El Presidente Trump

Wanderer78 · 03-01-2017 12:46PM

RobertKK wrote:

I do think people are wrong to write off anybody before the race has started. Trump was written off when he announced he would run. He was written off against Hillary. Now he is being written off before he has even done anything as President. Then there are others who call him the clown...I believe one can be sceptical, but I also believe people need to be given a chance as well, and that rule applies to everyone including Trump, only then will we know.

Many very well experienced political commentators are worried about this man and his administration, leading me to be worried. He's not particularly intelligent, and dreadfully ignorant, very unpredictable, he's effectively a big bully. His administration is filled with climate change deniars and people that have advocated for deregulation of industry's such as the financial sector etc in the past. This administration really doesn't look good.

RobertKK · 03-01-2017 01:02PM

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Many very well experienced political commentators are worried about this man and his administration, leading me to be worried. He's not particularly intelligent, and dreadfully ignorant, very unpredictable, he's effectively a big bully. His administration is filled with climate change deniars and people that have advocated for deregulation of industry's such as the financial sector etc in the past. This administration really doesn't look good.

They are worried as the status quo is no longer the policy, that regime change is something that Trump has rejected, and that foreign policy is not a 'us versus them' when it comes to Russia.
The experienced ones always need a bogeyman, like they had with WMD, the rubbish about Gaddafi and Benghazi, Assad in Syria, meanwhile going easy on the biggest terrorist supporting nation that is Saudi Arabia.

If he is not particularly intelligent, it doesn't say much for his opponents whom he beat comfortably. They must not have been intelligent enough to put together a winning campaign despite wanting Trump to be their opponent, and getting help from the media.

Christy42 · 03-01-2017 01:17PM

RobertKK wrote: »

That is ignoring there was no flip flop on TTIP.
There was no flip flop on bringing jobs back to the US.
There was no flip flop on being more business friendly with lower corporation tax and an incentive for US companies to bring offshore money back to the US.
There has been no flip flop on opposing regime change.
There has been no flip flop on improving relations with Russia.
There has been no flip flop when it comes to China.

You are ignoring his flip flop on the regime change on Libya because? I gave you the link before. Also Iraq was a regime change he changed his mind on. And denied having changed his mind on.
He also has not brought the jobs he could back to the US (his own company). Though it is true he has not flip flopped on the trade agreement. As pointless as reversing that would be.

He absolutely flip flopped on whether or not China should give back that drone as well as whether or not they are behind the global warming conspiracy.

Wanderer78 · 03-01-2017 01:19PM

RobertKK wrote:

They are worried as the status quo is no longer the policy, that regime change is something that Trump has rejected, and that foreign policy is not a 'us versus them' when it comes to Russia. The experienced ones always need a bogeyman, like they had with WMD, the rubbish about Gaddafi and Benghazi, Assad in Syria, meanwhile going easy on the biggest terrorist supporting nation that is Saudi Arabia.

RobertKK wrote:

If he is not particularly intelligent, it doesn't say much for his opponents whom he beat comfortably. They must not have been intelligent enough to put together a winning campaign despite wanting Trump to be their opponent, and getting help from the media.

Not at all, they have right to be worried, many of these commentators have disliked most administrations particularly the most recent ones, for the right reasons to, I'm finding I'm using this term a lot now, 'everything is different, but nothing has changed'! Trump supporters are deluding themselves that things will be different under this administration, and I suspect many that find themselves in trouble in American society now, will very likely be still in trouble in a couple of years, possibly worse.

We obviously have a very different interpretation of intelligence, I've always liked that Chomsky quote, 'uninformed, irrational decisions', I.e. trump used this well known 'marketing technique' to 'sell' his campaign to voters, I.e. they were manipulated by a 'salesman'!

He's a very dangerous and unpredictable person to be a major world leader, be aware!

Christy42 · 03-01-2017 01:20PM

RobertKK wrote: »

They are worried as the status quo is no longer the policy, that regime change is something that Trump has rejected, and that foreign policy is not a 'us versus them' when it comes to Russia.
The experienced ones always need a bogeyman, like they had with WMD, the rubbish about Gaddafi and Benghazi, Assad in Syria, meanwhile going easy on the biggest terrorist supporting nation that is Saudi Arabia.

If he is not particularly intelligent, it doesn't say much for his opponents whom he beat comfortably. They must not have been intelligent enough to put together a winning campaign despite wanting Trump to be their opponent, and getting help from the media.

He is a salesman. You don't say Tom Brady is dumb because he loses a football game. You also don't say a politician is dumb only on the evidence of losing a political race. He is charismatic and won on the basis of this. People trusted him in spite of all evidence. That is his skill.

The fact that people keep trying to link this skill to intellegence is silly. Hawking might be a terrible politician at winning a campaign but is certainly a genius. Gwb won two elections and is an idiot.

InTheTrees · 03-01-2017 01:20PM

RobertKK wrote: »

They are worried as the status quo is no longer the policy, that regime change is something that Trump has rejected

He hasnt rejected anything. He told anyone what they wanted to hear to get elected.

Maybe you missed him threatening North Korea yesterday?

InTheTrees · 03-01-2017 01:27PM

RobertKK wrote: »

A debt that seems to double every 8 years at this stage and it will be an enormous challenge for Trump.

A challenge? You honestly think he cares? Does anyone seriously think that the trump administration is anything but a massive cash grab by trump and his cronies? They want to get as much as they can for themselves and then get out.

Seriously? All this waffle about the rust belt. What on earth do you think he's actually going to do for those people? he doesnt give a sh*t about them.

The first thing on the GOP agenda is cutting off their healthcare ffs.

Trent Houseboat · 03-01-2017 01:31PM

Does it count as a flip flop that he said he would impose greater taxes on companies who were moving jobs abroad and is now actively paying one to not move some but still move most?

Of course not, that was a stroke of genius.

RobertKK · 03-01-2017 01:43PM

Christy42 wrote: »

You are ignoring his flip flop on the regime change on Libya because? I gave you the link before. Also Iraq was a regime change he changed his mind on. And denied having changed his mind on.
He also has not brought the jobs he could back to the US (his own company). Though it is true he has not flip flopped on the trade agreement. As pointless as reversing that would be.

He absolutely flip flopped on whether or not China should give back that drone as well as whether or not they are behind the global warming conspiracy.

Because he did not change his stance on Libya within the campaign.
Only idiots would still support regime change after Libya and his opponent was an idiot.

RobertKK · 03-01-2017 01:44PM

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

Does it count as a flip flop that he said he would impose greater taxes on companies who were moving jobs abroad and is now actively paying one to not move some but still move most?

Of course not, that was a stroke of genius.

Not a stroke of genius but saving some jobs better than no jobs, the word would be pragmatic.

Christy42 · 03-01-2017 01:47PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Because he did not change his stance on Libya within the campaign.
Only idiots would still support regime change after Libya and his opponent was an idiot.

Great. He didn't change his mind on this issue within this brief window of time. Ffs he even flip flopped on whether he would have intervened several years ago. He only admitted he supported a regime change because he was shown a video of it

03-01-2017 01:47PM

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Hannity is some "journalist"

He was asking telling Assange to say that the information he got was not from Russia....:p he is joke

Reagan will be turning in his grave with how the GOP are selling out to the Russians shamefull stuff

There's a very interesting write up (The Toxoplasma of Rage - Part II) about the exact thing you've just done here.. The riskier the angle or the more controversial, the greater the social capital someone gains by backing it.

Certain answers to moral dilemmas can also send signals. For example, a Catholic man who opposes the use of condoms demonstrates to others (and to himself!) how faithful and pious a Catholic he is, thus gaining social credibility. Like the diamond example, this signaling is more effective if it centers upon something otherwise useless. If the Catholic had merely chosen not to murder, then even though this is in accord with Catholic doctrine, it would make a poor signal because he might be doing it for other good reasons besides being Catholic – just as he might buy eyeglasses for reasons beside being rich. It is precisely because opposing condoms is such a horrendous decision that it makes such a good signal.

So in this case, you know that Hannity was asking Assange a Yes or No question summarised as "Can you in all honesty say that this stuff didn't come from Russia". But because this is an anti-Trump thread and you want to be seen a prominent aggressor, you deliberately misinterpreted what Hannity said so that it reads like "Assange, please say Russia didn't do it".

This is a great indicator of the levels you'll go to to be anti-Trump and to others here, it's very impressive. You've established that you'll go to any length and even sacrifice your intellect to oppose this man.

If it's how you want to present yourself and you want to gain the kudos from other Trump-haters, you're more than welcome to. Just don't expect anyone with a decent level of self-respect to acknowledge your analysis.

InTheTrees · 03-01-2017 01:55PM

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Ethics who needs ethics, GOP guts and removes independence from the ethics committee. I thought he was going to drain the swamp? :mad:

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/02/politics/office-of-congressional-ethics-oversight-of-ethics-committee-amendment/

This is just unbelievable.

The republicans are scraping the ethics rules for congress.

Yay! Bring on the corruption!

Save

RobertKK · 03-01-2017 01:57PM

Christy42 wrote: »

Great. He didn't change his mind on this issue within this brief window of time. Ffs he even flip flopped on whether he would have intervened several years ago. He only admitted he supported a regime change because he was shown a video of it

If one doesn't learn by hindsight, but want to continue the same disastrous policies then there is a problem.
The problem in this area lost.

InTheTrees · 03-01-2017 01:58PM

Deleted User wrote: »

So in this case, you know that Hannity was asking Assange a Yes or No question summarised as "Can you in all honesty say that this stuff didn't come from Russia". But because this is an anti-Trump thread and you want to be seen a prominent aggressor, you deliberately misinterpreted what Hannity said so that it reads like "Assange, please say Russia didn't do it".

It is a highly sympathetic interview. Its certainly not impartial. Plainly they're both on the same page as regards getting their message out.

RobertKK · 03-01-2017 01:59PM

Hannity and Trump, one is the hand, the other is a glove that fits...

InTheTrees · 03-01-2017 02:00PM

RobertKK wrote: »

If one doesn't learn by hindsight, but want to continue the same disastrous policies then there is a problem.
The problem in this area lost.

Can you explain to us why the congressional ethics regulations have to be scrapped?

03-01-2017 02:02PM

InTheTrees wrote: »

It is a highly sympathetic interview. Its certainly not impartial. Plainly they're both on the same page as regards getting their message out.

That's no excuse for misinterpreting it.

InTheTrees · 03-01-2017 02:05PM

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a great indicator of the levels you'll go to to be anti-Trump and to others here, it's very impressive. You've established that you'll go to any length and even sacrifice your intellect to oppose this man.

Well I'm not hearing any of the trump supporters offer anything to defend his policies except endless analysis of the election.

PopePalpatine · 03-01-2017 02:12PM

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Ethics who needs ethics, GOP guts and removes independence from the ethics committee. I thought he was going to drain the swamp? :mad:

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/02/politics/office-of-congressional-ethics-oversight-of-ethics-committee-amendment/

B-b-but Hillary!

RasTa · 03-01-2017 02:14PM

Getting bored of his tweets now.

03-01-2017 02:19PM

InTheTrees wrote: »

Well I'm not hearing any of the trump supporters offer anything to defend his policies except endless analysis of the election.

The election is the most important thing being discussed since it's the Democrats that are causing the friction with Russia right now.

And you should read posts more carefully if you think everyone who isn't anti-Trump is one of his supporters.

Billy86 · 03-01-2017 02:29PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The election is the most important thing being discussed since it's the Democrats that are causing the friction with Russia right now.

And you should read posts more carefully if you think everyone who isn't anti-Trump is one of his supporters.

You seem to be conveniently ignoring that the GOP are not only supportive of Obama's recent measures against Russia but have referred to them as "overdue" and "too little, too late", even referring to the hacking scandal as "an act of war".

conditioned games · 03-01-2017 02:36PM

Both the Republicans and the Democratics are the same. Trump is as good an independent candidate we will ever get.

Christy42 · 03-01-2017 02:36PM

RobertKK wrote: »

If one doesn't learn by hindsight, but want to continue the same disastrous policies then there is a problem.
The problem in this area lost.

He did not learn. He simply claimed to have had a different view all along. That is not learning. That is point blank lying. You know his sentence is a lie when he says he was against this or the other so why believe he is against it now?

To learn you have to admit your mistakes. For him opposing the Libyan rebellion was politically convince the. To be consistent he had to he always against it. I doubt he even remembered if he had taken a side in 2011.

Cheerful Spring · 03-01-2017 02:37PM

InTheTrees wrote: »

He hasnt rejected anything. He told anyone what they wanted to hear to get elected.

Maybe you missed him threatening North Korea yesterday?

Threatening North Korea or taking military action against the country is a threat to China. Trump has a dangerous personality and we just don't know what he plans to do till we see it reported by the News and by then it could be too late to stop him. I just don't see a Kennedy/Cuban Missile situation with Trump where he successfully manages to prevent a international crisis. Trump white house cabinet also is full of war hawks and many of them have a deep hatred for China. A war is coming if he makes a move in the China South Seas or increases military support for South Korea. America in the 40's before Pearl harbor tried to isolate Japan economically and militarily and that forced the Japanese to go to war. Trump plans for trade wars with China and a push back in the China South Seas will lead us down the same path and war will come maybe before the summer.

conditioned games · 03-01-2017 02:39PM

RasTa wrote: »

Getting bored of his tweets now.

I'm loving his tweets, especially when he trolls the brainwashed and controlled mainstream media. Keep them coming please.

RasTa · 03-01-2017 02:43PM

conditioned games wrote: »

I'm loving his tweets, especially when he trolls the brainwashed and controlled mainstream media. Keep them coming please.

Exactly, like most trolls they become boring after awhile.

03-01-2017 02:44PM

Billy86 wrote: »

You seem to be conveniently ignoring that the GOP are not only supportive of Obama's recent measures against Russia but have referred to them as "overdue" and "too little, too late", even referring to the hacking scandal as "an act of war".

And I seem to be inconveniently unable to find much on this. There a couple of quotes from Republicans but it just seems to be a few..?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/01/cotton-latest-to-say-obamas-russia-sanctions-over-hacking-overdue-too-late.html

Cotton’s remarks are similar to those of House Speaker Paul Ryan and Texas GOP Sen. Mike McCaul, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security.

“I am pleased to see the Obama administration is finally responding to Russian meddling,” McCaul said Thursday. “But these actions are long overdue. … For years I have pressed them to stand up to Russia … . I look forward to working with the incoming Trump administration to make sure that … our adversaries do not to do it again.”

Has there been something since the 1st showing that a majority of Republicans are with Obama on the sanctions and expulsion of diplomats? It looks like McCain and those lads above are in support of it but I can't find anything else. I'm searching news.google.com with fairly generic phrases related to it.

RobertKK · 03-01-2017 02:47PM

InTheTrees wrote: »

Can you explain to us why the congressional ethics regulations have to be scrapped?

I think a wise person would not comment on something they lack enough information on.
So I will not explain as it would be stupid to do so.

El Presidente Trump

Comments