The new, new, new, etc...Trump

reincarnation

https://www.buzzfeed.com/davidmack/reboot?utm_term=.le1nZZeYyM#.mbRr99wEba

 

Trump has a bad habit of self-destructing every time he opens his mouth.

 

Ooops......

Who keeps changing themselves?

 

One of the things I never understood about Clinton was how she/they moved to New York and convinced people that she was a New Yorker and understood them, etc. That might have been her greatest trick.

 

There are many, many, many people out there who vote either for celebrity status, or for anyone with the (D) after their name. We see it every election cycle in Massachusetts; Scott Brown was a great US Senator, but Chief Spreading Bull Elizabeth Warren had the almighty (D) and the Harvard pedigree (which she lied to get), so Brown was given two-in-the-hat in November.

That's from someone who's been unenrolled (used to be called Independent until an actual Independent Party, an oxymoron if there ever was one, sprung up in the Bay State) for many years. I've voted for Democrats in the past, mostly local elections, and would again in the future, provided I liked their positions on issues.

 

New York, especially the city, has a pretty constant churn of people coming and going. Who is a New Yorker? Anyone who moves here and identifies as a New Yorker.

I've talked to people from some other states that have a sense of birthright identity tied up around their state. Some people I met from Texas, for example, feel that only people born and raised in Texas get to be "real Texans" for example.

New York, both in and outside the city, has a long history of immigrant populations. We're cool with the idea of people coming to New York and declaring it their home state.

The fact is Bill Clinton has an office in Manhattan. He's blocks away from other New Yorkers who have offices in Manhattan and come from much farther away than Arkansas.

I've not met anyone in New York who feels that she did a bad job of representing New York in the Senate. Nor have I met anyone who had anything particularly negative to say about her successor Kirsten Gillibrand. Though there are plenty of people, myself included, who are not exactly Chuck Schumer fans and he's lived in New York for a lot longer than HRC.

 

Maybe I'm just a small town kid but just because you move in and "identify" as someone who lives in my town doesn't mean you know anything about the town, the people, the challenges/problems. It doesn't mean, to me, that you can represent me.

 

That's true. But New York State is not a "small town" with homogeneous issues. I can assure you that the people of Manhattan have very different issues from the people of Brooklyn. And the people of Syracuse have issues that are on a completely different planet.

New York Senators don't represent a few counties or a specific town. They represent a very large, very diverse (geographically, economically, culturally etc) state. Even if you were born and raised in New York City you likely have no concept of the issues that effect the North Country or the Buffalo Niagara region and someone from one of those areas has no concept of the issues affecting people in the city of New York.

So whether the person is from New York or not doesn't really matter. Being from Syracuse a person would have an incredibly limited scope of knowledge of the issues and concerns that face New Yorkers every day. And you can't be from all of New York. Even people like me, from Brooklyn now living in Syracuse, have a massive time gap. The issues I encountered in Brooklyn, when I was a kid by the way, are many years old in a city that has undergone massive changes during that time.

I imagine, to an extent, that this is an issue in any large state and its senators. But I think in those states people tend to flex a bit more on who they feel, for Senate at least, is capable of representing them.

 

Oddly, no one can name any Hillary Clinton accomplishments.

Gillibrand used to be my Representative (mixed Dem and Rep district) and I gave her credit for sending the most straightforward questionnaire I could recall. Then she was appointed as replacement for Senator Hillary, spent a day touring the state with Schumer and emerged as a far left dimwit.

 

That doesn't affect me but I am waiting for the first Mongolian president. That would be so way far super cool.

 

If you think that Kirsten Gillibrand is "far left" then you are operating on a political spectrum that is horrifically skewed. You want to argue that Bernie Sanders is "far left?" OK. Fine. In the grand scheme of Washington he's about as far left as any elected official. There are obviously people who never get elected who are even more to the left but, in terms of people actually in Senate, he's about as far left as you can get.

But Kirsten Gillibrand? Please. She's a significantly more attractive version of Schumer. Both are NYC Democrats. They sit at a fancy restaurant eating frog legs with Jon Corsine laughing at how much they made in speaking fees. You can criticize that. I certainly do. But labeling any of the big business friendly people who rely on Wall Street money to keep their jobs as "far left" is just way off base.

 

Well, I'd say that's because she's a career politician. Politicians don't have accomplishments. Some of them accomplished stuff before they ran for office. Some accomplished stuff after they left office. But during the time that they are actually in office they are spending their time horse trading for votes. Legislation they propose has to entice other politicians to vote for it. And those politicians won't unless that legislation is acceptable to their lobbyists who represent the special interest groups that keep those people in office.

This goes for both sides of the aisle. There are no accomplishments.

Legislators have a very straight forward job. Write and propose laws and then vote. That's really it. They don't make furniture. They don't fix cars. They put words on paper which then becomes an intangible law provided it directly or indirectly enriches people who were already rich and influential.

 

The Castro, Chavez and Maduro clans are wealthy. Are they far left?

 

Re-read what I wrote. I never said that wealthy people cannot be far left. Chavez seized private enterprises and socialized them. That's pretty far left.

Kirsten Gillibrand was a corporate attorney for Big Tobacco before she was elected. Does that sound like she is a harbinger of socialism? A warrior for the proletariat?

Jon Corsine was CEO of Goldman Sachs. Same question.

 

Yeah, I get it. Probably one of the reasons I don't live there.

 

That's some rhetoric for the dupes. The movers and shakers want government control because who then controls government controls all.

 

My point is that it is absolutely ridiculous to paint a corporate attorney as "far left." A far left politician would be occupying Wall Street. The closest Gillibrand comes to "Occupy Wall Street" is the fact that she had an office down there before, and likely will have one there after, she's done with politics.