The Biden/Harris Administration Accomplishments Thread

#551
#551
GroverCleveland said:
I hear you, brother. FWIW, I think there were many things that appealed to people and what got him elected in the first place and continued support in 2020.

1) He was not part of the swamp as you allude to. After the arrogance of the Obama administration and of Hillary Clinton, many people felt the elite ruling class (including a segment of the Republican party, people like Mitt Romney) thought they had it figured out and the country was their oyster. They could do what they pleased and while they were not able to complete a leftist shift towards moving the country down the socialist road, they were well on their way; Hillary's election would seal the deal.

2) The news media is dominated by elitists who look down their noses at the middle class and, particularly, flyover county. I'd personally like to tar and feather Jim Acosta. Trump stuck his finger the eye of both these groups and people loved it.

3) He was goal oriented and is results driven, damn the niceties. Unfortunately, this was his biggest problem, he never seemed to really understand how to play Washington politics to really keep his policy goals on track. Just because he and the Senate Majority Leader of his own party may disagree on something is not a good excuse to attack said Senate Majority Leader.

4) Most people I know hated his Twitter account. Only a few I know felt it was the only way he could talk directly to the people. Personally, he made me despise the words Twitter and tweet. But it was sometimes fun to see him stick it to the elites.

5) The massive support in 2020 was push back against what, with very few exceptions, everyone thought was a senile moran being led around by a bunch of woke idiots and some puppet masters we really do not see (his cabinet is absolutely full of clowns and I don't believe they're collectively capable of running a lemonade stand with any competency, let alone the Federal government).

6) His actual policies appealed to people who supported him (I did for the general) like illegal immigration, recognizing China's economic hegemony, ending the endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Israel, recognizing and calling out the European NATO countries riding us for their defensive umbrella, the understanding what a freaking high cost government regulations are and lowering income taxes, especially corporate income taxes and his calling out the fact that Washington now thinks it owns the country, doesn't serve it. There are probably more, these are just ones off the top of my head.

I hope he decides not to run again as I agree with you, he is seriously flawed individual for that position. If he does, I'll support someone else in the primary. If he is the nominee, I will support him in the general because the Democrats are being led by full-blown idiot leftist progressives.
Click to expand...
Well done. 💯 percent dead on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol
#552
#552
C-south said:
Lol. Diversity is absolutely not needed. I’m sure you’d rather have a black surgeon perform open heart surgery on you who finished at the bottom of his class with pending malpractice suits against him than a white surgeon who’s performed hundreds and the best there is.
Click to expand...
If I’m going to have someone’s hands in my chest playing with my left internal mammary artery and shutting down my heart to fix it, he better be the best. ( nursing humor ) I don’t care if his Siamese twin is adjoined too him and reading poetry, he better be the best. I would never request a mediocre doctor because he filled some quota somewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol, AM64, whodeycin85 and 2 others
#553
#553
Probably_in_Class said:
I just want what's best for me and those around me. Unfortunately, I feel like our political leaders on both sides care less about that and more about "beating" the other side. We all need to stop electing people who only want to fight each other.
Click to expand...

Don’t listen to that wing nut , you’ll do better trying to stay just like your post says in here . People aren’t going to be too hard on you with that perspective . Luth is the most progressive liberal in here and try’s to convince people he’s reasonable and rational .
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland, norrislakevol, Vol737 and 2 others
#555
#555
NurseGoodVol said:
If I’m going to have someone’s hands in my chest playing with my left internal mammary artery and shutting down my heart to fix it, he better be the best. ( nursing humor ) I don’t care if his Siamese twin is adjoined too him and reading poetry, he better be the best. I would never request a mediocre doctor because he filled some quota somewhere.
Click to expand...
I want House, not Doogie. (Although House put many of his patients thru Hell before he got it right.)

Maybe.. Hawkeye, not Frank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol, Vol737, AM64 and 2 others
#556
#556
luthervol said:
I can also tell you that all of the recruiters of players I've coached have always asked extensively about character type issues.
Click to expand...

There is some reason behind that. Players who count against a scholarship quota and who then drive a Prius to rob a gas station don't generally stay on the roster regardless of how many recruiting stars they "earned". That doesn't mean the coach should go looking for 2 star recruits because a 5 star looked like 5 star trouble. It also still has nothing to do with diversity unless you consider a budding criminal a diversity worth bringing to the team. A player who can't play because of lacking character robs you of a scholarship position and leaves a hole in the roster regardless of talent, so character is a consideration, but the coach wasn't there looking at your players first because of character.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb
#560
#560
0nelilreb said:
The really sad part is , I don’t believe it’s all troll . There a stench , but I think it’s coming from a hybrid form of Marxism that loves them some Capitalism rewards .
Click to expand...

True, it’s certainly not all troll. Pretty 50/50 between troll and complete partisan stupidity, but that’s only for those that are officially keeping score.
 
#561
#561
McDad said:
Perhaps I am the only who sees the construct is created in such a way to make the "fact" inherently provocative.
Click to expand...
I understand your point, but when you say the sitaution didnt arise or make the PanAm analogy, you ignore Garland.
 
#562
#562
AM64 said:
There is some reason behind that. Players who count against a scholarship quota and who then drive a Prius to rob a gas station don't generally stay on the roster regardless of how many recruiting stars they "earned". That doesn't mean the coach should go looking for 2 star recruits because a 5 star looked like 5 star trouble. It also still has nothing to do with diversity unless you consider a budding criminal a diversity worth bringing to the team. A player who can't play because of lacking character robs you of a scholarship position and leaves a hole in the roster regardless of talent, so character is a consideration, but the coach wasn't there looking at your players first because of character.
Click to expand...
All true. My point was simply that the concept of "most qualified" goes deeper than most people initially realize.
Lots of criteria are in play when crowning the "most qualified".
Those criteria change constantly and the ultimate good of the future of the company/organization/country must be the final determinant.
 
#563
#563
luthervol said:
All true. My point was simply that the concept of "most qualified" goes deeper than most people initially realize.
Lots of criteria are in play when crowning the "most qualified".
Those criteria change constantly and the ultimate good of the future of the company/organization/country must be the final determinant.[/QUOTE]
Click to expand...
Damn. Who determines that? Your feels?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#567
#567
Vol737 said:
Biden blasted for policing free speech with ‘dystopian’ disinformation bureau

What an amazing accomplishment by this administration! They couldn’t get more Orwellian or Gestapo if they tried. Ministry of Truth…and the Dems/Libs/left don’t even bat an eye.
Click to expand...

Things are looking grim for them in the next election so controlling the "truth" could be seen as an advantage.

Of course, there's also the risk of a move like this (we don't yet know exactly what this will look like in practice) blowing up on them and driving even more people away. Hell, if they really do screw this up even moderate liberals that value the 1A are going to say "I'm not going to vote R but I can't support this current administration any longer either.".
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, Vol737 and norrislakevol
#572
#572
Probably_in_Class said:
It's a slow day at work, so I'll jump which I'm sure is a mistake.

I grew up a Republican who has turned away from the party primarily because I can't align with Trump and those that support him. What I can't understand is how he maintains so much support and why he holds appeal to people sticking with the Republican party. Could anyone calmly, logically explain why his version of politics is still attractive?

I completely understood the original appeal in 2016. Washington had left the vast majority of the country, particularly the south and rural parts, behind or ignored it for decades. Trump stood up and said that, but to me at least, it was very clear he wasn't the right person to lead that movement (he's the textbook definition of NYC/Washington elite). What confuses me is after seeing him in office for 4 years, why is his behavior and message still appealing?
Click to expand...
Because most common sense Americans are sick and tired of all the looney liberal wacko BS going on in the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, SpaceCoastVol, AM64 and 1 other person
#575
#575
luthervol said:
Again, it comes down to who decides what makes one "the best and most qualified" person. And what the ultimate primary objective is.

I still think a football coach/team owner is a good analogy.
Lots to be considered, and on multiple levels, when making a pick or a hire, and there are often disagreements on what the top priorities and qualifications should be.
Best player but with low character, or great but not best player with high character?
Best player available in the draft, or do we pick to fill a specific need?
A player known to be a positive in the locker room, or a slightly better player who is known to be a cancer to team chemistry?
A player that can help us this year but is on the way down, or a person who needs a little time but has a huge upside?

To say just pick the most qualified - is much to simplistic.
Click to expand...
Is it really? Is it really necessary to make things so nuanced people think you are nuts?
It’s really not, seek the most qualified or settle for mediocrity and nuance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top