Military Spectacle for July 4

  • Thread starter Thread starter PaulinVA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ridgerunner said:
As shown previously, he’s about where Obama was at the same time. "…like never seen be
Click to expand...
Are looking at @PaulinVaA 's 538 data or your own Investor’s Daily editorial that you linked from June 2018?

Here is a screenshot from the 538 showing tracking to date:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Trump has been remarkably steady in his lack of approval. Now, as comparable to comparable points in their first terms, he lags all presidents but Carter, including one-term presidents Ford and GHW Bush.
 
The graph you posted shows Trump and Obama are different by only a few percentage points. To most normal people that would qualify as “about where Obama was at the same time”. I suppose you would like to quibble over the exact definition of “about” though.
 
PaulinVA said:
40.png
Jeanne_S:
If Trump hadn’t won HC would be the president. No ther Republican could have beat her.Trump gets credit for all the winning,like him or not you can’t spin the truth
Click to expand...
Sorry, Jeanne, that’s just wishful revisionist thinking.

Clinton had a 54% unfavorable rating and Trump had a 58% unfavorable rating. More people voted for Clinton than Trump.

I will speculate that any Republican candidate would have had a lower unfavorable rating than Clinton and would have won. In 2016 neither candidate was all that great. Also, any other Democrat would have had a lower unfavorable rating and would have beaten Trump.
Click to expand...
Every day gives me another reason I’m glad I voted for Trump.
 
F_Marturana said:
Why would they be described as “built like a Sherman Tank”?
Click to expand...
I don’t think I’ve ever seen either Jayne Mansfield or Marilyn Monroe be described as “built like a Sherman tank,” and a minute on Google isn’t bringing it up, either. Usually, “built like a Sherman tank” means 100% functional, 0% aesthetic. Or it means rugged. Or it means masculine. But those are pretty much the opposite of the aesthetics of either of those two.

So the best guess I can come up with is that whoever said it was putting the emphasis on “built”— fit/stacked/having presence —and couldn’t come up with a good simile, so they threw in “Sherman tank.”

But that’s a total guess, because I didn’t see/hear the original context.
 
Lemuel said:
40.png
PaulinVA:
But you can’t say that more people wanted him to be President.
Click to expand...
No, and you can’t say that more people wanted Hillary to be president, either. If there were such thing as a popular vote, the candidates would have campaigned quite differently and the voter turnout would have been different. I used to live in California. Most of the Republicans I knew, (and I’m not one of them) didn’t bother to vote because the democrat candidate winning California was a foregone conclusion.

If there were such a thing as a popular vote, which there isn’t, I think Trump would have won by a substantial margin. But there isn’t a popular vote and there’s no way to know who was more popular.
Click to expand...
This is true. I know a few Californians who didn’t vote for this reason.
 

"This is not the first time military leaders have signaled their discomfort with potential politicization of the military in recent weeks. In early June, former acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan issued an internal memo to all Pentagon personnel, service members and civilian employees calling on leaders to “reinforce the apolitical nature” of the US military, according to a copy obtained by CNN.

The memo was in response followed reports that the White House Military Office coordinated directly with the Navy’s Seventh Fleet to have the USS John S. McCain hidden from view during Trump’s visit to Japan. The late senator and Trump sparred often."
 
Heaven forbid that the president should honor the military on Independence Day, like every town in the country with a population larger than 10 does.

But in truth, since the liberals politicize everything Trump does, it’s hard for him to do anything at all without their unduly politicizing it.

Your CNN article cited not a single military person who “has concerns” about the event. It does state one high ranking officer who is overseas, and CNN suggests that he might be lying about being unable to be there. But the following are going to attend, no doubt with many others of lesser rank:
Acting Secretary of Defense Mark Esper
Gen. Joseph Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Secretary of the Navy, Richard Spencer
Adm. Bob Burke, Vice Chief of Naval Operations
Lt. Gen. Eric Smith, Deputy Commandant of the US Marine Corps
Acting Air Force Secretary Matthew Donovan
Gen. Stephen Wilson, Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force
Adm. Karl Schultz, US Coast Guard Commandant
Mr. James McPherson, performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of the Army
Lt. Gen. Joseph P. Martin, incoming Vice Chief of Staff of the Army

Just one more garden-variety liberal Trump hatred article.
 
The liberal media is the result of any unpopularity as it has been their job to assist in bringing
down this president since the results of the
election were announced.
The immaturity of the losers has been very
obvious.
 
Ridgerunner,
The Generals are attending because they were ordered to. Attendance does not equal support.

Serious question - do you not see the parallels with authoritarian regimes who parade their military might through the streets? Do you remember the tanks in Tiananmen Square?

From Admiral Kirby:

"The Fourth of July is not a military holiday. We set aside other days to honor our troops: Veterans Day, Memorial Day, Armed Forces Day. Independence Day is about our difficult birth as a nation, about the moral courage it took for people living in 13 disparate colonies to throw off what they called the absolute tyranny of Britain’s King George III.
"

 
Last edited:
Why were people so shocked, dumbfounded and let down when she lost then? Don’t you remember election night?
 
PaulinVA said:
Serious question - do you not see the parallels with authoritarian regimes who parade their military might through the streets? Do you remember the tanks in Tiananmen Square?
Click to expand...
There is a slight difference between a few armored vehicles on static display during a celebration of our nation’s independence, and tanks deploying to attack peaceful protesters.
 
MikeInVA said:
There is a slight difference between a few armored vehicles on static display during a celebration of our nation’s independence, and tanks deploying to attack peaceful protesters.
Click to expand...
I agree, Mike.

I am a veteran. I believe from the bottom of my heart that American troops would not do anything like Tiananmen Square. I also don’t believe that they would support Trump’s desire to be a tin-pot dictator.
 
PaulinVA said:
I also don’t believe that they would support Trump’s desire to be a tin-pot dictator.
Click to expand...
How is this display any different than the dozens of military displays held on military installations across the US every year?
 
7_Sorrows said:
The immaturity of the losers has been very
obvious.
Click to expand...
Allow me to dissent. The liberal media want the Dem party to be the only party with any power, and permanently. It’s necessary to their protection of abortion forever; their most heartfelt value.
 
FirstFiveEighth said:
I just feel sorry for the guys who had a four day weekend this weekend who were suddenly told Friday that they would instead be standing around for people to gawk at and/or insult on the National Mall instead of drinking beer and watching fireworks with friends at home. I hope they get compensated with something while in DC.
Click to expand...
This…
 
In all this silly “popular vote” talk, I never see it taken into account how many Republicans did not vote because either they saw their state as a forgone conclusion one way or the other (California, Alabama), or weren’t sure Trump meant what he said. How many thousands or millions of votes is that? We simply don’t know. I know I didn’t vote for both those reasons plus I was absentee, but if I thought there was any chance Clinton would have taken my state I would have voted against her for sure. So claiming that Clinton was actually the preferred choice for the majority of registered voters is just an inference, and a largely irrelevant one at that. People make voting decisions based on the electoral college, not to tally their preference for the benefit of pollsters and statisticians.

I watched election night Democrats and the media were stunned that they could lose. Sucks to suck. Democrats are currently trying to rig the deck based on what they think Beni fits them. This “national popular vote pact” will last all he way until a Republican wins the popular vote and Cali et all have to give all their electoral votes to a Republican when the state voted overwhelmingly democratic. Then we will hear a bunch of whining about how the electoral college balances out power to states.
 
Last edited:
And…

#BoycottTrump4thofJuly trending number 1 on twitter in washington.
MikeInVA said:
How is this display any different than the dozens of military displays held on military installations across the US every year?
Click to expand...
It’s true that there are static displays at open houses all the time on posts and bases throughout our country. Only this is the National Mall and it’s to feed the ego of the President.

Just two tanks and two Bradleys is pretty pathetic, anyway. They are not part of some greater military display or salute. I would not be surprised if they end up somewhere near the VIP area so they can be in the TV shots of the speech.
 
PaulinVA said:
Serious question - do you not see the parallels with authoritarian regimes who parade their military might through the streets? Do you remember the tanks in Tiananmen Square?
Click to expand...
I am a thorough-going anti-Trumpian, and I have suspicions about his fondness for dictators. But didn’t Mr Trump pick up his wish for military might parading from the French?
PaulinVA said:
the moral courage it took for people living in 13 disparate colonies to throw off what they called the absolute tyranny of Britain’s King George III.
Click to expand...
Sorry, this is a bête noire of mine. I shall not derail this thread by arguing that they were wrong to call it that (but they were! 🙂 )
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top