Create Account


Board Performance Issues We are aware of performance issues on the board and are working to resolve them! The board may be intermittently unavailable during this time. (May 07) x


The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
What's good for the goose, is good for the gander?

#17
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2019, 06:24 PM by mikesez.)

(01-17-2019, 05:59 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:55 PM)mikesez Wrote: Maybe Pelosi's behavior was childish. 

She claimed that coordinating the security was too big of an ask with many of the security staff going unpaid.  It's an interesting claim.  Might be true.  The shutdown has lasted 29 days.  Have the President, Vice President, and members of the Supreme Court tried to appear at Capitol Hill at the same time in the last 29 days?  If not, we can't really compare the claim to reality, can we?

On the other hand, Trump has claimed that having these types of meet and greets with troops stationed in combat zones is unbecoming during the shutdown.  Yet two such identical events occured without any comment about the appropriateness.  So that claim can be tested, and it is false.

That said, SOTU addresses are dumb.

The only problem with Pelosi's claim about security is that it was immediately rebutted by Kirstjen Nielsen that it was false. That is a pretty reliable source of information. Pelosi also told Nielsen that she wasn't "interested in her facts" in a previous hearing. The reason we are at day 29 is because of zero compromise by the Democrats. If they meet in the middle, they can still convince their base "they won". Again, they are playing a losing hand here. Middle America wants border security.

So your evidence is testimony from a political appointee who works for Trump.

My evidence is the fact that similar trips took place only a few weeks ago.

Your evidence could be from a biased source.
My evidence is a simple historical fact
My evidence is stronger than yours.

I mean I know you're just going to double down with some nonsense.
Evidence doesn't seem to matter anymore actually.

(01-17-2019, 06:20 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 06:17 PM)mikesez Wrote: I'm a never Trump republican. Not that it matters. Political affiliation shouldn't determine whether anyone is right or wrong.


Nate silver says you're wrong. A lot of the media misunderstood the polls. but the poles themselves were basically right, that's why Hillary won the popular vote.

Actually, the polls were wrong. You would literally argue that water is wet by saying not in a frozen state.

And you would argue that two plus two is five if the president had tweeted that this morning.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: What's good for the goose, is good for the gander? - by mikesez - 01-17-2019, 06:23 PM



Users browsing this thread:
3 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!