beliefs and bias.
In the most general sense, that you are both somewhere on the conservative side of the spectrum.
Again, I doubt GA sees himself in that light.
That is how you see it perhaps in a, if they ain't with us they're against us, sort of way.
Really, Both of you guys are quite conservative, with you being a bit more so, based on your comments here in the forum.
Don't mean to ignore, GA.
Did I get it right about you and Ken being basically conservatives?
Probably, if the description speaks to values and not ideologies. I've gotten pretty 'liberal' in recent years. Now, I can see a man with a diamond-stud earring and not grimace.
From that perspective, we may not be that different.
You said a mouthful... I actually have always felt GA is a bit to the left-liberal.
No really, am I wrong in my assessment? I do feel as if I have shared with you, that both liberals and conservatives have so changed over the years.
I think you are pretty much the same as GA, a bit left of the middle. Am I wrong?
Funny, Sharlee, I always saw him as just to the Right of center. And I am sure that he will clear that up for us.
Many would probably tell you that I am probably a little more than just a "little left", but I am certainly not a Marxist or bomb throwing anarchist. I can be reasonable. For example, from my perspective Biden is to my right.
But when it comes to acceptance of some of the thing GA mentioned, I too, had to get over many hurdles.
I've been telling you that for years. I recall several times when you turned away from the Dark side and saw the light of the Force. I know there is still hope for you. ;-)
I hope you still draw the line at 'pants pulled down so you can see the person's underwear' though.
I am as liberal as they get and yet I cannot stand the sight of such tackiness in public.
I dont think that has to do with being liberal or not. Im younger than (most of) you, and probably more to the left and/or liberal than you, and for me (the underwear thing) it's just stupid.
What I have seen tossed about most is Liberal and Trumper. A ways back seeking to have a better understanding I found two articles describing the factions of the two parties back in 2019 by FiveThirtyEight. I may reread them later today. They say they are:
Wings of the Democrat Party
The Super Progressives
The Very Progressives
The Progressive New Guard
The Progressive Old Guard
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/th … tic-party/
The Wings of the Republican Party
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/th … can-party/
What I found interesting is there is no Liberal faction and no Conservative faction. Are those terms now outdated?
The terms liberal and conservative may harken to a time when both sides were more moderate in perspective, and we were able to find more common ground. I would not want to say that the terms are outdated more than that they have put on the shelf for a while.
I could be considered part of the Very Progressive Crowd.
On different issues, some people may skew closer to the middle while on others, they may be on a different point along the spectrum. I like to think I prefer a fiscally conservative democrat (like a Bill Clinton who ran his government with a budget surplus). But I like a very progressive candidate when it comes to marriage equality and climate change.
Other times, anywhere on the spectrum will do. That was the case for many democrats in 2020 and sounds like people like Sharlee will be there in 2024.
How about commonsense? How about having policies that benefit the middle class? In order to maintain & grow the middle class, reduce the inane social programs which tax the middle class to near death. To hell with climate change- such nonsensical buffonery. Let's talk economics. When people don't have to struggle socioeconomically, everything will fall into place. It is ALL about the Benjamins.
The right certainly wants to make each of the next few elections about the Benjamins. I disagree, in that electing someone who respects the Constitutional processes is what it is currently ALL about.
But climate change is talking about economics as the west burns and suffers droughts, as glaciers disintegrate and sea levels rise. The increased rate of these crises costs massive sums.
And I have seen plenty of policies from this administration that directly benefit the middle class. Who will be building the infrastructure? Who will benefit from lower drug costs? Who gets veteran health care? Who got student debt relief? Where is the commonsense in denying these policies that clearly positively affect the middle class?
Which inane social programs are you referring to?
Val, Bill was one of my favorite presidents... I don't think there is anything I could say derogatory about Bill's job performance. Wish he could have had 4 more. So, I declare this a holiday --- we sort of agreed.
I think the terms are still relevant. They are just the big baskets holding those smaller baskets. As in; most general vs. less general. They are safely all-encompassing without carrying the connotations or conditioning of adjectives.
The listed labels for conservatives seem about right, but I think the multiple "progressive" sects are too arbitrary. "Very Progressive" seems unnecessary.
Yeah I pretty much agree. It is like that Pew Research Typology article where the most discussed was Ambivalent Right. I skimmed the FiveThirtyEight articles paying attention to the main points for each that was highlighted at the beginning of explaining them giving more clarity. And, they gave examples with elected congresspersons as examples for each.
On that note, Oops!, I see I forgot to post the one for the Republicans and will here and Edit the original post.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/th … can-party/
I still think that there is a discernible difference between the super and very.
I see the "super" as revolutionaries verses the the "very" that still want to work within the system for change.
Oh my, I have always looked at "Sagging" as a fashion fad. That came and somewhat has faded out. I just remembered some of the fads that I joined in on when I was young. I gave slack on the fad. Does that make me a liberal? OH MY GOD --- LOL
Nope, 'sagging' still gets the 'idiot' look. A white man sagging is even more of an idiot.
No, I am for equal opportunity idiocy. This has been a predominantly black fashion statement of which I totally disapprove. I got brazen one day and called a kid out on it. I chided and said "Pull your pants up, nobody wants to see your drawers! " He said that I was "old fashioned".
Hey... This was all about the word passion.
I think we are headed into a passionate back-and-forth.
Yes, you got me there. But does not more knowledge on a given subject make for a better conversation, and does one not develop a bias the more they feel their knowledge supports their issue?
I feel you are passionate, it shows in your comments... So, I think one can channel their passion in the right direction. Do you not Combine passion with rationale when you share a comment?
That brings us back to the problem with bias, the more biased you are the more restricted you are going to be in where you get your "facts".
If the only source of news you trust is CNN and MSNBC and you call almost everything else Conservative and lies, then your knowledge and facts are extremely limited.
It is true it works both ways, so those that only listen to FOX and OANN are just as limited.
I do my best to avoid all American MSM, with the exception of the Wall St. Journal. But I do choose to watch and read Yahoo, Bloomberg, and CBS for business and investment news, and catch the news in general from those sites... which are not Conservative.
For foreign matters, like Ukraine, China, I go to foreign sites so I can get real facts about what is going on, not the American MSM narrative which often has nothing to do with reality.
Go read one of the dozens of Esoteric threads, you will feel right at home.
I've been following the forums...even that incorrect post about New York's castle doctrine that was posted. New Yorkers cannot just shoot someone if they come onto their property. But if inside the home and someone enters, happy hunting! I believe there was a claim that New Yorkers just have to sit back and watch a burglar take their stuff. Not true, at all.
Good luck with that, hopefully you never have to test that belief of yours.
What belief? I'm just correcting the record for the misinformation posted about New York's gun laws.
Here is a link to Article 35 of the New York Penal Law.
It is pretty common language for a Castle Doctrine.
New York is one of 12 states that impose a duty to retreat, which requires individuals, when not at home, to try to escape from a confrontation with a person behaving aggressively.
BUT EVEN WHEN HOME:
"the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with
complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no
duty to retreat if he or she is:
(i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor ; "
Good luck proving you were not the initial aggressor in NY.
Oh, proving it can be done, it just takes a year, a new administration, and $100,000 in legal fees. Good luck on getting an apology and your record expunged!
From what I was following in these forums, the claim was made that New Yorkers just had to sit back and watch burglars take their things, and had the duty to retreat, even in their home. That claim is patently false, under New York laws.
Someone in their own home and another with no ties to that home would be very easy to prove who the aggressor would be in that situation.
"Depending on the location, a person may have a duty to retreat to avoid violence if one can reasonably do so. Castle doctrines lessen the duty to retreat when an individual is assaulted within one's own home."
Which basically means that if the police show up at your house after a shooting, and they have a liberal DA that wants to prosecute, they will arrest you. Thousands of dollars and months later you might be set free, but it is not like they are going to expunge that arrest from your record.
Violent threats all around...
https://www.axios.com/2022/09/12/mar-a- … een-cannon
Trump supporter said, 'Yeah, hold my beer.'
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/arm … 44761.html
by Sharlee 2 months ago
I'd love to hear your perspective on this current political matter. It's worth noting that the topic doesn't revolve around Trump, but it's intriguing because President Biden is seeking re-election for another four years in office."Fox News Digital has confirmed House Speaker Kevin McCarthy,...
by Sharlee 13 months ago
Here once again Biden stands at a podium swings around his hands, and rants, seeking and appoint blame on American citizens, ultimately Republican citizens. Without cause, without proof of the motive of why or what possessed this nut job that attacked Paul Pelosi. Although in front of only a...
by Tim Mitchell 2 weeks ago
An interesting article I read; How Fear and Anger Impact Democracy (May 21, 2019) brings some light on the OP title. It is an essay published in Items, Insights from the Social Sciences of the Social Science Research Council.The article in my view shares what we may have long suspected and lived...
by Credence2 10 months ago
I stumbled upon a recent article the excerpt of it is below:The former chair of the Republican National Committee (RNC) has a blistering response to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's, R-Ga., recent remarks about debt.According to HuffPost, Michael Steele was not pleased with Greene's adamant pushback...
by Credence2 4 weeks ago
I was disturbed by an article I had recently read. The main theme emphasizing similarities between the current administration and the period during the 1920's after WWI and before the deluge of Hitler's ascendency in Germany. Yes, the article is from Salon but its content is still food for thought....
by Scott Belford 6 years ago
Maybe. The 17th Century term High Crimes and Misdemeanors may not mean what you think it might be after seeing President Clinton impeached, but not convicted. A common interpretation is as follows:The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct peculiar...
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|