Whitehouse Transition

[fskimospy]

I'll help. It revolves around the word 'temporary' which you might have missed.. Not too difficult to understand.

Can you explain how a temporary ban is not a ban?

This actually sounds very difficult to understand, at least for me. Maybe I lack the incredible reasoning skills of you and Pokerguy, haha.

 

[Jhhnn]

irst, can you point to where he said "ban"? He said temporarily halt their entrance until the immigrants can be vetted. (in his words, until our country's representatives can figure out what's going on). Typical lib distortion.

If that takes a decade or two, no problemo, right?

Conservatives simply want to hold immigration to a minimum & that's one component of how to accomplish it.

The truth is that immigration has a larger effect on small town America than many people realize, particularly in the food processing & meat packing industries. Just watching the workers come & go at shift change will tell us that. It's damned hard work with lousy pay & an immigrant magnet.

Denver was once home to many packing plants, now gone as employers moved to smaller towns where jobs were already scarce & the mentality defies unionization. Using immigrant labor is just an extension of that, one that some locals have come to resent rather deeply.

For example-

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/03/19/somalis-struggle-to-make-new-home-in-colorado/

Once Cargill perfects chicken processing robots none of 'em will have jobs.

 

[PokerGuy]

Can you explain how a temporary ban is not a ban?

This actually sounds very difficult to understand, at least for me. Maybe I lack the incredible reasoning skills of you and Pokerguy, haha.

Again, context. If the media (or you) were being honest, it would be reported like this: Trump is advocating temporarily halting further immigration of Muslims into the US until further investigation into better vetting options. Instead, they (like you) try to go with the distorting lie without context to pretend it's something it isn't.

 

[PokerGuy]

If that takes a decade or two, no problemo, right?

I did not argue for or against Trump's position. Just pointed out the distorted lie presented by the media (and people like eskimo who support the biased media).

Conservatives simply want to hold immigration to a minimum & that's one component of how to accomplish it.

More baloney. At least if you spew BS, people can recognize it as your opinion. The problem is when the media starts doing the same thing (which they frequently do).

 

[fskimospy]

Again, context. If the media (or you) were being honest, it would reported like this: Trump is advocating temporarily halting further immigration of Muslims into the US until further investigation into better vetting options. Instead, they (like you) try to go with the distorting lie without context to pretend it's something it isn't.

So we're back to this again. Can you provide us with the context that makes a total and complete shutdown of Muslim immigration not a ban? One of us isn't being honest here, that's for sure.

Let me break down how this is going to go in case there's any doubt in your mind. I've caught you in an obvious lie and I'm going to keep poking at you until you admit it. Your choices are to either keep coming up with more outlandish excuses as to why a ban is not a ban, in which case you're just going to give me more ammo, or come clean. Doesn't option 2 sound easier for everyone?

 

[JD50]

I'll help. It revolves around the word 'temporary' which you might have missed.. Not too difficult to understand.

Neither "ban" nor "halt" imply a length of time, so put whatever you want in front of them and then explain the difference.

 

[PokerGuy]

So we're back to this again. Can you provide us with the context that makes a total and complete shutdown of Muslim immigration not a ban? One of us isn't being honest here, that's for sure.

I already did. You don't like it because it messes up your world view, that's your problem, not mine.

Let me break down how this is going to go in case there's any doubt in your mind. I've caught you in an obvious lie and I'm going to keep poking at you until you admit it. Your choices are to either keep coming up with more outlandish excuses as to why a ban is not a ban, in which case you're just going to give me more ammo, or come clean. Doesn't option 2 sound easier for everyone?

lol, more delusions or grandeur. You were caught in a lie yet again, I don't care if you "keep poking" (ie deflecting from your lie) or not. Just admit that you lied and move on, it's much simpler for everyone.

 

[JD50]

PokerGuy, what is the difference between banning muslim immigrants and halting muslim immigration?

 

[fskimospy]

I already did. You don't like it because it messes up your world view, that's your problem, not mine.

Can you quote me where you believe you explained how a total and complete shutdown is not a ban?

lol, more delusions or grandeur. You were caught in a lie yet again, I don't care if you "keep poking" (ie deflecting from your lie) or not. Just admit that you lied and move on, it's much simpler for everyone.

Okay then, you're going to continue on with this! I'm excited to see how far you go!

 

[PokerGuy]

PokerGuy, what is the difference between banning muslim immigrants and halting muslim immigration?

He proposed a temporary stop in allowing further immigration until "our representatives can figure out what's going on". That doesn't mean legally preventing any further muslim immigration (ie, a ban), it means pause it to evaluate the vetting process. It means you put things on hold until you can figure out how to better vet people, and then you proceed from there.

I'm not arguing that I agree with his position by the way, though I would agree that blindly taking people from places like Syria without very carefully screening them is a very risky proposition.

 

[PokerGuy]

Okay then, you're going to continue on with this! I'm excited to see how far you go!

Sorry to disappoint you, but no, I'm not. You've shown clearly another example of how the media bias is evidence but you are incapable of seeing it because you agree with the bias. No further discussion and help you beyond that, only self reflection

 

[fskimospy]

He proposed a temporary stop in allowing further immigration until "our representatives can figure out what's going on". That doesn't mean legally preventing any further muslim immigration (ie, a ban), it means pause it to evaluate the vetting process. It means you put things on hold until you can figure out how to better vet people, and then you proceed from there.

I'm not arguing that I agree with his position by the way, though I would agree that blindly taking people from places like Syria without very carefully screening them is a very risky proposition.

So we all agree that he's proposing to prevent Muslims from entering the US for a period of time, correct? That is literally the dictionary definition of a ban.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ban

Full Definition of ban
banned
banning

1. transitive verb
2. 1archaic : curse
3. 2: to prohibit especially by legal means <ban discrimination>; also : to prohibit the use, performance, or distribution of <ban a book> <ban a pesticide>

Bans are not necessarily permanent. That's why we have the phrase 'temporary ban', after all. You're caught in a lie and you're trying to rewrite the definition of a word in order to avoid being wrong.

 

[fskimospy]

Just checking in, Pokerguy. How's that explanation coming?

 

[agent00f]

I already did. You don't like it because it messes up your world view, that's your problem, not mine.

lol, more delusions or grandeur. You were caught in a lie yet again, I don't care if you "keep poking" (ie deflecting from your lie) or not. Just admit that you lied and move on, it's much simpler for everyone.

Has this ever worked for you when it mattered, like at work? "Poker, you're late to the meeting again". "You guys are delusional, you're the late ones, just admit it, I ain't got time for this"

 

[Jhhnn]

Gotta love Poker Guy going on about the "temporary" nature of Trump's proposed ban on Muslim immigrants. I suppose he's right, in a way. The ban will likely last until Trump is out of the oval office & Repubs out of power because they have no intention of lifting the ban. They'll make some noises about reviewing the vetting process & blah-blah until it fades to obscurity. I mean, they're still investigating Benghazi, aren't they?

 

[SP33Demon]

slate.com and libtards are triggered like sharks to blood. You idiots will never realize how bad the media plays you on a daily basis.

 

[Paratus]

slate.com and libtards are triggered like sharks to blood. You idiots will never realize how bad the media plays you on a daily basis.

As I've mentioned half a dozen times the quotes are all from the Wall Street Journal.

LTRTFT.

 

[trenchfoot]

Trump, with the whims of the hard core right wing base in mind, can dictate whatever he deems "temporary" to be, depending on how it affects the support he needs to get re-elected.

He is going to have the most difficult time keeping the support of the working class mid-westerners that ultimately gave him his win while attempting to deal with the adversarial relationship he nurtured with the establishment GOP who wished him the worst in the worst possible way. It's the establishment he railed against that got him the support from the working class that is holding the establishment responsible for shipping their livelihoods overseas, and I wish these working class folks who put him in office all the best toward forcing Trump to keep his word to them IRT renegotiating NAFTA in their favor and bringing jobs back to America.

A tall order, but Trump did make that promise as well as the many other pledges he made to the working class to get elected.

But the big question in all of this is will they really care if he doesn't? Can Trump actually get away with reneging on those pledges as he cuts taxes for himself and the Koch's of the nation and dismantles regulations that keeps the working class safe from getting ripped off from guys that are just like Trump?

Will he allow another financial disaster to occur where the only big winners that came out of it was Wall Street, Trump himself and all of those other Big Business profiteers that cashed in on the crash?

Time will tell.

 

[lopri]

Here is the full WSJ story. I do not think Slate's article is misleading in anyway. Draw your own conclusions.

RNC Chair Reince Priebus Is Named Donald Trump’s Chief of Staff

Michael C. Bender and Carol E. Lee
Updated Nov. 13, 2016 11:43 p.m. ET

President-elect Donald Trump named Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus as his chief of staff, a selection that suggests the Republican is interested in a more conventional approach to governing after his insurgent campaign.

Mr. Trump on Sunday also named Stephen Bannon as his chief strategist and senior counsel. Mr. Bannon, who was chief executive of the Trump campaign, was in consideration with Mr. Priebus for the White House’s top personnel position.

“Steve and Reince are highly qualified leaders who worked well together on our campaign and led us to a historic victory,” Mr. Trump said in a statement. “Now I will have them both with me in the White House as we work to make America great again.”

The selection of Mr. Priebus as staff chief is an important marker in Mr. Trump’s high-pressure race against the clock to build the next administration. That effort begins in earnest on Monday, as his broader transition team holds its first formal meetings since a shake-up on Friday that installed Vice President-elect Mike Pence atop the organization.

Still, Mr. Trump’s transition is slightly behind the pace set by previous incoming presidents and the timetable established by his own team.

President Barack Obama, for example, named his chief of staff two days after winning the 2008 campaign. Inside the Trump transition team, a broader group of officials known as the “landing team” was supposed to have been announced on Friday and start inspecting agencies for potential changes this coming week. That was delayed after Mr. Trump shuffled the transition team’s leadership.

Another contributing factor: Mr. Trump’s victory surprised even his own top advisers, who, before Tuesday, were unable to focus the New York businessman on the 73 days between the election and inauguration, a senior aide said. They said Mr. Trump didn’t want to jinx himself by planning the transition before he had actually won.

During their private White House meeting on Thursday, Mr. Obama walked his successor through the duties of running the country, and Mr. Trump seemed surprised by the scope, said people familiar with the meeting. Trump aides were described by those people as unaware that the entire presidential staff working in the West Wing had to be replaced at the end of Mr. Obama’s term.

After meeting with Mr. Trump, the only person to be elected president without having held a government or military position, Mr. Obama realized the Republican needs more guidance. He plans to spend more time with his successor than presidents typically do, people familiar with the matter said.

Jason Miller, communications director for the Trump transition, declined to comment on those characterizations of the White House visit. He said in a statement that, “The difference between President-elect Trump and a politician is that Trump puts a premium on making the right decision, not the politically expedient one. President-elect Trump’s excellent judgment and temperament has served him well in business and in life, and he’s not going to be swayed by a bunch of political insiders responsible for filling up the swamp in the first place.”

There are signs that Mr. Trump has tempered several of his top campaign promises. He vowed during the campaign to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, but he said in a “60 Minutes” interview broadcast Sunday that a fence could be sufficient in some parts.

He also told CBS that he is rethinking his call to have a prosecutor investigate Hillary Clinton , saying of the Clintons that “I don’t want to hurt them” and “they’re good people.”

Still, he said in the interview that he would aim to jail or deport between two million and three million illegal immigrants whom he described as criminals, gang members and drug dealers. He didn’t specify how he would do this. The Obama administration already has made deporting illegal immigrants with criminal records a priority.

The selection of Mr. Priebus will, by definition, help organize the transition. This decision allows Mr. Trump and his team to focus on identifying 15 cabinet positions and more than 1,000 top posts that must be confirmed by the Senate.

A trained attorney, Mr. Priebus first interacted with the Trump inner circle in September 2015 when he persuaded the political neophyte to sign a pledge to support the GOP nominee, even if he lost the primary. He was among a small group inside a glass-encased Trump Tower conference room with Mr. Trump when they were informed the Washington Post was preparing to publish an 11-year-old video in which the nominee made lewd comments about forcing himself on women.

As the rest of Mr. Trump’s team strategized the response, Mr. Priebus was largely sidelined by an avalanche of calls and emails from top Republicans urging him to pull the party’s funding from the Trump campaign.

While Mr. Priebus’s elevation is a nod to the Washington establishment, Mr. Bannon brings a more disruptive political force into the White House. The former Goldman Sachs banker became chairman of the Trump campaign in late summer, leaving his position atop Breitbart News. That website has taken aim at establishment GOP figures and is identified with the “alt right,” a movement that promotes nativism and views immigration and multiculturalism as threats to white identity.

After he joined the campaign, Mr. Bannon pushed Mr. Trump to focus on white working-class voters and was instrumental in assembling a surprise news conference just hours before a presidential debate that featured Mr. Trump and several women who had accused his rival’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, of sexual misconduct.

At the news conference, Mr. Bannon, wearing glasses and pushing his hands into his jacket pockets, flashed a mischievous smile as stunned reporters—who had been told they would be witnessing debate preparations—surveyed the room.

“Bannon is going to be keeper of the image of Trump as a fighter against the status quo, and Reince is going to utilize his personal connections with the speaker and others, to make the trains run on time,” said Ken Blackwell, a former Ohio state official and a member of the transition team.

While other former campaign officials met in New York on Sunday, the broader transition staff based in Washington gathers on Monday. They will discuss the so-called landing teams tasked with entering federal agencies and reporting back on potential changes.

Friday’s reorganization of the transition team increased the influence of Mr. Pence and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.), who now has several allies holding top staff positions. The role for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who had been in charge of the transition, has been diluted.

The slower decision-making process is also amplified by Mr. Trump’s lack of public appearances since the election, even as protests erupt around the country following his election.

While Mr. Obama and his predecessor, Republican George W. Bush in 2000, used constant news conferences after their victories to speak to Americans, Mr. Trump has held none, only doing a Wall Street Journal interview and the “60 Minutes” appearance.

On Sunday, Mr. Trump noted that he had received congratulatory calls from Republicans who were opposed to his candidacy. Mr. Trump said primary rival Jeb Bush and his father and brother, the two most recent Republican presidents, all called “to express their best wishes.” Mitt Romney, the party’s 2012 nominee, also called to offer his congratulations.

—Damian Paletta contributed to this article.

 

[agent00f]

Trump, with the whims of the hard core right wing base in mind, can dictate whatever he deems "temporary" to be, depending on how it affects the support he needs to get re-elected.

He is going to have the most difficult time keeping the support of the working class mid-westerners that ultimately gave him his win while attempting to deal with the adversarial relationship he nurtured with the establishment GOP who wished him the worst in the worst possible way. It's the establishment he railed against that got him the support from the working class that is holding the establishment responsible for shipping their livelihoods overseas, and I wish these working class folks who put him in office all the best toward forcing Trump to keep his word to them IRT renegotiating NAFTA in their favor and bringing jobs back to America.

A tall order, but Trump did make that promise as well as the many other pledges he made to the working class to get elected.

But the big question in all of this is will they really care if he doesn't? Can Trump actually get away with reneging on those pledges as he cuts taxes for himself and the Koch's of the nation and dismantles regulations that keeps the working class safe from getting ripped off from guys that are just like Trump?

Will he allow another financial disaster to occur where the only big winners that came out of it was Wall Street, Trump himself and all of those other Big Business profiteers that cashed in on the crash?

Time will tell.

It's worth pointing out Berlusconi was in power off and on in Italy for a long time. Some countries just love their right wing populists.

 

[SP33Demon]

Trump, with the whims of the hard core right wing base in mind, can dictate whatever he deems "temporary" to be, depending on how it affects the support he needs to get re-elected.

He is going to have the most difficult time keeping the support of the working class mid-westerners that ultimately gave him his win while attempting to deal with the adversarial relationship he nurtured with the establishment GOP who wished him the worst in the worst possible way. It's the establishment he railed against that got him the support from the working class that is holding the establishment responsible for shipping their livelihoods overseas, and I wish these working class folks who put him in office all the best toward forcing Trump to keep his word to them IRT renegotiating NAFTA in their favor and bringing jobs back to America.

A tall order, but Trump did make that promise as well as the many other pledges he made to the working class to get elected.

But the big question in all of this is will they really care if he doesn't? Can Trump actually get away with reneging on those pledges as he cuts taxes for himself and the Koch's of the nation and dismantles regulations that keeps the working class safe from getting ripped off from guys that are just like Trump?

Will he allow another financial disaster to occur where the only big winners that came out of it was Wall Street, Trump himself and all of those other Big Business profiteers that cashed in on the crash?

Time will tell.

Shouldn't the real question be, what would have been the opportunity cost to these people if there was a hillary presidency? Even if Trump can't bring their jobs back, they've still dammed up Shit's Creek. Whether Shit's Creek springs a leak here or there is irrelevant, they put an end to the neoliberal corporate/media cronyism and showed the country/media that they are worthy of attention just as much as the coasts in their needs. They showed they are willing to turn their backs on either party if neither party tries to help them. They've showed that they can swing elections and won't hesitate to do it again if Trump doesn't show progress for them and possibly Bernie after that.

 

[SP33Demon]

It's worth pointing out Berlusconi was in power off and on in Italy for a long time. Some countries just love their right wing populists.

WTF are you talking about? These "right wing populists" from the midwest that tweaker2 is talking about voted for obama twice. Keep spewing your generalized partisan hatred and ignore reality so you can lose another election.

 

[trenchfoot]

Shouldn't the real question be, what would have been the opportunity cost to these people if there was a hillary presidency? Even if Trump can't bring their jobs back, they've still dammed up Shit's Creek. Whether Shit's Creek springs a leak here or there is irrelevant, they put an end to the neoliberal corporate/media cronyism and showed the country/media that they are worthy of attention just as much as the coasts in their needs. They showed they are willing to turn their backs on either party if neither party tries to help them. They've showed that they can swing elections and won't hesitate to do it again if Trump doesn't show progress for them and possibly Bernie after that.

Yes, some very good things have happened with Trump's victory, without doubt. But that needs to be balanced off with the fact that Trump is a mystery wrapped in a pile of dubious promises that's wrapped in a personality that doesn't endear himself to a lot of folks who are plainly skeptical of him, due to Trump just being himself.

Who knows, Trump kept rolling the dice in his mouth and kept spitting out sevens and elevens all while those numbers actually came up looking like craps, right up to the moment he won the big roll of the night. Maybe, just maybe he can keep that streak going to the benefit of those working class folks that voted for him instead of the big moneyed interests that usually end up sweeping the tables.

He may have won, but he won on words that at the present time, hold no water. All he has at the moment are promises made that need to be kept, with some of those promises being as ridiculous as making Mexico pay for a wall that they, and a whole lot of powerful American businesses don't want.

I really do wish him the very best, because some of the promises he made are to the working class, and some other comments he made are against the establishment that have had a very long run at depressing the wages and opportunities of the middle class and poor.

But are those promises just as worthless as the one he made about building a wall financed by the folks who would rather blow it up than pay for it?

 

[thraashman]

Can you explain how a temporary ban is not a ban?

This actually sounds very difficult to understand, at least for me. Maybe I lack the incredible reasoning skills of you and Pokerguy, haha.

You simply aren't hearing it right because unlike them your hearing is not being filtered by your rectum.

 

[SP33Demon]

Yes, some very good things have happened with Trump's victory, without doubt. But that needs to be balanced off with the fact that Trump is a mystery wrapped in a pile of dubious promises that's wrapped in a personality that doesn't endear himself to a lot of folks who are plainly skeptical of him, due to Trump just being himself.

Who knows, Trump kept rolling the dice in his mouth and kept spitting out sevens and elevens all while those numbers actually came up looking like craps, right up to the moment he won the big roll of the night. Maybe, just maybe he can keep that streak going to the benefit of those working class folks that voted for him instead of the big moneyed interests that usually end up sweeping the tables.

He may have won, but he won on words that at the present time, hold no water. All he has at the moment are promises made that need to be kept, with some of those promises being as ridiculous as making Mexico pay for a wall that they, and a whole lot of powerful American businesses don't want.

I really do wish him the very best, because some of the promises he made are to the working class, and some other comments he made are against the establishment that have had a very long run at depressing the wages and opportunities of the middle class and poor.

But are those promises just as worthless as the one he made about building a wall financed by the folks who would rather blow it up than pay for it?

I agree with most of what you said. I think Trump just talking about helping them and giving them hope was an improvement in their lives that had not been identified in a long time. The next step, like you said, is bringing those promises to fruition. Helping them get something better than minimum wage employment is going to be a monumental task, no doubt about it. As I've said before as my solution, I think Trump should be looking at a combo of EIC's (instead of min wage hikes since they partly pay for themselves), extra subsidies for STEM degrees (90%?) for those who prove capable for retraining, and insane tax breaks/incentives for companies to go there and invest in the area. This may even increase people out of college to move to that area! In the end, a mountain cannot move itself and the government needs to finally help the forgotten, it's long overdue. America first, and I hope Trump is more than words.