Create Account



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?

#1
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2019, 05:15 PM by mikesez.)

Not my post,
I thought this deserved its own thread
"Trump denies Pelosi aircraft for foreign trip in response to call for State of the Union delay"

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/17/trump-po...tdown.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...1be96d5094

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-d...nion-delay
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#2

Lol, Dems have finally found an adversary who is unafraid to play their games.
“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Reply

#3
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2019, 05:31 PM by StroudCrowd1.)

This is fantastic. I wish he would have waited until she was actually on the plane though, then made her get off.

I am sure the troops will really miss her visit.
Reply

#4

He's just mad she won't let him do the SOTU tradition.
He's not concerned about limiting travel during the shutdown.
He went to Iraq.
Republican members of Congress went on a trip too, after the shutdown began.
Suddenly, that's not OK.
None of this is good.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#5

(01-17-2019, 05:32 PM)mikesez Wrote: He's just mad she won't let him do the SOTU tradition.
He's not concerned about limiting travel during the shutdown.
He went to Iraq.
Republican members of Congress went on a trip too, after the shutdown began.
Suddenly, that's not OK.
None of this is good.

And Democratic members of Congress went to Puerto Rico to see Hamilton during the shutdown. What is your point exactly?

Her and Cryin' Chuck want to prevent him from communicating with the American people, but it won't work. Do you think the Democrats are proud that Trump surpassed 3% GDP his 2nd year in office, a feat Obama couldn't accomplish in 8? Good news all around mikesez!
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#6

(01-17-2019, 05:38 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:32 PM)mikesez Wrote: He's just mad she won't let him do the SOTU tradition.
He's not concerned about limiting travel during the shutdown.
He went to Iraq.
Republican members of Congress went on a trip too, after the shutdown began.
Suddenly, that's not OK.
None of this is good.

And Democratic members of Congress went to Puerto Rico to see Hamilton during the shutdown. What is your point exactly?

Her and Cryin' Chuck want to prevent him from communicating with the American people, but it won't work. Do you think the Democrats are proud that Trump surpassed 3% GDP his 2nd year in office, a feat Obama couldn't accomplish in 8? Good news all around mikesez!

Could that be a false equivalence?  Did the Puerto Rico trip involve military transport?
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#7

(01-17-2019, 05:43 PM)mikesez Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:38 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: And Democratic members of Congress went to Puerto Rico to see Hamilton during the shutdown. What is your point exactly?

Her and Cryin' Chuck want to prevent him from communicating with the American people, but it won't work. Do you think the Democrats are proud that Trump surpassed 3% GDP his 2nd year in office, a feat Obama couldn't accomplish in 8? Good news all around mikesez!

Could that be a false equivalence?  Did the Puerto Rico trip involve military transport?

Not really.

You refuse to see the childish behavior in Pelosi and focus solely on Trump, as if she has a valid reason to block Trump from doing the SOTU address.
Reply

#8

(01-17-2019, 05:38 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:32 PM)mikesez Wrote: He's just mad she won't let him do the SOTU tradition.
He's not concerned about limiting travel during the shutdown.
He went to Iraq.
Republican members of Congress went on a trip too, after the shutdown began.
Suddenly, that's not OK.
None of this is good.

And Democratic members of Congress went to Puerto Rico to see Hamilton during the shutdown. What is your point exactly?

Her and Cryin' Chuck want to prevent him from communicating with the American people, but it won't work. Do you think the Democrats are proud that Trump surpassed 3% GDP his 2nd year in office, a feat Obama couldn't accomplish in 8? Good news all around mikesez!

It's all just politicians being politicians at this point. If anyone, and I do mean anyone wanted a deal to happen, it would have happened already. Now it's just about letting 800,000 people go without pay while each side waits for the other one to blink.
Reply

#9
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2019, 05:56 PM by mikesez.)

(01-17-2019, 05:49 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:43 PM)mikesez Wrote: Could that be a false equivalence?  Did the Puerto Rico trip involve military transport?

Not really.

You refuse to see the childish behavior in Pelosi and focus solely on Trump, as if she has a valid reason to block Trump from doing the SOTU address.

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. They are not important.

It's important for both Presidents and members of congress to see what it's like out near the front lines, though.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#10

(01-17-2019, 05:52 PM)TJBender Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:38 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: And Democratic members of Congress went to Puerto Rico to see Hamilton during the shutdown. What is your point exactly?

Her and Cryin' Chuck want to prevent him from communicating with the American people, but it won't work. Do you think the Democrats are proud that Trump surpassed 3% GDP his 2nd year in office, a feat Obama couldn't accomplish in 8? Good news all around mikesez!

It's all just politicians being politicians at this point. If anyone, and I do mean anyone wanted a deal to happen, it would have happened already. Now it's just about letting 800,000 people go without pay while each side waits for the other one to blink.

Well, someone will blink in 3 weeks when the new caravans get here and I am pretty sure it won't be the GOP.

The Democrats biggest mistake is thinking Trump actually cares about owning the shutdown. Chuck and Nancy are playing a 7/2 offsuit here. Time to fold it.
Reply

#11

(01-17-2019, 05:32 PM)mikesez Wrote: He's just mad she won't let him do the SOTU tradition.
He's not concerned about limiting travel during the shutdown.
He went to Iraq.
Republican members of Congress went on a trip too, after the shutdown began.
Suddenly, that's not OK.
None of this is good.

Have you admitted you're not actually a conservative or Republican, yet?
Reply

#12

(01-17-2019, 05:55 PM)mikesez Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:49 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: Not really.

You refuse to see the childish behavior in Pelosi and focus solely on Trump, as if she has a valid reason to block Trump from doing the SOTU address.

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.
Reply

#13
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2019, 06:00 PM by mikesez.)

(01-17-2019, 05:52 PM)TJBender Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:38 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: And Democratic members of Congress went to Puerto Rico to see Hamilton during the shutdown. What is your point exactly?

Her and Cryin' Chuck want to prevent him from communicating with the American people, but it won't work. Do you think the Democrats are proud that Trump surpassed 3% GDP his 2nd year in office, a feat Obama couldn't accomplish in 8? Good news all around mikesez!

It's all just politicians being politicians at this point. If anyone, and I do mean anyone wanted a deal to happen, it would have happened already. Now it's just about letting 800,000 people go without pay while each side waits for the other one to blink.

It's not just Pelosi v. the President.  The whole thing can be completely resolved if 20 republican senators and 55 republican members of the House decide to override Trump's veto and open the government.

(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.

I'm pretty sure polling data says you're very wrong.  Trump is being blamed for the shutdown by 2 to 1 and a narrow majority says "no" to the idea of a wall at the border.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#14
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2019, 06:03 PM by StroudCrowd1.)

(01-17-2019, 05:59 PM)mikesez Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:52 PM)TJBender Wrote: It's all just politicians being politicians at this point. If anyone, and I do mean anyone wanted a deal to happen, it would have happened already. Now it's just about letting 800,000 people go without pay while each side waits for the other one to blink.

It's not just Pelosi v. the President.  The whole thing can be completely resolved if 20 republican senators and 55 republican members of the House decide to override Trump's veto and open the government.

(01-17-2019, 05:59 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: 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.

I'm pretty sure polling data says you're very wrong.  Trump is being blamed for the shutdown by  2 to 1 and a narrow majority says "no" to the idea of a wall at the border.

Let's see how it plays out in the coming months as these caravans come crashing into the border.

Also, polling data said Hillary would crush Trump in the election. Do you really believe polling data? I have never been polled before.
Reply

#15
(This post was last modified: 01-17-2019, 06:19 PM by mikesez.)

(01-17-2019, 05:57 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:32 PM)mikesez Wrote: He's just mad she won't let him do the SOTU tradition.
He's not concerned about limiting travel during the shutdown.
He went to Iraq.
Republican members of Congress went on a trip too, after the shutdown began.
Suddenly, that's not OK.
None of this is good.

Have you admitted you're not actually a conservative or Republican, yet?

I'm a never Trump republican. Not that it matters. Political affiliation shouldn't determine whether anyone is right or wrong.

(01-17-2019, 06:02 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:59 PM)mikesez Wrote: It's not just Pelosi v. the President.  The whole thing can be completely resolved if 20 republican senators and 55 republican members of the House decide to override Trump's veto and open the government.


I'm pretty sure polling data says you're very wrong.  Trump is being blamed for the shutdown by  2 to 1 and a narrow majority says "no" to the idea of a wall at the border.

Let's see how it plays out in the coming months as these caravans come crashing into the border.

Also, polling data said Hillary would crush Trump in the election. Do you really believe polling data? I have never been polled before.

Nate silver says you're wrong. A lot of the media misunderstood the polls. but the polls themselves were basically right, that's why Hillary won the popular vote.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#16

(01-17-2019, 06:17 PM)mikesez Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:57 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: Have you admitted you're not actually a conservative or Republican, yet?

I'm a never Trump republican. Not that it matters. Political affiliation shouldn't determine whether anyone is right or wrong.

(01-17-2019, 06:02 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: Let's see how it plays out in the coming months as these caravans come crashing into the border.

Also, polling data said Hillary would crush Trump in the election. Do you really believe polling data? I have never been polled before.

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.
Reply

#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

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#18

(01-17-2019, 06:23 PM)mikesez Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:59 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: 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: 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.

If you are asking if I base my evidence off of the Secretary of Homeland Security, then yes. I'm guilty as charged.
Reply

#19

(01-17-2019, 06:26 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 06:23 PM)mikesez Wrote: 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.


And you would argue that two plus two is five if the president had tweeted that this morning.

If you are asking if I base my evidence off of the Secretary of Homeland Security, then yes. I'm guilty as charged.

But then you reject evidence of things that happened only 2 weeks ago.
My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.
Reply

#20

(01-17-2019, 05:55 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:
(01-17-2019, 05:52 PM)TJBender Wrote: It's all just politicians being politicians at this point. If anyone, and I do mean anyone wanted a deal to happen, it would have happened already. Now it's just about letting 800,000 people go without pay while each side waits for the other one to blink.

Well, someone will blink in 3 weeks when the new caravans get here and I am pretty sure it won't be the GOP.

The Democrats biggest mistake is thinking Trump actually cares about owning the shutdown. Chuck and Nancy are playing a 7/2 offsuit here. Time to fold it.

Amazing how those caravans show up whenever Trump needs a ratings bump.
Reply




Users browsing this thread:
1 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!