The dislike button is as much a form of expression as a written response. Maybe you don't like this form of expression, but again this highlights my prior concern that you have a problem with dissent if it does not come in a form you find agreeable.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Canuck
Well-Known Member
Spoken like a teenage girl (no offence meant to teenage girls).
Ignoring him doesn't stop me seeing him hit "Dislike" to every single one of my posts, does it? Plus, when he actually posts an opinion, I have no issue with that. Again, I like dissenting opinions. He just likes to try to drive me nuts.
Truth be told, it really doesn't bother me all that much. I actually enjoy these exchanges even when it bothers me a bit -- there's nothing wrong with getting the juices flowing. Plus, he comes out looking so foolish that it's all worth it.
Last edited:
THIS MODERATOR has other things to do than moderate this sector, but:
DIESEL: first, there is no "Dislike" button. There is a "Disagree" one.
Second, this is not Facebook or some other PopularityShow website. This is the TMC FORUM. And that means the following:
if you are going to be a member, you must contribute to the forum, and that means engage in discussion. Not only is hitting a button not so doing, it is highly suggestive of one of two possibilities: the member either is incapable of discussion, or he prefers taking the cowardly or lazy way out.
I don't know and hardly care but for one recent item: you gave a "Disagree" to a Moderator. Doesn't matter. You gave one to ME. That matters a lot.
So: Cowboy up, Cupcake....or get off the ranch.
DIESEL: first, there is no "Dislike" button. There is a "Disagree" one.
Second, this is not Facebook or some other PopularityShow website. This is the TMC FORUM. And that means the following:
if you are going to be a member, you must contribute to the forum, and that means engage in discussion. Not only is hitting a button not so doing, it is highly suggestive of one of two possibilities: the member either is incapable of discussion, or he prefers taking the cowardly or lazy way out.
I don't know and hardly care but for one recent item: you gave a "Disagree" to a Moderator. Doesn't matter. You gave one to ME. That matters a lot.
So: Cowboy up, Cupcake....or get off the ranch.
Mario Kadastik
Active Member
‘He doesn’t like this sh*t’: Trump reportedly hates his job and his staff after less than a month
Out of curiosity, has any US president ever voluntarily given up the job before the term is over?
Out of curiosity, has any US president ever voluntarily given up the job before the term is over?
‘He doesn’t like this sh*t’: Trump reportedly hates his job and his staff after less than a month
Out of curiosity, has any US president ever voluntarily given up the job before the term is over?
Just nixon I think? Harrison and Garfield died after a short time.
The original story is this politico one
Trump vexed by challenges, scale of government
Last edited:
‘He doesn’t like this sh*t’: Trump reportedly hates his job and his staff after less than a month
Out of curiosity, has any US president ever voluntarily given up the job before the term is over?
Tomorrow you will hear he wipes his arse using the wrong hand.
They are running out of insults. Yer wife's a hooker! You have a tiny pecker! Your hair is messy! You have the wrong color skin! You're dumb! You smell like poo-poo! We saw you kissing a GIRL! You have kooties! etc.
The worst case was perhaps FDR. When he was ill and dying, he refused to give up the WH even if it meant handing Russia 1/2 of Europe and the possible destruction of the USA.
He didn't quit technically, but he kept the office when he could not be President any longer. He wanted to be dictator for life, which he succeeded at.
The worst case was 1933 coup attempt to oust FDR (by JP Morgan and friends) and install a military fascist dictator in the vein of Mussolini and Hitler. (The Business Plot)
look up nixon, do us all a favor and refrain from making posts here until you actually are informed about the subject, not just whatever propaganda you're reading.‘He doesn’t like this sh*t’: Trump reportedly hates his job and his staff after less than a month
Out of curiosity, has any US president ever voluntarily given up the job before the term is over?
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
I'm an old operations guy so I tend to look at things from a solution standpoint and not a do I or do I not like something. The thing is in front of me so I have to deal with the thing.
The above said, I was concerned about this latest election as we seem to be accelerating in the wrong direction. The unpopular or disapproval numbers on both sides were high.
The election is over so, in the interests of gaining some insight as to where we may be going, I started looking for an answer to a simple question. Trump has been around for many a year so how did someone who is arguably acted like, and been thought of as, a clown for twenty years succeed this time around.
I came up with this on Cambridge Analytica-
Trump Knows You Better Than You Know Yourself
And that had me looking for who Steve Bannon was-
Things make a lot more sense. If you prefer, here is the Skype recording-
Ok, so Steve is bright enough to pull this off. Trump can be manipulated if you stroke his ego and the presidency is a heck of a stroking.
The surprising thing about listening to Bannon was that I tended to agree with a lot of his observations and conclusions with a few very key exceptions.
First, I believe it is possible to have a moral compass without it being based on religion. This idea that the US was founded on Judaeo Christian values and therefore this is the only valid moral compass immediately alienates those who practice another faith and those that chose not to practice or believe in any one faith. I believe our founding fathers recognized this when they insisted in a separation of church and state.
Second, I do not subscribe to the us against them idea of a holy war with Islam. The issue is with radical fundamentalists who wish to use violence to achieve their goals. From what I've seen, most of the Muslim faith do not fall into this category.
The remainder of Steve's observations about "good" versus "bad" capitalism seems to be on point.
As for the electorate side of how Trump got elected, we voters are too lazy to do our jobs. We are responsible for hiring management and all we want is someone to come in and tell us they are going to fix things.
Close your eyes for a moment and imagine someone waived a magic wand and 80% of the electorate woke up tomorrow morning and said-
I will not vote for anyone, at any level, that takes money.
I will not vote for anyone, at any level, that does not make the removal of of money from politics their top domestic priority.
The results would be-
The news/polling organizations would pick up on it. Those of good character would be attracted back to politics in the interests of public service. Two or three election cycles in and a vast majority of our elected officials nation wide would be working to eliminate money in politics. The people stepping forward would be from all parties and thus we would retain our ability to choose those that best suit our values.
I've had the above conversation with many many people. My first question is why, irrespective of your political beliefs, would you want money competing with your vote/voice unless you were one of the very few actually providing the money? To me, the answer is simple; you would not. Yet, the idea and conversation gains no traction. My conclusion is that things are going to have to get a lot worse before people will learn that how you choose your leaders and the quality of your government actually does matter a bit. I was sad when I came to that conclusion.
The above said, I was concerned about this latest election as we seem to be accelerating in the wrong direction. The unpopular or disapproval numbers on both sides were high.
The election is over so, in the interests of gaining some insight as to where we may be going, I started looking for an answer to a simple question. Trump has been around for many a year so how did someone who is arguably acted like, and been thought of as, a clown for twenty years succeed this time around.
I came up with this on Cambridge Analytica-
Trump Knows You Better Than You Know Yourself
And that had me looking for who Steve Bannon was-
Things make a lot more sense. If you prefer, here is the Skype recording-
Ok, so Steve is bright enough to pull this off. Trump can be manipulated if you stroke his ego and the presidency is a heck of a stroking.
The surprising thing about listening to Bannon was that I tended to agree with a lot of his observations and conclusions with a few very key exceptions.
First, I believe it is possible to have a moral compass without it being based on religion. This idea that the US was founded on Judaeo Christian values and therefore this is the only valid moral compass immediately alienates those who practice another faith and those that chose not to practice or believe in any one faith. I believe our founding fathers recognized this when they insisted in a separation of church and state.
Second, I do not subscribe to the us against them idea of a holy war with Islam. The issue is with radical fundamentalists who wish to use violence to achieve their goals. From what I've seen, most of the Muslim faith do not fall into this category.
The remainder of Steve's observations about "good" versus "bad" capitalism seems to be on point.
As for the electorate side of how Trump got elected, we voters are too lazy to do our jobs. We are responsible for hiring management and all we want is someone to come in and tell us they are going to fix things.
Close your eyes for a moment and imagine someone waived a magic wand and 80% of the electorate woke up tomorrow morning and said-
I will not vote for anyone, at any level, that takes money.
I will not vote for anyone, at any level, that does not make the removal of of money from politics their top domestic priority.
The results would be-
The news/polling organizations would pick up on it. Those of good character would be attracted back to politics in the interests of public service. Two or three election cycles in and a vast majority of our elected officials nation wide would be working to eliminate money in politics. The people stepping forward would be from all parties and thus we would retain our ability to choose those that best suit our values.
I've had the above conversation with many many people. My first question is why, irrespective of your political beliefs, would you want money competing with your vote/voice unless you were one of the very few actually providing the money? To me, the answer is simple; you would not. Yet, the idea and conversation gains no traction. My conclusion is that things are going to have to get a lot worse before people will learn that how you choose your leaders and the quality of your government actually does matter a bit. I was sad when I came to that conclusion.
If one does not vote for the least evil than the most evil candidate will get elected. Your idea would be good if act of non-voting would count as a vote or if a candidate needed some threshold (i.e 33%) of all eligible votes to be elected.
As to Banon - he is preaching to a quire. Church has been loosing members and they would really like a solution to that. Seems like a holly war is an option but not just on non-believers but also on anyone who has money and is not aligned with them (i.e. witch hunt).
> The worst case was perhaps FDR. When he was ill and dying, he refused to give up the WH even if it meant handing Russia 1/2 of Europe and the possible destruction of the USA. [McRat]
Au contraire - FDR held on as long as he could so he could achieve the Yalta Agreement (in Crimea) which set in 'stone' the post war limits to Russian power that Stalin actually honored (for longer than most observer would have guessed at the time). The alternative was embarking on an immediate and costly battle to push back Stalin toward his homeland. Churchill and the other Allies were exhausted and reflected wisely upon Napoleon's experience marching to Moscow. 8^\\
--
Au contraire - FDR held on as long as he could so he could achieve the Yalta Agreement (in Crimea) which set in 'stone' the post war limits to Russian power that Stalin actually honored (for longer than most observer would have guessed at the time). The alternative was embarking on an immediate and costly battle to push back Stalin toward his homeland. Churchill and the other Allies were exhausted and reflected wisely upon Napoleon's experience marching to Moscow. 8^\\
--
That North Korea thing didn't work out too well. Stalin continued to seize Asian land after the Japanese surrendered. He had kidnapped some B-29 bombers (more expensive than the A-bomb project) and refused to release them until he had reversed engineered them, and held the crews imprisoned. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/1319691/How-Russians-copied-captured-B-29.html
Remember that Stalin was basically an Axis power at the start of WWII. They invaded Finland and Poland and seized land. So FDR knew Stalin's intentions well before Pearl Harbor. Truman was less lenient of Stalin's aggression, and if FDR stood down, things very well might have been turned out better if Truman had earlier control.
It seems strange and out of context to post political questions on a car forum. I love my Model X and that is why I'm here and believe that love, or other emotion of your choice, is what the forum should discus. With zero offense intended don't weigh much importance on answers to a political question by Tesla owners. While many answers may be from successful intelligent responders the sampling would in no way reflect the majority of the views, right or wrong, of mainstream Americans. Possibly in a few years when model 3 car owners dilute the pool of responses will the answers to political questions reflect popular opinion, again not right or wrong, but better reflect other views and that is what politics is about.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
