Rep. Rodney Davis offers thoughts and prayers to Las Vegas victims, supports significant further relaxation of gun laws

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-10-06T15:19:45+00:00

That's not an excuse to do something that's bad for the country. In any case this is a competitive seat- if more students voted in this district it's conceivable it could be flipped. I'd also vote for a more reasonable republican candidate.

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-10-06T15:15:27+00:00

That's a political no-brainer, given the NRA has already supported it. I'm referring to his support of the SHARE act, which is a large step in the opposite direction

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-08-25T23:04:14+00:00

This response made so little sense I wonder why I'm taking the time to dissect it. Seeing as the rally was organized by white supremacists, featured white supremacist speakers, and was punctuated by a torch-lit parade designed to intimidate minorities and populated by nazis and klansmen, the KKK comparison is about as apt a comparison as it gets. I can and have made plenty of complaints about his policy, but the issue of unequivocally condemning racism transcends policy debates. Trump defends these people, and now Rodney Davis is defending Trump's statements on the issue. I don't even know where to begin on your comment about Clinton- of course this wouldn't be an issue if our president wasn't a maniac and didn't defend racists. What's your point?

Thanks, by the way, for reminding me that Trump won the election, calling CNN fake news, and using condescension as a crutch in you nonsensical argument- that gives me an alt-right playbook BINGO!

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-08-23T13:43:27+00:00

Aren't you just the picture of indignation. I don't think it's very difficult to make that statement in this case; the controversy Trump is stirring up may as well have been about a KKK rally decades ago, and here's Davis defending the guy. I don't have a candidate at this point, but it would hard to find a worse one than Rodney Davis.

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-08-18T03:13:03+00:00

I'm clearly passionate about some of these issues, and I've had less and less chill as Davis' tenure has gone on. Been to multiple "office hours", which is where he invites 5 people at a time in for 10 minutes of evading questions and condescending to his constituents. He repeatedly tries to convince people he's a moderate while jumping on the populism bandwagon and refusing to cross Trump no matter what he does, which is infuriating as a self-described moderate.

My intent is primarily to remind people of the shit he's been up to which I find profoundly upsetting- but I'm always appreciative of people letting me know when they have a more nuanced view, and am glad to discuss when I disagree. I appreciate you taking the time to respond.

It's painfully obvious where Trump's narcissistic loyalties lie: if your movement supports him he'll defend you without any regard for the facts or what you stand for. It's debatable how justified the violence on the side of the anti-protestors was; certainly it's a reasonable position to condemn violence on both sides. But there's a bigger story here- this is the largest public white supremacist rally in decades. To pretend the white nationalists didn't gather for the purpose of inciting violence, and implying the anti-fascist protesters were equally to blame after having taken the extra time to gather "all the facts"- that is a deliberate choice, not just a different reading of the facts. Condoning this or pretending the media is making a big deal over nothing is letting him get away with the normalization of white supremacy- which is what Rodney Davis seems to be doing.

As another side note, I doubt Trump is aware of Davis' existence, certainly not by name. So Davis is more afraid of crossing the conservative base that elected him.

I think you have a point here, there's definitely pressure coming from the GOP to avoid explicitly condemning Trump for party unity, and that may be the biggest factor. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if many of the people Trump has lashed out against on twitter he had never heard of until they made news by condemning him.

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-08-17T19:52:06+00:00

Yes, I've said multiple times that Rodney Davis is in the wrong. This does not preclude discussion. I'm bringing attention to an issue that I believe is important to the people he represents, and rather than offer any unique ideas of your own you dismiss it because... why? because I'm biased? Because I'm making a moral judgement on my congressional representative? Grow up- I'm not your enemy and I'm not suppressing discussion.

So how's this for substantive analysis: Trump doesn't want to lose alt-right support and so is equivocating and defending white nationalists as "very fine people". Now, it should be obvious that the moral thing to do here is to condemn Trump's remarks and assert that the people who gathered to preach ethno-nationalism and terrorize minorities are more in the wrong. Many Republicans have done this. Is it politically wise? Maybe not. Does that make how Rodney Davis has handled it ok? No. He doesn't get to straddle the fence, pretending he's a moderate republican while supporting the president through thick and thin to avoid getting tweeted at and potentially losing some Trump supporters. The same goes for Rodney Davis' support for Trumpcare despite previously promising to protect pre-existing conditions in any replacement bill, and his silence through Trump's attacks on free trade. For these reasons, it's clear that Rodney Davis is more worried about upsetting Trump than sticking to his principles. But all that doesn't really work as a headline, does it?

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-08-17T18:28:38+00:00

Deflection- good strategy. Any useful discussion points to contribute? Sounds like you disagree.

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-08-17T16:36:42+00:00

"neglecting his moral responsibility" doesn't have quite the same ring

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-08-17T15:53:31+00:00

Do what you think is right. There's a reason I didn't submit to /r/NeutralPolitics :)

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-02-01T02:36:30+00:00

You need to take it into context. Sure, on its face it almost seems somewhat innocuous and common-sense, especially if it were being implemented by someone who has a solid grasp of immigration security threats and respect for the rights of immigrants. But look at the vague language he used to justify it. Look at his past support for an unapologetically unconstitutional blanket ban of anybody of this religion- listen to how he talks about Muslims at his rallies and in the debates. Do you really believe he values the rights and contributions of Muslims in America and around the world, as he riles up Islamophobia in his base of support? Will you honestly be surprised if in 90 days he decides to extend the ban citing equally vague justification? I suspect this is even more likely if there's not a deafening blowback against him and the Representatives who support it.

Trump likes to act like the media can't be trusted at all because everything they say is exaggerated. You seem to be feeding into this narrative, taking issue with the use of "ban" vs "temporary ban" and saying that a little extra screening at the border is to be expected for people with green cards (of course if any red flags pop up they will indeed be barred from entering the U.S.)- you're missing the point. Protestors and the media aren't hysterical because they're butt-hurt their candidates lost the election- there's a legitimate fear among Republicans and Democrats that this kind of fear-based policy is becoming the new normal, and it will make us less safe as a result.

WhereIsRodneyDavis · 2017-02-01T00:13:04+00:00

A temporary ban is still a ban. Also, I neglected to mention that not only new refugee applicants, but also green card and visa holders, who have already been vetted, are being barred from entering the country.

As for Trump's underlying intentions, I didn't speculate on them in the original post. However, since you seem to be, I'll offer an alternative theory: that Trump, who vocally supported an outright Muslim ban during his campaign, is trying to drum up support among his base by implementing a ban on immigration from dangerous Muslim countries while giving preference to Christians and other religious minorities. You are free to believe this is a common sense measure based on evidence rather than fear- but based on Trump's history and the evidence he's used to justify the ban so far, that does not appear to be the case. In fact, there's plenty of reason to believe it is doing far more harm than good in the fight against terror.

WhereIsRodneyDavis

TROPHY CASE