***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[Brownstone]

Ninja, which conservative columnists do you read?

I am curious because I do read several, unlike a lot of individuals in this thread.

 

[Mark Antony]

So you slurp your latte, what's the difference?

*sigh*

da reverse would be like Obama saying certain folks cling to their god & guns driving pickup trucks...its descriptors to identify a certain demographic.

 

[IATT]

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/gorsuch-writings-supreme-court-236891

 

[RustyShackleford]

Ninja, which conservative columnists do you read?

I am curious because I do read several, unlike a lot of individuals in this thread.

That is a strong assumption to make.

 

[Brownstone]

That is a strong assumption to make.

We in two different threads?

I rarely see rational conservative articles posted in here......

 

[Based Jesus]

I rarely see rational conservative articles

 

[Brownstone]

 
I rarely see rational conservative articles

You don't say, can you name a rational conservative columnist? Or do they not exist?

Because you certainly won't find them in the NY post....

 

[RustyShackleford]

That is a strong assumption to make.

We in two different threads?

I rarely see rational conservative articles posted in here......

I'm in this one, I don't know where you're at.

First off, how is that proof of anything?

Second, why is the onus on the liberals to do that?

Third, the conservatives that got banned for being bigots didn't do that.

 

[whywesteppin]

BlackIntellect, I'd love to hear what you read.

Maybe the fundamental difference is that I separate editorials from news, and in general I think NYT pure news is a fairly unbiased source and does a fairly good job of investigative journalism. NPR and, to a lesser extent, Wapo are good sources as well. For opinions/editorials, I read everything within reason, including NYT, Wapo, WSJ, and sometimes Foxnews, etc. I've avoided Huffpo more and more. There are also a couple other smaller conservative writers I follow as well.

I'd love to expand my sources of info though. And please don't list garbage like the Federalist.

 

[RustyShackleford]

 
I rarely see rational conservative articles

You don't say, can you name a rational conservative columnist? Or do they not exist?

Because you certainly won't find them in the NY post....

You a lil high on that horse famb

 

[EddieDoyers]

The American Conservative is pretty good imo

 

[Brownstone]

I'm in this one, I don't know where you're at.

First off, how is that proof of anything?

Second, why is the onous on the liberals to do that?

Third, the conservatives that got banned for being bigots didn't do that.

First off, you came at me saying it was presumptuous to say that individuals (majority) in this thread don't read conservative columnists. It obviously is an assumption, a strong one? Not really.

I didn't say it was proof of anything at all, now who's making strong assumptions?

I made the comment in reference to Ninjahood, who I honestly don't believe does either......

 

[whywesteppin]

One more thing -- pretty much every conservative news source or journalist I follow has come out strongly against trump.

 

[Brownstone]

You a lil high on that horse famb

Really? How so? 

There are quite a lot of rational conservative sources, a lot of them bring up good points.....

 

[RustyShackleford]

The American Conservative is pretty good imo

Yep, probably the best of the bunch.

I read the Atlantic so I get Frum, I read Brooks for a moderate view too, AC and National Review tops stories, and then I listen to Russ Roberts on Econtalk for an Austrian view.

The Economist is big on market based solutions so someone will get a good idea reasonable right wing policy reading that.

 

[whywesteppin]

btw this van Jones show is garbage. I feel like the audience is asleep.

 

[EddieDoyers]

One more thing -- pretty much every conservative news source or journalist I follow has come out strongly against trump.

eh........from what I read, they agree with a lot of the budgets cuts and proposed slashes to social work agencies that the Trump admin wants to do.

 

[RustyShackleford]

You a lil high on that horse famb

Really? How so? 

There are quite a lot of rational conservative sources, a lot of them bring up good points.....

Then you post them in here if you want to see them discussed more.

Simple

 

[whywesteppin]

One more thing -- pretty much every conservative news source or journalist I follow has come out strongly against trump.

eh........from what I read, they agree with a lot of the budgets cuts and proposed slashes to social work agencies that the Trump admin wants to do.

true.

and I should clarify. "pretty much every conservative news source I follow" is like 2 people.

 

[RustyShackleford]

I'm in this one, I don't know where you're at.


First off, how is that proof of anything?


Second, why is the onous on the liberals to do that?


Third, the conservatives that got banned for being bigots didn't do that.

First off, you came at me saying it was presumptuous to say that individuals (majority) in this thread don't read conservative columnists. It obviously is an assumption, a strong one? Not really.

I didn't say it was proof of anything at all, now who's making strong assumptions?

I made the comment in reference to Ninjahood, who I honestly don't believe does either......

I'm coming at you because I used "strongly"

Dude please.

 

[Brownstone]

no, da (religious) right just doesn't want to foot da bill for things it doesn't believe in (lil sister of da poor vs Obama administration on contraceptions)

Da religious right are hypocrites who voted for someone who grabbed someone by the vagina.

 

[EddieDoyers]

Speaking of filibusters, this is what a conservative website had to say on the following filibuster by the dems

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/millman/the-gorsuch-filibuster/

A couple of months ago, when the Gorsuch nomination was announced, I argued that, intentionally or not, Trump and the GOP had put Democrats in a difficult position. They could either solidly oppose a plainly qualified nominee, and risk irritating voters in key red states they need to win in 2018 — or they could respond in a less-partisan manner, see him confirmed by an Alito-like margin, and risk the wrath of a base justifiably enraged by the success of the GOP’s stonewall of the equally-qualified Merrick Garland.

The Democrats have plainly decided on the more confrontational option. But I’m not convinced this is simply because they are more scared of their base than they are interested in positioning for 2018. Rather, I think the calculation is something like the following:

• Gorsuch is going to be confirmed no matter what, because if they filibuster him then the GOP will eliminate the filibuster. There is no way the GOP will risk losing the Senate in 2018 after not having filled the seat, and they won’t consider backing down from an obviously qualified, uncorrupt nominee with an excellent judicial temperament.
  
  
• Therefore, the nomination is not going to be an issue in 2018 no matter what, so they don’t need to worry about the politics. Rather, the issue is whether the filibuster survives. And on the merits, there’s no reason to think the filibuster helps the Democrats more than the GOP. So let it die.
  
  
• Finally, the GOP can only put Democrats in a difficult position if they are in a position to capitalize on that difficulty. But that is decreasingly the case. The failure of the AHCA, and its wild unpopularity before it failed, has exposed the weakness of the GOP’s political position.
  
  

None of that means that filibustering Gorsuch is going to actually help the Democrats in any particular way. But failing to sustain a filibuster might well hurt them, and fighting tooth and nail looks like it has less downside than it might have, so here we are.

Like I said, Democrats have nothing to lose from filibustering as opposed to not doing jack ****

 

[Brownstone]

eh........from what I read, they agree with a lot of the budgets cuts and proposed slashes to social work agencies that the Trump admin wants to do.

Conservative writers - the good ones....share a lot of similarities to the left leaning ones, they navigate through the bs and hone in on the 1 or 2 factors that hold weight on a given issue.

 

[EddieDoyers]

One more thing -- pretty much every conservative news source or journalist I follow has come out strongly against trump.

eh........from what I read, they agree with a lot of the budgets cuts and proposed slashes to social work agencies that the Trump admin wants to do.

true.

and I should clarify. "pretty much every conservative news source I follow" is like 2 people.

I try to read up on conservative pieces to get a sense of direction of how they feel about Trump
The social conservatives are the ones that love Trump still, while the fiscal conservatives dislike some of what Trump is doing.
Also helps to have a father who leans right to let you know how he feels about politics

 

[everysingletime]

Your father still loves Trump?