Republicans support nepotism

February 7, 2018, 10:50 am

Agree8 Disagree17

32%
68%

The debate "Republicans support nepotism" was started by Nemiroff on February 7, 2018, 10:50 am. 8 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 17 people are on the disagree side. People are starting to choose their side. It looks like most people are against to this statement.

Nemiroff posted 17 arguments to the agreers part.
Ematio posted 8 arguments, ChangeMyMind posted 5 arguments, DarthLoquacious posted 1 argument, Nemiroff posted 3 arguments to the disagreers part.

Nemiroff, FiddleStorm, lachlan, historybuff and 4 visitors agree.
Ematio, Slymcfly, hassan, batmanfan777, ChangeMyMind, DarthLoquacious, brontoraptor, bruh352 and 9 visitors disagree.

Nemiroff
replied to...

"As far as nepotism goes, it is not illegal for the white house to do it. By law, nepotism is only illegal within an agency, and since the oval office isn't that... it's just morally wrong. You know... like cheating on your spouse. but hey, I guess the president of the US doesn't have to be a moral leader right?"

they are both morally wrong, perhaps moral was to vague a word for me to use, but they are not similar at all.

nepotism is a moral misdeed against the nation and the people you represent. it is a moral wrong similar to corruption. cheating on your spouse is a moral wrong against your spouse and family. it is not official businesses conducted in the name of the people.

if you still confuse these 2, I have no idea how to better explain it. make your closing statement and we will move on. I didn't think it would be that difficult to understand that official representatives represent you in official capacities, not in every aspect of their personal life.

2 months ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

regarding hillary:

Reagan's first lady promoted the war on drugs, Barbara tackled education. both systems equivalent to healthcare. nutrition was of vital importance at the time as obesity and other chronic diseases are our #1 killer, not an insignificant task imo.

the point is not what topic they choose to tackle but what powers, access, and clearance they are given. with the exception of the trumps, the answer is none. all they did was make a plan that any citizen including me and you can do. the difference is that they had a national stage to promote it. and nothing else.

(this is just a copy paste of what I had already said)

2 months ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

where do you get claiming that I pick and choose my statements. yes I said I wouldn't have picked bill for moral leadership, but 1 statement doesn't show a contradiction. I have repeatedly, including recently, stated I do not care about trumps infidelities or the access Hollywood tape!!!

also, how are you confusing actions elected officials do officially as your representatives, and what they do in their private lives? if a leader's primary position is to lower taxes and people elect/relect him, you seriously don't think his constituents mostly support lower taxes? of course it does! however his choice of favorite movie genre says nothing about the people.

I don't understand why you exaggerate my points to nonsensical conclusions, while also jumping to conclusions like in my first paragraph.

2 months ago

I personally care more about you picking and choosing for the sake of argument. I believe in personal responsibility, a concept lost in many citizens today. Having said that, you have got to measure everyone by the same stick, otherwise my job is too easy (but I get nothing out of it.) To say that you didn't elect Bill as a moral leader?

As far as nepotism goes, it is not illegal for the white house to do it. By law, nepotism is only illegal within an agency, and since the oval office isn't that... it's just morally wrong. You know... like cheating on your spouse. but hey, I guess the president of the US doesn't have to be a moral leader right?

Oh, and guess who settled that concept of "agency...."?

The Clinton's when the world flipped out that the first lady was gonna head the health care reform. Finally, I say again, do not confuse my lack of empathy for Democrats as me identifying as Republican; because I'm not. Neither party offers enough views that I agree with for me to want to claim membership.

2 months ago

and as for bill, I didn't elect him to be a moral leader (actually didn't even vote in those). couldn't care less if he did do that. that's his personal life and not something he did as an official duty. nepotism is an official duty as it is assigning official posts. and although I couldn't care less about a leaders personal infidelities, can you say the same thing about nepotism?

2 months ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

I didn't compare politicians to murderers, darth did. I separated them by the fact that one is a loose cannon criminal and the other is an elected person acting in your name.

and as I said, it's not about what they do but whether you let them do it without any blowback. the problem isn't that he happened to do it, but that none of you seem to care.

2 months ago

wow Nemiroff... did you seriously just compare a politician to a mass murderer? That's nonsense man.

Would it be fair to say that because Democrats elected Clinton and he cheated on his wife right under everybody's noses that Democrats support infidelity?

Lest not even mention what happened to anyone who'd opposed president Trump thus far: got fired.

2 months ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

I didn't elect the Vegas and parkland shooters, but many republicans did elect trump, and he acts in their name, with authority they gave him.

the fact that nepotism happened is not republican's fault. the fact that none of them seem to care or make defeatist excuses that they can't control the people they elect to represent them in American democracy is baffling.

2 months ago
DarthLoquacious
replied to...

Your argument of "doing nothing is the same thing as support". To that... ignorance my friend. Let me break this one down for you. What have you done directly after the Vegas shooting? Ill wait? Nothing? So by your "logic" you support Mass shootings? Let me make a different point. What did YOU do after the parkland shooting in response? hopefully you did not saw your gun in half and commit a felony like some uber-intelligent lawmakers.. but I am also willing to bet you did nothing. Thus you support killing children?

2 months ago

Then in this case, I believe you owe this debate chain proof of the support that Republicans have provided. I hope you do not come back and say that Republicans allowed Ivanka Trump and her husband to be given positions in the cabinet; I hope you can see pass the party affiliation and understand that there's a boss-employee relationship at that point and that Trump has been firing all those who oppose him.

I refuse to believe that every Republican supports nepotism, banning of Mexicans and Middleeasterns, arming teachers, or the war on the middle East, as much as I refuse to believe that every Democrat is a tree-hugging hippie that loves smoking weed, is anti-gun and wants to allow just anyone in the country.

It's just not a thing. I do not dismiss that each party has characteristics and a belief core; but nepotism, it's a stereotype AT BEST and that's taking everything that you've provided, and dismissing everything I've said. I personally see no proof that there's a clear support from right wingers, but as always, I'm open to more data.

2 months ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

I think your confusing practice for support. are you saying it's impossible for someone to support something they don't practice? someone who doesn't drink alcohol can't possibly promote the right of others to partake?

how do you explain the fact that there has been absolutely zero outcry over this from any right wing source? do you think that is normal or even acceptable?

2 months ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

Reagan's first lady promoted the war on drugs, Barbara tackled education. both systems equivalent to healthcare. nutrition was of vital importance at the time as obesity and other chronic diseases are our #1 killer, not an insignificant task imo.

the point is not what topic they choose to tackle but what powers, access, and clearance they are given. with the exception of the trumps, the answer is none. all they did was make a plan that any citizen including me and you can do. the difference is that they had a national stage to promote it. and nothing else.

2 months ago

Well, let's see. Michelle Obama was in charge of making the youth of America lose weight, whereas Hillary Clinton ran a healthcare program. I'm sorry, those two do not hold the same level of impact for a "typical first lady" pet program. Maybe this is just me.

Second, this debate was titled "Republicans support Nepotism". So I'm merely trying to stay on topic; I believe you have got to prove that the Republican party makes nepotism a common practice. As a whole! If the debate was titled, "Donald Trump supports Nepotism", I would have just taken a vote, because that one is hard to argue: he obviously does.

Believe it or not, I think human beings should be measured by their achievements and actions. So when it comes to hooking up a family member with a job and their sole qualification is sharing some DNA with the employer, it is outrageous.

Talk is cheap, but so are blanket statements; maybe they're just a pet peeve of mine. And as far as action goes, I cannot do much but to discourage Nepotism and vote smartly. But I am open to suggestions.

2 months ago

based on your lack of outrage it appears that you are ok with nepotism in practice, regardless of how many times you make lipservice in calling it shitty in theory.

talk is cheap, where's the action?

2 months ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

Hillary Clinton was given a role typical of any first lady. a powerless role to promote a pet project. no votes, no power. unlike Jared Kushner and ivanka who are thrust into the inner of inner circles, handling international relations (while not divesting a penny from their businesses) and given (prematurely) top security clearance.

I'm not saying every Republican would do nepotism in their administration, I'm saying there is rampant nepotism RIGHT NOW, and none of you are even talking about it.

and despite the fact that you agree it is a very shitty thing, I see no outrage coming from you either, in fact just defense and an exaggerated misdirection to a previous, no longer in power administration. if you believe bill was guilty of nepotism it is a worthy conversation, but shouldn't we focus on the ongoing abuse of nepotism happening as we speak first?

2 months ago

It would be hard to argue to defend Trump, but just because he's the highest ranked Republican it doesn't mean all his actions are a blanket for the entire party (excluding obvious party-affiliated beliefs). When Bill Clinton was president, he appointed his wife to lead the health care reform (or something somewhat related).

Nepotism is a clear disregard for those who are otherwise qualified, and a disregard for the people, as the decision to put someone blood related in charge appears to be more important than the betterment of society. Having said this, I insist, nepotism knows no party affiliation, just shitty people. Therefore the statement that republicans support Nepotism is to me, unsubstantiated. We are going to end up listing examples, and I'll find other non republicans who have done the same.

2 months ago

it's hard to argue with when trump is giving jobs to family members which just brushes the edge of being illegal.

2 months ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

afflict*
:x

2 months ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

certainly no one in history has every cried out "I love nepotism". yet it is the silence that is screaming their support.

nepotism is a disease that can inflict any side at any time, but currently it is inflicting the right, and in response, nothing.

2 months ago

Whoa guys.... Are we reaching here.... I personally do not think that Nepotism is present with Republicans only... I think it's something shitty people do; there's no color (red or blue) assigned to it

2 months ago

I feel this is a very important threat to our democracy and that the denial is strong.

bump.

2 months ago

bump

2 months, 1 week ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

yes I do support Hillary Clinton.

I was expecting all Americans to be against nepotism, but they didn't really need to act against it... until it came up and became (or should have become) a central issue suddenly. I act when there is an imperative, not arbitrary or theoretical.

3 months, 1 week ago

Sir, how many things do you act against that you don't support?

3 months, 1 week ago

Do you support Hillary Clinton?

3 months, 1 week ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

demand that he remove his family..

I'm sorry I don't understand your question, are you in support of doing nothing and not caring? do you think nepotism is fine for the highest office in the land and a precedent to follow in the future?

3 months, 1 week ago

What do you want them to do?

3 months, 1 week ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

doing nothing is the same thing as support. democrats made an outcry, republicans remained silent, and their leaders approved with no reprecussions

3 months, 2 weeks ago

But even if that is the case, Trump does not represent the belief of all Republicans

3 months, 2 weeks ago

Are you referring to the fact that Trump puts his children in positions of power?

3 months, 2 weeks ago

Well honestly speaking, I don't know what your example is. Would you like to present it?

3 months, 2 weeks ago

Lol oops

3 months, 2 weeks ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

thank you, but i think your reply was for a different thread. this one is on nepotism, not immigration.

3 months, 2 weeks ago

Lol that was funny. Trump is not against all immigration being eliminated. He's for enforcing our law (In the case of illegal immigration) and protecting america from threats (Concerning Islam.) I feel the big issue deals with Islam, so I'll focus on that. We know that most terrorists are islamic, yes? So under that assumption, we know that with all the refugees there must be some in there who hold those beliefs.

To illustrate it, a man walks up to your front door with a bowl of skittles. He says some of them are poisonous, but the rest are fine. Would you feed thpse skittles to your family?

3 months, 2 weeks ago
Nemiroff
replied to...

interesting redirection, but I'm talking about national leadership here, not Wal-Mart

I know you know what my example will be, so let's see you trump it.

3 months, 2 weeks ago

It's kind of dishonest to lump all Republicans under that idea. Most (Not all) republicans believe that you should get to your position by merit. The nepotism issue sounds more like a democrat issue, concering the whole affirmative action thing. They're putting unqualified people in colleges and jobs just because of their race.

3 months, 2 weeks ago

or at least have a much higher tolerance for it then I would expect

3 months, 2 weeks ago
Discuss "Republicans support nepotism" politics
Add an argument!
Use the arrow keys to navigate between statements. Press "A" to agree and press "D" to disagree.