The Trump Presidency – 2016

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

I've been assigned to 2 presidential escort details. Obama didn't even offer so much as a wave to the police that got him to the airport safely. Trump stopped and shook the hand of every officer that got him to the airport.

Whether or not you want to appreciate the time, effort, and disruption to the lives of everyone involved (because days off being cancelled at the last minute is just wonderful) to get a president safely from 1 point to the next, it says a lot when someone can at least shake your hand and say thank you.

Then there's the skipping police week so you could invite a rapper who chose to write a song commemorating a convicted cop killer to the White House during you know....the week remembering officers killed in the line of duty. Or sending representatives to a funeral of someone who chose to assault and attempt to disarm a police officer. Or calling police officers racist during a memorial service for police officers.

So yeah, I can say with confidence that law enforcement officers didn't feel the greatest confidence in their president in that time period.

So essentially, Obama doesn't pay police enough respect. I can appreciate that on some level. On another, I think "Is that what you got in this for? For the president to pat you on the head and say 'good boy!'?"

I get the waving. That's an easy to do, and seems like common courtesy. I would ask if shaking the hands of every officer in every escort is standard protocol though, or even an efficient use of time. I'd imagine presidents ride in a LOT of motorcades. I do see how the gesture would go a long way towards ingratiating yourself to someone (aside: my FIL has a picture of Reagan shaking his hand, when he was pulling duty I *think* as the pilot for the presidential press core, and it is a very cool thing to see in someone's home office). Is not doing it necessarily a slight? What was Bush protocol?

I can empathize on having to pull overtime or rearrange vacation schedules. But...I don't know that I'd lay that at the president's feet? It's not as if he checks the Outlook calendar and says "oh, you know what? illinifan has off that day - cancel the ride down to _____." Also, that's not just you who has to do those things. Many, probably too many, American workers have to put up with that stuff. It's not unique to police. A lot of positions are overworked and understaffed. With the new SC, we should probably prepare for more of that sort of thing.

Ok, this: "so you could invite a rapper who chose to write a song commemorating a convicted cop killer." I had to look this up, as I wasn't familiar with it (in full disclosure...I was only tangentially aware of "Police Week," and that is largely because of the complaint when Obama didn't attend it). Common IS a rapper. Though his own site describes him as "an American hip hop recording artist, actor, film producer and poet." But "rapper" - that carries a certain connotation, doesn't it? It's one thing if the president hosts an actor, or a poet, or a film producer. But a rapper. That in an of itself is bad, isn't it? As for the song - I can appreciate not being thrilled about a song which lionizes someone convicted of aiding and abetting the murder of a state trooper. I think the point of the song is to speak to a perceived injustice - that she was wrongfully convicted (per wiki, medical forensics backed her assertion that she was shot while holding her hands up, and there was no gun residue on her hands). We'll never know what really happened that night - police word against that of BLA members. But Common had his doubts - and given today's cilmate, body cam evidence, etc - can you blame him? I'm sorry, but the word of police isn't unassailable.

But yes, I get why this would be a sore point. I'm from Philly - there are still plenty of bad feelings regarding Mumia Abu-Jamal and the Daniel Faulkner killing. I'd imagine police would be pretty pissed if Rage Against the Machine were invited to the White House.

Could Obama have picked a better week for this? Certainly.

Regarding Obama "calling police officers racist" - I'l appreciate help with this reference, and maybe a quote. I know he wasn't happy about the Henry Louis Gates arrest, but don't know if he ever used the term "racist" ("stupid" I think I've seen referenced). Was it something he said in Dallas?

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by cartman

Usually in a democracy, the side the gets the most votes at all levels is not the minority party. The way that the gerrymandering packed all those votes into the cities plays a large part too.

That's how a democracy works, but we've been using the term incorrectly for as long as our country has existed. We are not a direct democracy and havent been ever.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

On another, I think "Is that what you got in this for? For the president to pat you on the head and say 'good boy!'?"

Of course not, but people notice things. And when someone does something while another does not, it paints the picture.

What was Bush protocol?

No idea, I can only compare Obama and Trump.

Ok, this: "so you could invite a rapper who chose to write a song commemorating a convicted cop killer." I had to look this up, as I wasn't familiar with it (in full disclosure...I was only tangentially aware of "Police Week," and that is largely because of the complaint when Obama didn't attend it). Common IS a rapper. Though his own site describes him as "an American hip hop recording artist, actor, film producer and poet." But "rapper" - that carries a certain connotation, doesn't it? It's one thing if the president hosts an actor, or a poet, or a film producer. But a rapper. That in an of itself is bad, isn't it?

Huh?

Could Obama have picked a better week for this? Certainly.

Exactly.

Regarding Obama "calling police officers racist" - I'l appreciate help with this reference, and maybe a quote. I know he wasn't happy about the Henry Louis Gates arrest, but don't know if he ever used the term "racist" ("stupid" I think I've seen referenced). Was it something he said in Dallas?

During the memorial service for the Dallas officers killed.

But America, we know that bias remains. We know it, whether you are black, or white, or Hispanic, or Asian, or native American, or of Middle Eastern descent, we have all seen this bigotry in our own lives at some point. We’ve heard it at times in our own homes. If we’re honest, perhaps we’ve heard prejudice in our own heads and felt it in our own hearts. We know that. And while some suffer far more under racism’s burden, some feel to a far greater extent discrimination’s stain. Although most of us do our best to guard against it and teach our children better, none of us is entirely innocent. No institution is entirely immune, and that includes our police departments. We know this.

OBAMA: And so when African-Americans from all walks of life, from different communities across the country, voice a growing despair over what they perceive to be unequal treatment, when study after study shows that whites and people of color experience the criminal justice system differently. So that if you’re black, you’re more likely to be pulled over or searched or arrested; more likely to get longer sentences; more likely to get the death penalty for the same crime. When mothers and fathers raised their kids right, and have the talk about how to respond if stopped by a police officer — yes, sir; no, sir — but still fear that something terrible may happen when their child walks out the door; still fear that kids being stupid and not quite doing things right might end in tragedy.

When all this takes place, more than 50 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, we cannot simply turn away and dismiss those in peaceful protest as troublemakers or paranoid.

[cuervo72]

Thanks for the quote. I interpret these words different from what you do. I hear him saying that we all have racial biases, and that we all have to be aware of them and fight against them. That includes police. Perhaps more importantly than most, given the power that they have.

And if there's a group that claims they are being affected by these biases, it is important to listen to them

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Thanks for the quote. I interpret these words different from what you do. I hear him saying that we all have racial biases, and that we all have to be aware of them and fight against them. That includes police. Perhaps more importantly than most, given the power that they have.

And if there's a group that claims they are being affected by these biases, it is important to listen to them

I can appreciate the statement. I have a problem with choosing a memorial service for murdered police officers as the place and time to make the statement.

[cuervo72]

Understood.

[JPhillips]

In that same service he said this:

I see how easily we slip back into our old notions, because they’re comfortable, we’re used to them. I’ve seen how inadequate words can be in bringing about lasting change. I’ve seen how inadequate my own words have been. And so, I’m reminded of a passage in John’s Gospel, “let us love, not with words or speech, but with actions and in truth.”

If we’re to sustain the unity, we need to get through these difficult times. If we are to honor these five outstanding officers who we lost, then we will need to act on the truths that we know. That’s not easy. It makes us uncomfortable, but we’re going to have to be honest with each other and ourselves.

We know that the overwhelming majority of police officers do an incredibly hard and dangerous job fairly and professional. They are deserving of our respect and not our scorn

(APPLAUSE)

When anyone, no matter how good their intentions may be, paints all police as biased, or bigoted, we undermine those officers that we depend on for our safety. And as for those who use rhetoric suggesting harm to police, even if they don’t act on it themselves, well, they not only make the jobs of police officers even more dangerous, but they do a disservice to the very cause of justice that they claim to promote.

Shouldn't we look at the totality of his remarks and not just those that you most disagree with?

or this:

In the aftermath of the shooting, we’ve seen Mayor Rawlings and Chief Brown, a white man and a black man with different backgrounds, working not just to restore order and support a shaken city, a shaken department, but working together to unify a city with strength and grace and wisdom.

(APPLAUSE)

And in the process, we’ve been reminded that the Dallas Police Department has been at the forefront of improving relations between police and the community.

(APPLAUSE)

The murder rate here has fallen. Complaints of excessive force have been cut by 64 percent. The Dallas Police Department has been doing it the right way.

(APPLAUSE) And so, Mayor Rawlings and Chief Brown, on behalf of the American people, thank you for your steady leadership. Thank you for your powerful example. We could not be prouder of you.

(APPLAUSE)

These men, this department, this is the America I know. And today in this audience, I see people who have protested on behalf of criminal justice reform grieving alongside police officers. I see people who mourn for the five officers we lost, but also weep for the families of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile. In this audience, I see what’s possible.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by tarcone

There is nothing specific harming me. Im as middle class as you can get. Maybe its the fact that I feel the middle class is getting shit on.

As an example, my daughter is going to college, we make too much for her to get grants, but not enough to just pay for her college. Yes, we are debt ridden because that is what the USA is about. Borrow now and pay later. And we fell into that trap. My wife and I are poor savers, like many in this country.
So, we are too rich for free college money, but to poor to pay the high price of college. So I feel squeezed by that. Why is the middle class the whipping boy? We are the backbone of the country but are left out and shit upon.

The left only cares about the poor. The right only cares about the rich.

Who do i have fighting for me? It used to be the elected officials. The pharmacist who ran for office. The farmer or the local business owner. Not the really rich that can afford it now. The career politician.

Well Hillary Clinton was proposing "free" college to help people like you, not to mention expanded healthcare which you seem to support.

But you were the cool kid and voted for Gary Johnson. I mean he offered...what exactly?

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Well Hillary Clinton was proposing "free" college to help people like you, not to mention expanded healthcare which you seem to support.

But you were the cool kid and voted for Gary Johnson. I mean he offered...what exactly?

Pot.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The left only cares about the poor.

This really isn't accurate. Expanded healthcare, free college, and a $15 minimum wage are boosts to the middle class. The $15 minimum wage thing is misrepresented as helping the poor, but the ultimate goal is to boost middle class wages which have stagnated in recent years and are actually dropping under the current administration (in relation to inflation).

The right will tell you that helping the rich means the middle class will eventually get help in the form of better wages, benefits, ect but trickle down economics is incredibly flawed from a very basic economic standpoint. It never happens that way.

I completely understand that neither party offers the best of everything or even most things to very many people right now, but if finances are your (and I mean collective your not you specifically) primary factor when voting then I don't understand how any middle class or poor person could vote GOP.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

In that same service he said this:



Shouldn't we look at the totality of his remarks and not just those that you most disagree with?

or this:

People hear what they want to hear.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

In that same service he said this:



Shouldn't we look at the totality of his remarks and not just those that you most disagree with?

or this:

No? There's no reason to make that statement at the memorial service for murdered police officers.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

People hear what they want to hear.

Guess so.

[JPhillips]

dola

Happy 17th anniversary of the war in Afghanistan!

[Drake]

My dad is a retired pastor. For my whole life, there was a bright line in my family between duty to God and duty to country. I mean, you were supposed to do both, but the order of priority was clear.

And today on FB, he posts: "As for me and my house, we will Salute the Flag, Stand for the National Anthem, Kneel before the Cross, and Serve the Lord."

I knew my parents were conservative. I knew that their politics are, in essence, abortion uber alles.

But this shit...this shit I just do not understand. I'm going to have to put it right up there with the weekend my dad spent in tears and prayer because I'd started listening to the 77's and Undercover and I was inviting the devil's music to infiltrate our house.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by bronconick

Pot.

[Ben E Lou]

Haley is out.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Haley is out.

We won't see anyone like her come our way for another 74 years...

[Ben E Lou]

Dola...



The beginning of Haley 2020, or some scandal? Seems like an odd timing.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Dola...



The beginning of Haley 2020, or some scandal? Seems like an odd timing.

She might think she wants to run in 2020, but people will not forget how she became yet another adoring puppet of Trump after he won. Or at least I hope they do.


There's been a little talk about the ethical use of private planes, but I doubt that would get her to resign.

[JPhillips]

Is Trump just hyping a resignation or is Haley getting a different job?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Is Trump just hyping a resignation or is Haley getting a different job?

I'm sure reporters everywhere are looking for leaks of the real reason.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Is Trump just hyping a resignation or is Haley getting a different job?

Crazy speculation from the right-Graham will replace Sessions as Attorney General and Haley will replace Graham.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Kodos

We won't see anyone like her come our way for another 74 years...

Surely it won't take 74 more years for the Republicans to put a woman of color in any kind of leadership situation.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by stevew

Surely it won't take 74 more years for the Republicans to put a woman of color in any kind of leadership situation.

Just a Halley's comet joke.

[JPhillips]

Maybe it is as simple as she wants out before Trump kills her future.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Maybe it is as simple as she wants out before Trump kills her future.

That's what I mean by timing. If that were the case, then why now? Why not before she sat in on that round table of praise? Why not right after he did something especially egregious? And if she doesn't want to be tethered to Trump, why say she's going to campaign for him?

[JPhillips]

Tom Nichols speculated that now is a good time because it can't be tied to anything. She isn't making any statement by leaving at this time. Maybe.

There is an ethics investigation, so maybe she's bailing before that finds something damaging. Who knows?

[PilotMan]

I really don't think it's uncommon for a person in her position to leave after a couple years. Especially if she has designs on something in 2020.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Tom Nichols speculated that now is a good time because it can't be tied to anything. She isn't making any statement by leaving at this time. Maybe.

There is an ethics investigation, so maybe she's bailing before that finds something damaging. Who knows?

This goes along with my line of thinking. Supposedly the Mueller investigation is winding down and I believe she'll want to bail before it ends. Right now she's leaving on her terms.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I really don't think it's uncommon for a person in her position to leave after a couple years. Especially if she has designs on something in 2020.

An admin official leaving the admin and then primarying the President would be very unusual.

And I can't see that happening. She might run if Trump doesn't, but challenging Trump is a sure way to end your career in this GOP.

[PilotMan]

I don't think a Presidential run in 2020 would be in her plan. I'd say she's more likely to make a Congressional run, then try for Presidency in 2024.

[JPhillips]

She'll definitely be back at some point. I think she wants to be able to say she was pro-Trump, but also be able to say she wasn't really if the shit really hits the fan. She certainly doesn't want to have to answer any questions after the Mueller report drops.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

She'll definitely be back at some point. I think she wants to be able to say she was pro-Trump, but also be able to say she wasn't really if the shit really hits the fan. She certainly doesn't want to have to answer any questions after the Mueller report drops.

That's my guess. Also maybe she got the heads up that Graham isn't going to run again in 2020 and figures the Senate seat is hers which she can parlay into a run for President in 2024.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

That's my guess. Also maybe she got the heads up that Graham isn't going to run again in 2020 and figures the Senate seat is hers which she can parlay into a run for President in 2024.

Yes I assume she's still quote popular in South Carolina, and UN ambassador has always been a transient position. Clinton had 3, Bush 4, Obama 2, overall it's 26 in 56 years since the only one who served more than 4 years (Henry Cabot Lodge). There's also even the rumors of Graham taking over as AG for Sessions, in which case I assume the acting Governor would happily appoint Haley if she wants it, so she doesn't run against him & beat him again.

If she was resigning effective immediately I'd be more apt to believe there's smoke, but doing it after midterms makes sense for someone with higher ambitions.

[BishopMVP]

Amazon raises minimum wage to $15/hr... and people complain? Guess you can't win. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/09/t...pay-raise.html

I'd love to see the breakdown on how many part time & seasonal workers benefit from these changes vs how many multi year workers are actually seeing a decrease in pay.

[miami_fan]

Rand Paul on political climate: 'I really worry that someone is going to be killed' | TheHill

Is Rand Paul going soft/liberal?

[bronconick]

Soft in the head, maybe. Heather Heyer's mother is probably not impressed

[Edward64]

I haven't seen Bloomberg in top 10 lists. All things held equal (hard to define of course), I prefer a successful business person over a professional politician and/or actor/actress.

It doesn't seem the broad Dem base would support him but just another contender to watch out for in the future.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/10/mike...president.html

Mike Bloomberg is a Democrat. Again.

The billionaire and former New York mayor, who is considering a run for the White House in 2020, announced on social media early Wednesday morning that he re-registered as a member of the Democratic Party. He had previously run for office as a Republican and an independent.
:
While he considers a run against President Donald Trump, the former New York mayor has some work cut out for him if he wants to appeal to the base of his party. While Bloomberg, who has previously flirted with the idea of running for president, has positioned himself as a socially progressive billionaire, advocating for gun control and environmentalist policies, he has taken some stances that might not be palatable to rank-and-file Democrats.

In a recent New York Times interview, he chided liberals for pushing aggressive regulatory policies on big business and major banks. Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, both considered potential contenders for the Democratic nomination in 2020, are popular among the party’s base.

[JPhillips]

If that fucker runs as an independent and helps re-elect Trump...

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

That's what I mean by timing. If that were the case, then why now? Why not before she sat in on that round table of praise? Why not right after he did something especially egregious? And if she doesn't want to be tethered to Trump, why say she's going to campaign for him?

Well it was the next business day after Kavanaugh was approved. I know a lot of Republican women have rallied to his defense, but not all of them have. And since then Trump has made some pretty silly statements about Dr. Ford. In addition to all the other speculation it may have been the thing that made her go, you know I don't want to be tied to this stuff going forward.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Amazon raises minimum wage to $15/hr... and people complain? Guess you can't win. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/09/t...pay-raise.html

You did read why, right?

But in Amazon warehouses across the country, many longtime workers are fuming that — based on the information they have received so far — they may end up making thousands of dollars less a year.

Yes, Amazon is increasing wages, which will benefit most employees. But it will no longer give out new stock grants and monthly bonuses. Some workers believe that means their total compensation will shrink.

I'd be pissed too if I was losing out on more lucrative stock grants and bonuses for a higher monthly pay just to make a few Senators happy.

[Logan]

A "bad" company would just stop paying out the bonuses and stock without giving a corresponding pay raise to even approach balancing it out.

[molson]

The Amazon thing is going to really impact the lower-paid workers without those benefits. It's shaping up to be a big game changer at the Whole Foods where my girlfriend is a manager. It will be a lot easier to recruit and retain good employees, particularly in a geographic area where lots of service industry workers make at or close to minimum wage (though Whole Foods has always paid decently relative to similar employment). Of course there will be some wrinkles - people who took years to get to $15 and beyond are now basically in the same place they would be if they just showed up relative to others, and the overall compensation for the higher-paid workers will decrease both relative to others, and in some cases from where they were before. But this is what a lot of people want - the emphasis is on the lowest-paid workers and giving them a living wage. I was just in Boston and the Marriott strikers were very visible "One job should be enough." The lowest paid people getting more doesn't mean that everyone else will be bumped up too, it's going to mean the opposite in some cases, and certainly the lower-middle salary people are going to make much less relative to others if we have a bigger glut of employees all around that $15 mark that has become the rallying point.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by molson

The lowest paid people getting more doesn't mean that everyone else will be bumped up too, it's going to mean the opposite in some cases, and certainly the lower-middle salary people are going to make much less relative to others if we have a bigger glut of employees all around that $15 mark that has become the rallying point.

I wonder if there will be a trend of low managers/salary folks actually asking to take a demotion /step back. If the pay is close enough id take less stress and responsibility every day.

[molson]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

I wonder if there will be a trend of low managers/salary folks actually asking to take a demotion /step back. If the pay is close enough id take less stress and responsibility every day.

I could see that happening at Whole Foods. Manager (or "Team Leader" as they call it there), is a very stressful job and there's high turnover. The pay is good by grocery store standards but not so high above $15 that it's worth it for everyone. I know people at Whole Foods can tend to shift around the store or even move to different stores in different geographic areas - when you find the right fit they're a great employer, but it's not always easy to find that fit.

[Warhammer]

There are going to be several unintended consequences. The big concern is inflation, it is basic economics, more dollars seeking the same amount of goods. Another concern, many workers who this would affect, are already seeing jobs threatened. McDonalds has more and more self serve kiosks at their stores. I greatly prefer ordering through the kiosk rather than wondering if the cashier is getting my order right. I can easily see more fast food joints going this route.

The best way to address pay is arm yourself with a skill set that makes you valuable to employers. The other side of the equation, HR departments need to quit setting ridiculous bars for positions. There are jobs that I held 10 years ago and was a top performer that I would not be considered for now due to my degree (sales vs engineering). This needs to stop as it hurts both the employer and the employee. The employer since they are not looking at all viable candidates and the employee because they are not being given a fair shake. But, if you have a skill set that is difficult to replace, employers will pay you more. I know plenty of people, even at big companies, that had positions created for them so they could work outside a normal pay structure to keep a valued individual.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by molson

I know people at Whole Foods can tend to shift around the store or even move to different stores in different geographic areas - when you find the right fit they're a great employer, but it's not always easy to find that fit.

That's fairly common in the grocery business, from what I observed from my wife and I having worked at grocery stores for about 10 years through high school and college/law school. Store managers would get moved around fairly often, while others in management would do months-long shifts in produce or bakery or customer service/front-end, or even night shift/stocking. Store managers moving around kinda reminded me of how churches would rotate pastors every few years, out of the blue.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

HR departments need to quit setting ridiculous bars for positions. There are jobs that I held 10 years ago and was a top performer that I would not be considered for now due to my degree (sales vs engineering). This needs to stop as it hurts both the employer and the employee. The employer since they are not looking at all viable candidates and the employee because they are not being given a fair shake. .

My wife and I were just talking about this.

She is VP/ GM of sales for a Warren Buffet owned company. Her feeling is within 5-10 years the value of a college degree is going to be considerably lower.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

I wonder if there will be a trend of low managers/salary folks actually asking to take a demotion /step back. If the pay is close enough id take less stress and responsibility every day.

That's what should happen, and then companies will have to offer higher wages/benefits to recruit managers. That's how raising wages at the bottom can lift those above them.