Politics Trump in Full Panic, Claims All Epstein Files Are Fake, Created by Obama

[Phatguysrule]

You are assuming Americans will actually use public transportation...this is a car culture unlike most of the world. That's not changing in 3 years either...I'm just being pragmatic, not idealistic. California has not been building a high speed rail for 45 years either...not sure where you got that idea, but it's not based in facts. That's why there's not a stretch of high speed rail. They are having trouble keeping Amtrak afloat as it is...again, public transportation is just not supported by the population here and that's not all on business models...it's just a fact.

You have to make public transportation faster than taking cars.

Nobody's going to take the train for public transport if it's going to take them two or three times longer than just driving.

I would absolutely take the train or public transit if it was faster and cheaper than driving.

 

[Phatguysrule]

For reference:


Does LA have a good transit system?

Los Angeles is home to one of the country's best public transportation networks, including subways, light rail, buses and shuttles that service every corner of the Greater Los Angeles area.
View attachment 74622
https://www.discoverlosangeles.com


Los Angeles has had mass transit light rail since 1990, when the Metro Rail Blue Line (now the A Line) opened. This line, which runs between Downtown Los Angeles and Long Beach, was the first of several light rail lines to be built in the region. The Blue Line was a significant step in the revival of rail transit in Los Angeles after a period where buses had become the dominant form of public transportation, according to PBS SoCal.

Not sure what point you're trying to make here.

Public transit in the US is garbage compared to most of our peer countries.

 

[Phatguysrule]

You are assuming Americans will actually use public transportation...this is a car culture unlike most of the world. That's not changing in 3 years either...I'm just being pragmatic, not idealistic. California has not been building a high speed rail for 45 years either...not sure where you got that idea, but it's not based in facts. That's why there's not a stretch of high speed rail. They are having trouble keeping Amtrak afloat as it is...again, public transportation is just not supported by the population here and that's not all on business models...it's just a fact.

California's been trying to build high speed rail since the '90s. I said '80s and I stand corrected. So 30 years. Japan built 350 some miles of high speed rail in 5 years.

That would get you from LA to Vegas and halfway back.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_California_High-Speed_Rail

 

[crandc]

Took BART to work every day when at Genentech. Without traffic driving was faster but there was traffic and paying toll. Genentech paid our transit so cost me nothing. Got a lot of reading done and didn't have to cope with traffic, parking, annoying drivers.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Not sure what point you're trying to make here.

Public transit in the US is garbage compared to most of our peer countries.

No point. Just referencing to help the discussion.

 

[barfo]

California's been trying to build high speed rail since the '90s. I said '80s and I stand corrected. So 30 years. Japan built 350 some miles of high speed rail in 5 years.

That would get you from LA to Vegas and halfway back.

Not a great comparison.
The differences between Japan and the USA aren't just that we have a Democratic Party and they don't.

Like almost every country, their government operates on a longer timescale than ours. Makes it easier to do big projects.
Also, their population is culturally more inclined to go along with the plan (whatever the plan is) rather than fight endlessly about it. Makes it easier to do big projects.
Plus, they built the initial lines in the early 60s, while we were busy aiming for the moon. Their moon shot was a huge success, which allowed them to build more lines without too much opposition.
Ours was a big success too, but there wasn't much of a way to follow up on it except for drinking Tang and eating Food Sticks. Mars is still too far away.

barfo

 

[crandc]

Nixon was brought down by what was called a third rate burglary. And completely unnecessary, he would have won re-election easily. Once investigation began into Watergate it uncovered the enemies list, the plots against Martin Luther King, etc. etc.

So yeah Trump is panicking. He makes Nixon look like an honest patriot. When you look under rocks, all kinds of creepy crawlies emerge.

 

[riverman]

When you have the Supreme court in your pocket you can get away with anything it seems. There's no fair accountability for the felon, liar, rapist and defamer of the constitution. I don't see that changing in the political climate these days. It's sad but unfortunately the state of the country. Fortunately, I can still vote in Oregon.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Not a great comparison.
The differences between Japan and the USA aren't just that we have a Democratic Party and they don't.

Like almost every country, their government operates on a longer timescale than ours. Makes it easier to do big projects.
Also, their population is culturally more inclined to go along with the plan (whatever the plan is) rather than fight endlessly about it. Makes it easier to do big projects.
Plus, they built the initial lines in the early 60s, while we were busy aiming for the moon. Their moon shot was a huge success, which allowed them to build more lines without too much opposition.
Ours was a big success too, but there wasn't much of a way to follow up on it except for drinking Tang and eating Food Sticks. Mars is still too far away.

barfo

They built that stretch in the early '60s. In 5 years. I'm advocating that we do half as much in 80% of the time. Under the same president.

The point is that it can be done. Democrats are the party advocating for these things but they aren't getting them done.

Just saying it can't get done isn't enough. That's not working out very well for the Democrats (or any of us) at all.

It needs to change.

 

[BigGameDamian]

 

[barfo]

They built that stretch in the early '60s. In 5 years.

Yes, and we went to the moon in the 1960s. It's not the 1960s anymore.

I'm advocating that we do half as much in 80% of the time. Under the same president.

The point is that it can be done. Democrats are the party advocating for these things but they aren't getting them done.

Just saying it can't get done isn't enough. That's not working out very well for the Democrats (or any of us) at all.

It needs to change.

Of course it can be done - in the absence of anything that prevents it. So all you have to do is get rid of all the things preventing it from being done. It's simple.

Let's make a list of those things so that you can get to work on removing them.
Let's see:

• Lack of Funding
• Lawsuits
• Environmental regulations
• Voter disinterest
• Rider disinterest
• Lobbyists for alternatives
• Corruption

There are probably more, but that should keep you busy until I think of others.

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

Yes, and we went to the moon in the 1960s. It's not the 1960s anymore.



Of course it can be done - in the absence of anything that prevents it. So all you have to do is get rid of all the things preventing it from being done. It's simple.

Let's make a list of those things so that you can get to work on removing them.
Let's see:

• Lack of Funding
• Lawsuits
• Environmental regulations
• Voter disinterest
• Rider disinterest
• Lobbyists for alternatives
• Corruption

There are probably more, but that should keep you busy until I think of others.

barfo

I already addressed those concerns. Emergency declarations can get past all of that.

If it's faster and cheaper than driving people will use it.

It could even take longer than one president as long as you had benchmarks that need to be met before funding was released. You could fund it under the original president and have the rest of the funds waiting an escrow with bonuses for on time completion.

And it's doesn't only apply to high speed rail. It also applies to rural broadband and other infrastructure projects.

And this certainly isn't the only way this can get done. But you actually have to have people in positions of power who actually want to get it done rather than just play politics.

These things haven't gotten done because Dems have been playing politics too much.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Maybe separate election thread but no one can build complex stuff overnight.

I wouldn't be offended if a mod were to move it to a separate thread.

That seems like it would be the cleanest solution if we don't want the two topics discussed in this thread.

 

[Strenuus]

When you have the Supreme court in your pocket you can get away with anything it seems. There's no fair accountability for the felon, liar, rapist and defamer of the constitution. I don't see that changing in the political climate these days. It's sad but unfortunately the state of the country. Fortunately, I can still vote in Oregon.

For now.

 

[barfo]

I already addressed those concerns. Emergency declarations can get past all of that.

Yes, apparently now absolutely anything qualifies as an emergency, so the fact that we don't have high speed rail is an emergency.
If you want to govern the way Trump governs, yes. Laws don't matter. Anything can be done - and if necessary, just deport those that disagree.

If it's faster and cheaper than driving people will use it.

No argument there. But that's once it's built. Getting support for spending megabucks on building it is the more important hurdle.

It could even take longer than one president as long as you had benchmarks that need to be met before funding was released. You could fund it under the original president and have the rest of the funds waiting an escrow with bonuses for on time completion.

Maybe. How do you keep the next congress from simply taking away that escrow account? Congress can't pass laws, supposedly, that Congress can't reverse.
And now that following the law is optional, there's nothing to stop a new administration from killing any project.

And it's doesn't only apply to high speed rail. It also applies to rural broadband and other infrastructure projects.

And this certainly isn't the only way this can get done. But you actually have to have people in positions of power who actually want to get it done rather than just play politics.

These things haven't gotten done because Dems have been playing politics too much.

If by 'playing politics' you mean trying to please too many different factions at the same time, then I'd kind of agree.
It's not easy to be both environmentally sensitive and ram giant development projects through at warp speed.

There's a million problems with getting things done in this country. You seem to think that if we could just replace the Democratic Party with some other party, everything would suddenly be easy.

I can't see it myself.

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

Yes, apparently now absolutely anything qualifies as an emergency, so the fact that we don't have high speed rail is an emergency.
If you want to govern the way Trump governs, yes. Laws don't matter. Anything can be done - and if necessary, just deport those that disagree.

Climate change is an emergency. So is the shrinking middle class and the homelessness that goes with it.

High speed rail helps by providing long term employment for many as well as more accessible transportation for the masses.

No argument there. But that's once it's built. Getting support for spending megabucks on building it is the more important hurdle.

California has repeatedly voted to support it. There is plenty of demand. So have other regions.

Maybe. How do you keep the next congress from simply taking away that escrow account? Congress can't pass laws, supposedly, that Congress can't reverse.

You write it into the contract. Once it's in the escrow account it is out of congresses hands.

And now that following the law is optional, there's nothing to stop a new administration from killing any project.

You make policy so popular that it would be political suicide to kill it. That's how social security lasted.

If by 'playing politics' you mean trying to please too many different factions at the same time, then I'd kind of agree.

Exactly. That's stupid. Supporting a few overall policies would solve the problems of nearly all of these factions. Universal access to healthcare, education, and top quality social safety net.

It's not easy to be both environmentally sensitive and ram giant development projects through at warp speed.

There's a million problems with getting things done in this country. You seem to think that if we could just replace the Democratic Party with some other party, everything would suddenly be easy.

I can't see it myself.

barfo

I don't think replacing the democratic party solves anything. I've never suggested any such thing.

I've suggested they narrow their focus, refuse large donations and corporate donations and actually get shit done.

 

[barfo]

Climate change is an emergency. So is the shrinking middle class and the homelessness that goes with it.

High speed rail helps by providing long term employment for many as well as more accessible transportation for the masses.

Sure, it helps. But does it resolve the emergency?

Basically this is an argument for using emergency powers for literally everything, because any policy is somehow related to economics or climate change or something that someone might want to call an emergency.

Trump is modeling this form of government right now. Although our next dictator might be more benevolent, I don't want count on it.

Exactly. That's stupid. Supporting a few overall policies would solve the problems of nearly all of these factions. Universal access to healthcare, education, and top quality social safety net.

And high speed rail. We can't leave that out, can we?

I've suggested they narrow their focus, refuse large donations and corporate donations and actually get shit done.

So:
1) discard many of their voters
2) discard many of their donors
3) very likely lose elections as a result of 1 and 2
4) ???
5) get shit done

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

Sure, it helps. But does it resolve the emergency?

It absolutely helps address the emergencies mentioned. No question.

Basically this is an argument for using emergency powers for literally everything, because any policy is somehow related to economics or climate change or something that someone might want to call an emergency.

It's an argument for using emergency powers to address emergencies.

Trump is modeling this form of government right now. Although our next dictator might be more benevolent, I don't want count on it.

Except Trump is making up fake emergencies, I'm suggesting we address emergencies that have been proven with solutions which have been proven to address the aforementioned emergencies. Said solutions that have already been approved many times by voters in the state.

And high speed rail. We can't leave that out, can we?

I'm certainly open to suggestions as to better alternatives. High speed rail is simply an example of the Dems failure to deliver.

So:
1) discard many of their voters

voters have already approved high speed rail

2) discard many of their donors

Abso-fucking-lutely

3) very likely lose elections as a result of 1 and 2

1 (doing what voters want? Yes)
2 (fuck large donors)
as opposed to losing twice to a clown like Trump using the current strategy? You might want to try again.

4) ???
5) get shit done

barfo

It seems to me that you're advocating for the same strategy that lost to Trump twice. And you're making up reasons to do so.

Donald Trump. Think about that. You are suggesting that Democrats follow a strategy that has made them less popular than Donald Fucking Trump.

 

[JfizzleBlazer]

 

[SlyPokerDog]

MAGA: MAKE IT GO AWAY!

GHISLAINE BEGS FOR HELP

BROTHER: HE WAS MURDERED

President flails as Epstein storm rages around his govt...

Man Held in Same Cell Says There's No Way He Killed Self...

 

[BigGameDamian]

 

[Everything Beagle]

Oh well never mind then. Shoot we almost had him.

 

[JfizzleBlazer]

 

[Everything Beagle]

If this was a basketball game we’d say the refs rigged it or the players threw it.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

I already addressed those concerns. Emergency declarations can get past all of that.

If it's faster and cheaper than driving people will use it.

It could even take longer than one president as long as you had benchmarks that need to be met before funding was released. You could fund it under the original president and have the rest of the funds waiting an escrow with bonuses for on time completion.

And it's doesn't only apply to high speed rail. It also applies to rural broadband and other infrastructure projects.

And this certainly isn't the only way this can get done. But you actually have to have people in positions of power who actually want to get it done rather than just play politics.

These things haven't gotten done because Dems have been playing politics too much.

I think it is very presumptuous to just say if its cheaper and quicker, people will use it. I do not believe this to be true at all. Short of mass transit pulling up to within walking distance of every home, most people don't care to drive their car to a park and ride to then get on a tram. Park and rides have been around for decades. If this were realistic, they would be on every other block by now.
Another aspect is cars are vanity and this is the most vanity country in the world. No way people give up their ability to bling on the highways.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I think it is very presumptuous to just say if its cheaper and quicker, people will use it. I do not believe this to be true at all. Short of mass transit pulling up to within walking distance of every home, most people don't care to drive their car to a park and ride to then get on a tram. Park and rides have been around for decades. If this were realistic, they would be on every other block by now.
Another aspect is cars are vanity and this is the most vanity country in the world. No way people give up their ability to bling on the highways.

Of the people I've spoken with the vast majority have said that if it was faster and cheaper they would gladly use public transit for their commute.

It's not presumptuous. It's my prediction.

I have not suggested anybody has to give up anything. I have not suggested anybody even should give up anything.

I am suggesting the government should actually build what the people of California have voted for and approved funding for.

What's the problem?

 

[crandc]

MAGA who were screaming at weekend gathering about releasing files now meekly shutting up because Trump said to.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Of the people I've spoken with the vast majority have said that if it was faster and cheaper they would gladly use public transit for their commute.

It's not presumptuous. It's my prediction.

I have not suggested anybody has to give up anything. I have not suggested anybody even should give up anything.

I am suggesting the government should actually build what the people of California have voted for and approved funding for.

What's the problem?

No problem. That was the only thing I personally question. I guess we just disagree on that portion, though, i do think it's one of the biggest portions. People say they will do things they don't do all the time. Maybe they will. But the faster and more efficient has to account for dealing with driving off route to a carpool or transit stop and parking, often having to pay for parking, the loss of privacy and being able to rock out loud or smoke a cigarette, weather. I don't think many of these things are thought about by the pollsters. I've watched it happen in Seattle. Get voted in and then not used.

Now, in all fairness, I've seen it in the NW, where it's cold and wet. But I think in S. Cal, people would just as easily stay in their AC cars on hot days, than stand outside and in a sardined mass transit car.

When polls like this are taken, I question whether the people answering have thought out all the scenarios. This is one of those times I think polls could possibly provide a false narrative. Just my opinion.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Of the people I've spoken with the vast majority have said that if it was faster and cheaper they would gladly use public transit for their commute.

It's not presumptuous. It's my prediction.

I have not suggested anybody has to give up anything. I have not suggested anybody even should give up anything.

I am suggesting the government should actually build what the people of California have voted for and approved funding for.

What's the problem?

No problem. That was the only thing I personally question. I guess we just disagree on that portion, though, i do think it's one of the biggest portions. People say they will do things they don't do all the time. Maybe they will. But the faster and more efficient has to account for dealing with driving off route to a carpool or transit stop and parking, often having to pay for parking, the loss of privacy and being able to rock out loud or smoke a cigarette, weather. I don't think many of these things are thought about by the pollsters. I've watched it happen in Seattle. Get voted in and then not used.

Now, in all fairness, I've seen it in the NW, where it's cold and wet. But I think in S. Cal, people would just as easily stay in their AC cars on hot days, than stand outside and in a sardined mass transit car.

When polls like this are taken, I question whether the people answering have thought out all the scenarios. This is one of those times I think polls could possibly provide a false narrative. Just my opinion.

Wait. I just realized what thread we are talking in. Should this convo maybe be in it's own "Mass Transit Thread" or something? I mean it might get bigger than the Mass Melo Thread!!!

 

[Everything Beagle]