Front Office Football Central

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)
-   Off Topic (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The Trump Presidency – 2016 (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=92014)

miami_fan 01-26-2019 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3229761)
TBH, I would value someone that knows how to play the game, has built up relationships across the aisle, knows how to negotiate politically etc.


The 2016 presidential election proves (to me at least) that you may be the only person in America who still holds these values.

SackAttack 01-26-2019 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3229754)
The point as I understand is that there's a difference between being a good congressional leader and being a good president. There's a reasonable argument that the skillsets required are mutually exclusive. I think you can be a good Senator and a good President - but maybe not a good Speaker/Majority Leader.


The argument I've made before is that if you're a good (or better) Senator, you're more valuable to your party's goals spending 20 or 30 years as one of the hundred or so most powerful people in the country. You can shape legislation for a generation if you're charismatic enough to earn your peers' support as Majority Leader.

Presidenting is different. You're the Commander-in-Chief, so you have the last word on things cogent to the national defense. There are other responsibilities in that vein that are more about the well-being of the country than any one in-the-moment issue.

But when you circle back around to legislation, your time as President is limited. In that context, the role is more about legacies than anything else. Protect your ideological predecessors' legacy; build your own. Maybe dismantle your immediate predecessor's legacy if you're a petty fuck who holds a grudge because you got made fun of once upon a time.

But you're in the office for, at most, around ten years. And in those ten years, you'll either be signing the legislation your ideological peers send you, vetoing the stuff your ideological opposites send you, or tiptoeing through a bipartisan minefield on stuff that's not as clear-cut. Yeah, you can lean on Congress and say "This is what I would sign, and that is what I would not," but ultimately what lands on your desk depends on Congress more than you.

If you're a kickass Senator, stay in the Senate. If your Senatorial legacy isn't that clear-cut but you're a charismatic sonufa who can charm babies and woo voters, sure, chase that brass ring. But Presidents basically never re-enter government after their time in office is over. If a kickass Senator leaves the Senate to chase higher office (or try to burnish a resume for a future run), he or she should be damned sure there's nothing more they can accomplish in the Senate, IMO.

Edward64 01-26-2019 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miami_fan (Post 3229767)
The 2016 presidential election proves (to me at least) that you may be the only person in America who still holds these values.


May have been true back in 2016 but I think many people will think this way in 2020 after the Trump mess.

SackAttack 01-26-2019 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3229772)
May have been true back in 2016 but I think many people will think this way in 2020 after the Trump mess.


Why? 2016 proved that Independents and Democrats didn't learn that lesson after third-party votes and "I just can't vote for Gore" got W. elected.

What makes you think 2020 will be the "you can't get fooled again" moment for them?

digamma 01-26-2019 05:40 PM

Can we please end this nonsense discussion? Nancy Pelosi is going to be 81 in 2020 and is not going to run for President.

cuervo72 01-26-2019 05:54 PM

Herding cats, dig.

larrymcg421 01-26-2019 06:20 PM

I wasn't even making the argument that she'd be an ineffective President. She has the right kind of pragmatism that I like for someone in that role. I just think she's terrible as a candidate.

cuervo72 01-26-2019 08:05 PM

Trump’s golf course employed undocumented workers — and then fired them amid showdown over border wall

Not a surprise, as I think it was known the clubs have been staffed with undocumented immigrants. But as one poster says:

"So, in short, club management has knowingly employed undocumented immigrants for years, and knew exactly who they were."

I guess at least they didn't arrange for ICE to be there.

Edward64 01-26-2019 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by digamma (Post 3229783)
Can we please end this nonsense discussion? Nancy Pelosi is going to be 81 in 2020 and is not going to run for President.


She seems to be of sound mind. Sounds like age discrimination/prejudice to me :)

She just needs to propose a good VP for just in case.

Edward64 01-26-2019 09:00 PM

Yeah, keep it up you ass.

Mueller's got all the cards and your only way out is a Trump pardon (if possible) and Trump is not someone you want to depend on.

Roger Stone mocks Mueller after indictment in Instagram post
Quote:

A day after being indicted, Roger Stone used his Instagram account to mock special counsel Robert Mueller and dub the charges against him a big "nothingburger."

"Here’s what Mueller has on me #nothingburger," Stone posted on Saturday. The post accompanied a doctored image of Mueller dressed up as a waiter holding an empty bun on a silver platter.

kingfc22 01-27-2019 02:01 PM

So in the past week, we’ve had 10 people killed in mass shootings by WHITE AMERICANS.

Yet, Trump and his cronies are once again banging the Build the Wall drum behind false and/or completely misleading information :banghead:

JPhillips 01-28-2019 08:00 AM

Trump accidentally admits he's not the smartest.



albionmoonlight 01-28-2019 09:41 AM





Imagine getting to Congress and somehow deciding that the problem is that the lobbyists don't have ENOUGH power, so we'd better make sure that the actual legislators are neophytes who need to rely on their institutional expertise.

PilotMan 01-28-2019 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3229849)




Imagine getting to Congress and somehow deciding that the problem is that the lobbyists don't have ENOUGH power, so we'd better make sure that the actual legislators are neophytes who need to rely on their institutional expertise.



I've been coming around more and more to this line of thinking, but there has to be a happy medium in here where we can cap influence on leadership, while limiting leadership terms at the same time. Or making it much, much harder for leaders to continue to hold onto power the longer they are in office. At this point though, I think you're right about lobbyists frothing at the mouth over new people to 'show the ropes' to and how to get things done. We can kiss any manner of representation away if that's the case.


albionmoonlight 01-28-2019 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PilotMan (Post 3229850)
I've been coming around more and more to this line of thinking, but there has to be a happy medium in here where we can cap influence on leadership, while limiting leadership terms at the same time. Or making it much, much harder for leaders to continue to hold onto power the longer they are in office. At this point though, I think you're right about lobbyists frothing at the mouth over new people to 'show the ropes' to and how to get things done. We can kiss any manner of representation away if that's the case.



YES. There is a place for some reforms/improvements. But term limits are like burning down your house to get rid of ants in your kitchen. It causes way bigger problems than it solves.

albionmoonlight 01-28-2019 11:03 AM

I Am So Progressive That I Am Already Preparing My 2020 Protest Vote For Donald Trump - McSweeney

Atocep 01-28-2019 11:37 AM


Sometimes I wish this board had a like button. Progressives shooting themselves in the foot by over thinking their cause and pouting because they don't get their way is large part of why we're in this mess in the first place.

jeff061 01-28-2019 12:26 PM

You think Brexit would have blown that "strategy" up for everyone.

larrymcg421 01-28-2019 01:09 PM

One of my favorite lines from The West Wing is, "We have term limits. They're called elections." And I totally agree with that. If people in a district want a career politician representing them, then that's their right.

People are fooling themselves if they think term limits will get the crooks out and bring in the good guys. There's an endless amount of cynical, partisan politicians to rotate in. My favorite example of this is when the GOP finally ousted Rostenkowski (only because he was indicted), the Democrat who came to replace him two years later was none other than Rod Blagoievich.

QuikSand 01-28-2019 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PilotMan (Post 3229850)
I think you're right about lobbyists frothing at the mouth over new people to 'show the ropes' to and how to get things done.


yup

Edward64 01-28-2019 04:51 PM

Yay. I really don't care either way but am slightly disappointed that Pelosi didn't make him wait until after the 3 weeks to see how negotiations were going. But I guess this is Pelosi being a grown up.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/28/polit...y-5/index.html
Quote:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has invited President Donald Trump to give his State of the Union address on February 5, Pelosi's office announced Monday.

"When I wrote to you on January 23rd, I stated that we should work together to find a mutually agreeable date when government has reopened to schedule this year's State of the Union address," Pelosi stated in a letter provided by her office. "In our conversation today, we agreed on February 5th."

Pelosi continued, "Therefore, I invite you to deliver your State of the Union address before a Joint Session of Congress on February 5, 2019 in the House Chamber."

A Pelosi aide said that the speaker was the one to call Trump on Monday.

Lathum 01-28-2019 05:11 PM

IMO a great move. Anything to the contrary would have been looked upon a being petty,

BYU 14 01-28-2019 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lathum (Post 3229880)
IMO a great move. Anything to the contrary would have been looked upon a being petty,


Completely agree, she leveraged this situation well throughout and would have undone all that if she had continued to delay it.

JPhillips 01-28-2019 09:19 PM

Quote:

Supplies of medicine should be deemed more important than shipments of food if there is a no-deal Brexit, the health secretary has told MPs.

Matt Hancock made clear his view when answering questions at the health and social care select committee. “The thing is that medicines will be prioritised in the event of a no-deal Brexit,” the health and social care secretary said when asked by the former Labour health minister Ben Bradshaw which would be given precedence.

Bradshaw responded: “Over food? Over vital food?”

It is absolutely astounding that the UK has gotten itself into this position.

AlexB 01-29-2019 08:24 AM

Agreed.

When the country was asked about signing up for the EU (then the EEC) in the 1970s it was billed as a trading & customs opportunity.

Nothing was mentioned about EU parliament, COJ, etc taking precedence over or shaping/dictating UK laws.

How we ever got into this position is indeed astounding, but at least we are close to getting out of it now.

The one thing that I really do wish they could sort out is the customs and trading agreement though - that will be a complete PITA for some time by the looks of it

Marc Vaughan 01-29-2019 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexB (Post 3229904)
Nothing was mentioned about EU parliament, COJ, etc taking precedence over or shaping/dictating UK laws.

You are aware that none of that is true? - the UK had right of veto over laws and regulations introduced in the EU (UK Voting/Veto rights) and when they had been passed we still could have passed laws to remove their effect or contested them (European / UK Law), however a series of UK Governments have preferred to accept such things and blame the EU rather than take responsibility for them even when they have often had good reason to come to pass (other countries haven't been so willing to do so, despite having weaker positions in the EU than the UK).

But hey, don't let facts get in the way of screwing up the country - Brexit is a total cluster fuck imho, it was granted through a referendum full of false statements and even when that came to light its supporters have continue to bang a drum harking back to a time in history they believe will come again ... it reminds me a lot of Trump supporters wanting to drag the US back to the 1950's in all honesty.

Thomkal 01-29-2019 09:41 AM

Roger Stone appearing in court now-they had to get him local repesentation at the last second because his lawyers were not part of the local bar and did not file correctly or some such legal lunacy :)

Thomkal 01-29-2019 10:31 AM

Roger Stone pleaded not guilty as expected.


Meanwhile in Trumpville, we have a weather report:


In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded. In coming days, expected to get even colder. People can’t last outside even for minutes. What the hell is going on with Global Waming? Please come back fast, we need you!

Thomkal 01-29-2019 11:03 AM

Jeff Flake will not run against Trump is 2020-joins CBS news though so at least we will get to see him not back up anything he says for longer.

kingfc22 01-29-2019 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomkal (Post 3229911)
Roger Stone pleaded not guilty as expected.


Meanwhile in Trumpville, we have a weather report:


In the beautiful Midwest, windchill temperatures are reaching minus 60 degrees, the coldest ever recorded. In coming days, expected to get even colder. People can’t last outside even for minutes. What the hell is going on with Global Waming? Please come back fast, we need you!


The stupidity is amazing

albionmoonlight 01-29-2019 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomkal (Post 3229911)
Roger Stone pleaded not guilty as expected


So people know, at this stage of the proceedings, everyone pleads not guilty. This does not preclude a "Change of Plea" hearing to guilty later.

Of course, Stone does not appear at all like he's gonna plead guilty. But this wasn't some defiant move on his part. It was routine. It just got the speedy trial clock running.

I. J. Reilly 01-29-2019 11:41 AM

Of course he’s stupid, but it’s kind of beside the point.

Trump is like one of those animals that’s so perfectly adapted to their environment that they stopped evolving 500 million years ago. Crocodiles have pretty small brains, but they eat well. They just have to float around in the watering hole and eventually dinner comes to them.

Trump doesn’t know anything, just that when he tweets out something he heard on TV everyone talks about him. It satisfies his most primal need, so he keeps doing it.

digamma 01-29-2019 11:46 AM

He's honestly just a high profile internet troll...

oh, who has access to the world's most powerful arsenal of nuclear weapons.

Edward64 01-29-2019 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan (Post 3229906)
You are aware that none of that is true? - the UK had right of veto over laws and regulations introduced in the EU (UK Voting/Veto rights) and when they had been passed we still could have passed laws to remove their effect or contested them (European / UK Law), however a series of UK Governments have preferred to accept such things and blame the EU rather than take responsibility for them even when they have often had good reason to come to pass (other countries haven't been so willing to do so, despite having weaker positions in the EU than the UK).

But hey, don't let facts get in the way of screwing up the country - Brexit is a total cluster fuck imho, it was granted through a referendum full of false statements and even when that came to light its supporters have continue to bang a drum harking back to a time in history they believe will come again ... it reminds me a lot of Trump supporters wanting to drag the US back to the 1950's in all honesty.


Don't claim to understand the intricacies. In a way I understand the pro-Brexit but I also see the upheaval in leaving the EU.

My one small, personal data point is I remember touring Rome and seeing the EU flag over Castel Sand'Angelo. I don't know the background behind that but it just struck me as wrong and I wondered it Italy was giving up too much sovereignty.

AlexB 01-29-2019 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan (Post 3229906)
You are aware that none of that is true? - the UK had right of veto over laws and regulations introduced in the EU (UK Voting/Veto rights) and when they had been passed we still could have passed laws to remove their effect or contested them (European / UK Law), however a series of UK Governments have preferred to accept such things and blame the EU rather than take responsibility for them even when they have often had good reason to come to pass (other countries haven't been so willing to do so, despite having weaker positions in the EU than the UK).

But hey, don't let facts get in the way of screwing up the country - Brexit is a total cluster fuck imho, it was granted through a referendum full of false statements and even when that came to light its supporters have continue to bang a drum harking back to a time in history they believe will come again ... it reminds me a lot of Trump supporters wanting to drag the US back to the 1950's in all honesty.


I used the phrase shaping/dictated specifically. Estimates range between 13% and 62% of UK laws are shaped/dictated by EU laws. Not dictated ‘as in you must do xyz, but shaped/dictated because of our agreement with the EU parliament

You are right that in many cases we have an opt out, abd also right that many other countries do not follow EU directives as closely as we have done.

However, why would we not want the ability to shape/dictate 100% of our own laws?

One of the issues with Brexit is that many people on the Leave/Remain sides refuse to acknowledge there is anything good/bad about either opposite viewpoint, or that both campaigns were horrendously run two years ago, with lies, exaggerations and scaremonger from all - it’s as if Remain were shining white lights of virtuosity throughout!

Respectively, the trading side of the EU is great, wouldn’t change much if anything at all; if you’ve ever been to Brussels and the Parliamentarium, and still think the EU parliament is a good idea, we found the place to have different characteristics. In brief, trade good, government bad.

On the campaigning the bus was extremely misleading, but so was all the scaremongering on the other side.

To give you an idea of where I stand, in order of preference to what I hope happens in the next two months:
  1. The backstop gets removed, and the revised exit deal goes through
  2. No deal exit, which in essence shoul lead to the above fairly quickly as it will not be starting from a blank sheet of paper - there is largely agreement on most areas already. Short term this would be difficult though
  3. Remain in the EU under current terms
  4. The deal gets voted through with the backstop - the current deal would leave us as a vassal state

There are different measurement ciriteria, but in all of those that i have seen through standard media reports, the UK economy is ranked as the 6th - 9th largest in the world. Nobody has thus far been able to explain to me how one of worlds top ten economies cannot stand on it’s own two feet?

Super Ugly 01-29-2019 02:24 PM

Quote:

On the campaigning the bus was extremely misleading, but so was all the scaremongering on the other side.

I think that it is disingenuous to compare the campaigns in this way.

Quote:

There are different measurement ciriteria, but in all of those that i have seen through standard media reports, the UK economy is ranked as the 6th - 9th largest in the world. Nobody has thus far been able to explain to me how one of worlds top ten economies cannot stand on it’s own two feet?

I would recommend reading Simon Wren-Lewis:

mainly macro

AlexB 01-29-2019 02:49 PM

Thanks for the link, but not exactly an attempt at a balanced, or even unprejudiced, piece

Edit to say I’m happy and keen to discuss, but let’s try and at least use sources that are not so partisan, on either side of the argument

Double edit to say, isn’t there a Brexit thread somewhere rather than derailing this one?

Marc Vaughan 01-29-2019 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexB (Post 3229928)
Thanks for the link, but not exactly an attempt at a balanced, or even unprejudiced, piece


If you mean the ones I included in my post they're from an independent non-partisan fact checking organisation and purely state the facts of the situation? ...

With regards to your hope about the 'backstop being removed' - that is a stupid situation and has huge ramifications which it is incredibly short sighted to remove there has already been more unrest in Ireland than has been the case in decades ... if the backstop is removed there is unfortunately a very real chance of a resurgence of such activity.

Brexit possible effects on Ireland

AlexB 01-29-2019 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan (Post 3229936)
If you mean the ones I included in my post they're from an independent non-partisan fact checking organisation and purely state the facts of the situation? ...

With regards to your hope about the 'backstop being removed' - that is a stupid situation and has huge ramifications which it is incredibly short sighted to remove there has already been more unrest in Ireland than has been the case in decades ... if the backstop is removed there is unfortunately a very real chance of a resurgence of such activity.

Brexit possible effects on Ireland


No, not your link, the one from Super Ugly. Is this best in the Brexit thread?

Edit now the thread’s cleared up: I don’t think the links you posted don’t necessarily say what you think they say: theoretically the UK has a veto, but in practice the issue would have to be so egregious that the ramifications afterwards need to be worth it. We’re talking semantics to a degree, but if your part of a family you compromise more than if you are out if it.

And the second link explains exactly what I had stated: EU law, EU Human Rights, supercedes UK law.

Both links can be summed up by a paragraph in the second link
Quote:

Given the doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty in the UK, meaning that there are no limits on what Acts can be passed or removed, it might be possible for Parliament to contradict EU laws. But this would seem incompatible with continued membership of the EU

AlexB 01-29-2019 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan (Post 3229936)
If you mean the ones I included in my post they're from an independent non-partisan fact checking organisation and purely state the facts of the situation? ...

With regards to your hope about the 'backstop being removed' - that is a stupid situation and has huge ramifications which it is incredibly short sighted to remove there has already been more unrest in Ireland than has been the case in decades ... if the backstop is removed there is unfortunately a very real chance of a resurgence of such activity.

Brexit possible effects on Ireland


And just confirm people always like being called stupid and short-sighted, and always maintain civil dialogue in such cases. Your points wouldnt have been any less clear if you had left out the sly phrases, and generally people will engage more to debate instead of insult or insinuation.

I just thought I’d mention it, as removing the backstop is commonly known to mean ‘and replacing with’ something definitive - what that something is has to be agreed, but it can’t be beyond the wit of man to work out a system.

Every lorry has a taco, a license plate and a load list, so as long as the politicians work out a trade agreement, it should be simple with ANPR technology and random weighbridge checks, just like happens in the UK now, and probably more so with systems that a short sighted stupid person like me can think of.

But tbf I didn’t make that 100% clear, so have clarified in the Brexit thread.

Edward64 01-29-2019 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexB (Post 3229941)
And just confirm people always like being called stupid and short-sighted, and always maintain civil dialogue in such cases. Your points wouldnt have been any less clear if you had left out the sly phrases, and generally people will engage more to debate instead of insult or insinuation.


Thanks guys, good to be distracted from the "troubles" in the US for a short while!

AlexB, I will say that I have my differences from Marc (e.g. unauthorized immigration, dual citizenship) and I personally never thought of him being "sly". Just my 2 cents worth.

AlexB 01-30-2019 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3229958)
Thanks guys, good to be distracted from the "troubles" in the US for a short while!

AlexB, I will say that I have my differences from Marc (e.g. unauthorized immigration, dual citizenship) and I personally never thought of him being "sly". Just my 2 cents worth.


I haven’t either, which is why I was surprised

Butter 01-30-2019 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexB (Post 3229965)
I haven’t either, which is why I was surprised


To be even more fair, he said the situation was "stupid" and the potential solution "short-sighted". He didn't direct either of those at you personally.

If you are going to have debate, at least identify when you are being personally attacked or not, because thin skin won't get you too far.

AlexB 01-30-2019 07:45 AM

Edit - You know, what forget about it. I haven't got the strength or time right now. This was just an explanation of why I asked Marc not to use phrases like that, but I've reminded myself why I usually don't engage on this topic: all sides are too entrenched, and facts don't seem to matter.

So let's all get back to Trump.

Thomkal 01-30-2019 09:34 AM

So back to Trump then. His Intel chiefs testified before Congress yesterday, contradicting much of what Trump believes. But Trump knows best of course, so he had to blast them in his tweets:


https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/30/polit...rea/index.html

Marc Vaughan 01-30-2019 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexB (Post 3229941)
And just confirm people always like being called stupid and short-sighted, and always maintain civil dialogue in such cases. Your points wouldnt have been any less clear if you had left out the sly phrases, and generally people will engage more to debate instead of insult or insinuation.

Just to clarify I wasn't aiming stupid or any other reference at yourself - just at the entire Brexit situation and the current scenarios being mooted. Apologies if you took it a way I hadn't intended.

Quote:

I just thought I’d mention it, as removing the backstop is commonly known to mean ‘and replacing with’ something definitive - what that something is has to be agreed, but it can’t be beyond the wit of man to work out a system.
Ok that makes sense - I'm sensitive about the backstop because I get the impression a lot of people (in England let alone elsewhere) don't understand the importance of it in Ireland (and I'm half-Irish, as the saying goes - I'm half Irish, half English so I hate myself ;) ).

JPhillips 01-30-2019 10:02 AM

Foxconn's Wisconsin cash grab just keeps getting better. Now they may not have even 1000 jobs by 2020 and an executive said that you can't look at the Wisconsin investment as a factory.

SackAttack 01-30-2019 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3229985)
Foxconn's Wisconsin cash grab just keeps getting better. Now they may not have even 1000 jobs by 2020 and an executive said that you can't look at the Wisconsin investment as a factory.


"investment."

Scott Walker gave them $4 billion dollars to build the incredible shrinking whatever-it-is.

That's not an investment. That's a grift.

PilotMan 01-30-2019 11:02 AM

I guess that doesn't make the 18 million KY passed out for an Ark, seem quite so bad then.

Thomkal 01-30-2019 11:08 AM

I hope they can sue Walker/Foxconn

NobodyHere 01-30-2019 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3229985)
Foxconn's Wisconsin cash grab just keeps getting better. Now they may not have even 1000 jobs by 2020 and an executive said that you can't look at the Wisconsin investment as a factory.


Were there any safeguards at all in this deal for the taxpayers?

lungs 01-30-2019 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3229985)
Foxconn's Wisconsin cash grab just keeps getting better. Now they may not have even 1000 jobs by 2020 and an executive said that you can't look at the Wisconsin investment as a factory.


And the Republican Assembly leader said the reason is because we got rid of Scott Walker.

RainMaker 01-30-2019 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3230027)
Were there any safeguards at all in this deal for the taxpayers?


Not many. Looks like it just gets prorated down. So the state will pay $230,000 per job and Foxconn doesn't have to create the number of jobs they promised. A sweet deal.

Amazon sort of did something similar when they split their HQ2 up. They got the subsidies for say 50,000 new jobs and then told the state they'll only make 25,000 but get the full subsidy.

This is going to be a common tactic by companies going forward. Promise a ton of jobs, get huge subsidy, scale back what they planned to do and pocket the massive subsidy that was based on the original job number.

RainMaker 01-30-2019 05:16 PM

I should add that Foxconn pulls this shit all the time. They've been doing it for a decade now. Only the dumbest fucking people on the planet fall for it. So I guess congrats to Scott Walker and people who voted for him. You couldn't run a simple Google search.

SackAttack 01-31-2019 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lungs (Post 3230036)
And the Republican Assembly leader said the reason is because we got rid of Scott Walker.


He also said that giving Walker the authority to do deals like that independent of the legislature was a mistake because they don't trust Tony Evers so they need(ed) to take that authority away before he could use it.

Shameless.

lungs 01-31-2019 09:50 AM

Now FoxConn isn't just changing focus of what they are doing in WI, they are suspending all work on the project.

Blast that Tony Evers for ruining this project!

QuikSand 01-31-2019 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuikSand (Post 3227119)
I know it's folly to continue to fall for the ongoing mess here, but I sometimes am just too weak to overcome it...

Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "....The United States looses soooo much money on Trade with Mexico under NAFTA, over 75 Billion Dollars a year (not including Drug Money which would be many times that amount), that I would consider closing the Southern Border a “profit making operation.” We build a Wall or....."

The man genuinely believes that a trade deficit means we are just handing the other country cash. That we are "losing money."

We buy stuff from Mexico because we (American people and companies) WANT the stuff from Mexico more than we want the money. They are not robbing us. They are BENEFITING us.

It is not necessarily a good thing to have a trade deficit with a given country... but it bears absolutely no relationship with the sort of "deal" he seems to think it is. He treats it like we're haggling price over the land for a new hotel... and that it's a pure zero sum game on "who gets the money." Trade isn't anything like that, and thinking about it that way (using that term very loosely) is unbelievably ill-advised (also using the back end of that term very loosely).

I understand that this isn't really even in the top 10 or maybe top 50 of things to really worry about. But it's totally awful.


Aaron Rupar on Twitter: "Trump downplays the national debt increasing under his watch: "Well, the trade deals won't kick in for a while."… "

sigh

JPhillips 01-31-2019 02:50 PM

Regarding the deficit, it's hard to figure out if he's running a con or if he's the one being conned.

QuikSand 01-31-2019 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3230127)
Regarding the deficit, it's hard to figure out if he's running a con or if he's the one being conned.



QuikSand 01-31-2019 03:30 PM

Along similar lines -- topics that piss off someone like me and presumably not too many others:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/nat...c-rss_20190131

Holy shit does that fire me up. It's possible there's more to the story, but the first impression is a putrid one.

BishopMVP 01-31-2019 03:46 PM

The initial EEOC complaint was over height discrimination because she's a dwarf? Did not see that twist coming, but maybe that odd detail will help this story gain or maintain traction.

And considering "two officials who did not want to be identified confirmed Klein moved the files to a high shelf" I can assume they're not done trying to plug leaks...

JPhillips 01-31-2019 03:56 PM


kingfc22 01-31-2019 04:25 PM

Glad to know publicly available testimony on video from the Intelligence Chiefs was completely manipulated and altered by the Deep State Fake News.

Can we just skip to the part of the film where everyone needs to greet the orange clown with Heil Trump?

Edward64 01-31-2019 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingfc22 (Post 3230145)
Glad to know publicly available testimony on video from the Intelligence Chiefs was completely manipulated and altered by the Deep State Fake News.

Can we just skip to the part of the film where everyone needs to greet the orange clown with Heil Trump?



Per Trump, they told him they were misquoted, taken out of context etc. Should be interesting what Coats and Haspel say in public next (to the inevitable questions)

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/31/polit...pel/index.html
Quote:

President Donald Trump claimed Thursday that his intelligence chiefs, including Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and CIA Director Gina Haspel, told him that they were misquoted when they publicly contradicted him during public on-camera testimony.

He made the claim a day after he tweeted that "Intelligence should go back to school!"

"They said they were totally misquoted and totally taken out of context," Trump said when asked by CNN if he raised the testimony with Coats and Haspel during his daily briefing on Thursday.

"They said it was fake news," Trump said.

The President did not provide examples of the areas the intelligence chiefs said they were misquoted. Their testimony was televised, and their written assessment of global threats was made public.

cuervo72 01-31-2019 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3230152)
Per Trump



JPhillips 01-31-2019 10:11 PM





Another thing that would be a huge scandal for any other president but will be lost in mountain of Trump's corruption.

QuikSand 02-01-2019 03:25 PM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.6e27ef0db212

Ben E Lou 02-01-2019 03:47 PM

Holy hell



Ben E Lou 02-01-2019 04:10 PM

Heh.



Radii 02-01-2019 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuikSand (Post 3230214)


"we had huge surpluses with Mexico. With NAFTA, we have huge deficits. We lose $100 billion a year on trade with Mexico. Does that sound good? And this has been going on for many years. So I stopped it. I stopped it a lot."


"I stopped it a lot" is just such a mind numbing stupid thing to say. I know Trump says mind numbing stupid things every single time he opens his mouth, but even with my expectations as low as I thought they could go when reading an article about things the man said, that made me stop and shake my head.

RainMaker 02-01-2019 05:21 PM

The reason you have a trade deficit is because you are a more prosperous country. We had trade surpluses during the Great Depression. During the last big recession our trade deficit dropped a ton.

It also completely ignores foreign investment. Something that goes up when you have a trade deficit.

This is basic economics.

albionmoonlight 02-01-2019 05:24 PM

What in the actual fuck was going on in yearbook publishing in the 1980s?

JPhillips 02-01-2019 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3230224)
What in the actual fuck was going on in yearbook publishing in the 1980s?


This.

What happens when the VA Gov resigns? Who even is the Lt. Gov.?

molson 02-01-2019 06:50 PM


JPhillips 02-01-2019 07:22 PM

The first polling on Schultz is out. Over half don't know him, but among those that do he has a 4% approval rating. Even more amazing is that it's 4% for Dems, 4% for GOPers and 4% for independents.

JPhillips 02-01-2019 07:24 PM

dola

And Northam is toast now as the NAACP has just called for his resignation.

BishopMVP 02-01-2019 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3230224)
What in the actual fuck was going on in yearbook publishing in the 1980s?

This wasn't even a HS yearbook, it was a Medical School one?!?

cuervo72 02-01-2019 07:37 PM

Wife and I were wondering what colleges (let alone med schools) even HAD yearbooks.

miami_fan 02-01-2019 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuervo72 (Post 3230243)
Wife and I were wondering what colleges (let alone med schools) even HAD yearbooks.


I had the same thought

stevew 02-01-2019 08:03 PM

My college had a yearbook

cuervo72 02-01-2019 08:52 PM

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/o...athy-tran.html

Quote:

Things only escalated on Wednesday, when Gov. Ralph Northam was asked about the uproar during an appearance on a radio show. Northam, a pediatric neurologist by training, spoke about what actually happens when a woman goes into labor with a fetus that has severe deformities and may not be viable. The infant, he said, would be delivered and kept comfortable, and the family would decide about resuscitation.

My wife (steadfastly R) watched clips of Northam's interview and immediately said that no, what he was talking about wasn't abortion but palliative care (she's a NICU nurse).

Edward64 02-01-2019 10:18 PM

Wow, there's a lot of apathy here. No/hardly mention of Booker or Harris recent announcements.

Thomkal 02-01-2019 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3230262)
Wow, there's a lot of apathy here. No/hardly mention of Booker or Harris recent announcements.



Not apathy, there is a lot of time before that election-enough to see how they are going to handle Trump in the meantime. There's a couple unexpected running like Marianne Williamson, author and Oprah's spiritual advisor


Marianne Williamson, Oprah’s spiritual adviser, is running for president - Vox


not holding out much hope for her getting far, but I would have said the same for Trump too.

Radii 02-02-2019 12:06 AM

Our country is a fucking joke. Jesus Christ.

JPhillips 02-02-2019 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3230262)
Wow, there's a lot of apathy here. No/hardly mention of Booker or Harris recent announcements.


Literally every member of the Democratic party is running, so I expect each announcement will get little interest unless there's a big surprise.

GrantDawg 02-02-2019 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3230281)
Literally every member of the Democratic party is running, so I expect each announcement will get little interest unless there's a big surprise.





That is the way I am feeling. Some who have announced are interesting. and all of them have their flaws. It is going to be sometime before we can even so who will gain traction, and who will almost immediately run out of money and drop.

GrantDawg 02-02-2019 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3230227)
This.

What happens when the VA Gov resigns? Who even is the Lt. Gov.?




nvm. Article I read was incorrect. It is Justin Fairfax.

RainMaker 02-02-2019 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BishopMVP (Post 3230240)
This wasn't even a HS yearbook, it was a Medical School one?!?


That was the strangest part for me. Why does a medical school have a yearbook and why would you put that in it?

Also this is the kind of headline that lets you know its a bad day for your political career.


JPhillips 02-02-2019 12:46 PM

Now Northam is saying he isn't in the picture. But yesterday he apologized for being in the picture. Was he involved in so many racist photo shoots that he can't remember when he was a character and when he wasn't? That doesn't seem like a helpful defense.

NobodyHere 02-02-2019 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3230298)
Now Northam is saying he isn't in the picture. But yesterday he apologized for being in the picture. Was he involved in so many racist photo shoots that he can't remember when he was a character and when he wasn't? That doesn't seem like a helpful defense.


Yeah, this is a textbook example of how NOT to handle a PR crisis.

Ben E Lou 02-02-2019 01:42 PM

Apparently he had a 1 PM press conference scheduled to announce his resignation and then he scrapped that. What an absolute dumpster fire.

NobodyHere 02-02-2019 01:44 PM

I bet Trump is loving this. He could shoot a white person on 5th Ave and the media would give it very little coverage.

Chief Rum 02-02-2019 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3230303)
I bet Trump is loving this. He could shoot a white person on 5th Ave and the media would give it very little coverage.


Rip Van Winkle I presume and you been sleeping the past three years? I get your point, but terrible analogy. Trump can't sneeze and not have it over-covered by all media.

GrantDawg 02-02-2019 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3230298)
Now Northam is saying he isn't in the picture. But yesterday he apologized for being in the picture. Was he involved in so many racist photo shoots that he can't remember when he was a character and when he wasn't? That doesn't seem like a helpful defense.





I just have a hard time believing he didn't see the picture before he apologized, and I also don't think I would have to ask friends to make sure it wasn't me in the picture. If he did, then he should resign anyway as a complete moron.

Lathum 02-02-2019 02:39 PM

Judge much guys?

Like you all never got black out drunk in college and dressed in KKK garb?

Drake 02-02-2019 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lathum (Post 3230307)
Judge much guys?

Like you all never got black out drunk in college and dressed in KKK garb?


:devil:

NobodyHere 02-02-2019 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lathum (Post 3230307)
Judge much guys?

Like you all never got black out drunk in college and dressed in KKK garb?


Yeah, next they'll be saying dressing as Michael Jackson (including darkening your face) is wrong.

stevew 02-02-2019 04:27 PM

I guess I am of the era where you could dress up like Michael Jackson without using blackface and you'd be just fine. he must be thriller era?

albionmoonlight 02-02-2019 06:18 PM

I lack the capacity to really understand what it must’ve been like to be an African-American man in medical school—the pinnacle of our educational system—in the 1980’s and to have to excel academically while this culture was going on all around you.

albionmoonlight 02-02-2019 06:39 PM

‪Would you be completely shocked if at least one Dem 2020 contender’s campaign has reached out to Northam’s people asking him to hold off on resigning until the candidate can issue a statement demanding his resignation?‬


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.