Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

everlast75

Manic Moran wrote: »

Unwittingly, you have just demonstrated part of the problem. As many here have doubtless observed, I am not averse to speaking in opposition to, or at least providing another viewpoint, the default groupthink of this thread, leading some to consider me a Trump supporter, though I have repeatedly stated I am not and never have been. I have similarly posted several times in the past that I don't see any great point in posting on some issues I agree with you on since you guys are doing a well enough job of it. I don't see many people on this thread condemning similar actions on the Democrat side, presumably they are happy enough that I do so.

Try an experiment. Remember the gerrymandering issue that went to the Supreme Court a few months ago? Go back to the Trump Thread V, do a search for Gerrymandering, gerrymandered, etc. You get quite a few results as that is when Rucho was decided, but I note that your name does not seem to be one of them. Am I to assume from your silence that you support gerrymandering? It's not as if you weren't active on the thread, just searching for "posts by everlast75" gives me 61 pages of results!

Let's go one stage further: The first paragraph of the Supreme Court decision states "The North Carolina plaintiffs claimed that the State’s districting plan discriminated against Democrats, while the Maryland plaintiffs claimed that their State’s plan discriminated against Republicans". Now, go back to your search results, and add the word "Maryland". Not one word from any person here about gerrymandering in Maryland by Democrats, despite the fact that it reached SCOTUS. Bad Republicans are bad. Bad Democrats... well, we'll just leave it to folks like Manic to point that out, after all, he's not with us and we can keep our focus on the opposition and it's a convenient excuse to denegrate him because he's pointing it out. Despite my condemning gerrymandering on both sides.

Apparently, though, to be credible I am to be obligated to post on every single thing, even if it's redundant because it's already well covered. This seems very similar to a sort of required virtue signalling. I certainly don't object to what you said on the 'send her back' matter, and did not post anything in opposition. It's almost like required virtue-signalling.

To expand to other posts. "The Republicans started it" or "The Republicans are worse" may be true. I've seen this on matters varying from gerrymandering to supreme court nominations. Did "But he did it first!" ever work after an admonishment from your dad when you were growing up after a playground argument? It's irrelevant. Spilt milk. Sunken costs. Whatever you want to call it. The bottom line is that it exists, and should be unacceptable, either initially or in response. And the reality is that it exists on both sides. A refusal to accept this is part of the problem creating the partisanship we suffer from in the US.

The bottom line, folks here have correctly observed that a number of Republican supporters would rather vote Russian than Democrat. Few seem as eager to remember that there is a fierce anti-Republican camp on the Democrat side who equally don't give a damn about anything except to prevent Republicans from winning.

As for my being 'fair and balanced', I never claimed to be such. I'm a moderate (At least, by US Standards). I'm as biased and adamant in my opinions as a moderate as a staunch Democrat is to theirs, or Republican to theirs. There are places where I disagree with this thread, and say so. There are places where I agree with the thread, and feel no need to say so, because it's already been said.

Don't buy that last bit sorry.

I want to be fair to you, but your defense is that you don't want to criticise because it's already been said.

Around the time of the "send them back" chants, (iirc - I'm on my phone, more difficult to search)I'd to ask you a couple of times if you agreed that trump was racist. I had to ask that many times because you wouldn't answer. Eventually you said yes, but that reply was even ambiguous.

You say it doesn't need to be said, but if one is to take anything from the "thanks" option here, its that one poster agrees with another. I've singularly failed to notice you thanking any post criticising Trump.

On that point, you've exaggerated what I've said in order to make me appear unreasonable. I never said that you had to "thank every post". That would be ridiculous. I am telling you i couldn't find one.

He is a realist and a bully and people like him need to be called out on it. You may argue that posting a scathing comment doesn't make a blind bit of difference, and that's true. But it's better than equivocation.

As for gerrymandering, either party doing is absolutely wrong. My solution (which i posted here) was to set up a non- partisan outside group to determine the issues. I frankly don't remember any comments on rullings on that issue, but now you know my view.

I'm happy to go with a Court ruling. I said that i would be happy with the Mueller report before it came out. Pro-trump people hedged their bets. What happened afterwards? I still went with the report regardless of the fact that there was not enough proof of conspiracy to bring charges. If i were a partisan hack, i would have denounced Mueller for not finding what i wanted to.

I posted here I was happy that there were Democrats charged arising from the report, including Greg Craig. A hopeless partisan wouldn't do that.

I apologise if it seems like I'm singling you out. To be honest, there are very few to debate on the pros and cons of Trump left here. He is almost cartoonishly an evil villain, so few would.

I've completely lost patience with anyone who doesn't call out his behaviour when they see it. I've had 3 years of this clown and his enablers shi**ing all over public decency and gaslighting those who took offence. I'm not saying you are one of those btw. I'm just explaining why I've had enough.

If that's unreasonable, so be it.

If you think that I'm being unfair, i can live with that.

Frankly, this whole presidency had been an aberration and hopefully, the final curtain will fall soon, Trump and his enablers and supporters will get what is coming to them.

everlast75

What an extraordinary thing for a senator to say.

I guess he's placed all his chips in with Trump's "deep state" narrative.

https://twitter.com/EricTWalters/status/1180834042423459841?s=19

marno21

everlast75 wrote: »

What an extraordinary thing for a senator to say.

I guess he's placed all his chips in with Trump's "deep state" narrative.

https://twitter.com/EricTWalters/status/1180834042423459841?s=19

Not just a US Senator, Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee.

This stuff isn't funny anymore.

robindch

Manic Moran wrote: »

To expand to other posts. "The Republicans started it" or "The Republicans are worse" may be true. I've seen this on matters varying from gerrymandering to supreme court nominations. The bottom line is that it exists, and should be unacceptable, either initially or in response. And the reality is that it exists on both sides. A refusal to accept this is part of the problem creating the partisanship we suffer from in the US.

Not in the slightest. What's creating the toxic political environment in the US these days is that one side - the Republican side - is repeatedly and openly dishonest as it continually plays with the fire of identity and race politics. The Democrats, to an almost complete extent, do none of these things.

Your claim that the two are equivalent, and are therefore equally to blame, is quite unconvincing.

Itssoeasy

I can’t remember which GOP senator said it today but when asked about trumps comments in China and trump asking China for help he said that we basically shouldn’t take those comments seriously. So basically the us presidents words don’t carry the weight they once did and we need to check to see whether he was being serious.

Water John

Jim Jordan. As someone said a few days ago, if it's him you have out defending you, you are in trouble.

Itssoeasy

Water John wrote: »

Jim Jordan. As someone said a few days ago, if it's him you have out defending you, you are in trouble.

Jim Jordan is the lookout on the titanic Frederick fleet if he saw the iceberg and decided to not alert the bridge.

StringerBell

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I can’t remember which GOP senator said it today but when asked about trumps comments in China and trump asking China for help he said that we basically shouldn’t take those comments seriously. So basically the us presidents words don’t carry the weight they once did and we need to check to see whether he was being serious.

That was Marco Rubio.

It was a painful interview to watch that one.

Water John

They both did. Must have been a speaking point from GOP HQ.

26000 Elephants

StringerBell wrote: »

That was Marco Rubio.

It was a painful interview to watch that one.

Yup, that's it. You cant take the President seriously anymore. Everything he says is a joke! Haha, triggering libs!!

(Except for David Schiff. Everything he says is deadly serious, and if he isn't, then its TREASON!! But totally not triggered....)

Thank god this circus is finally entering the final phase.

aloyisious

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I can’t remember which GOP senator said it today but when asked about trumps comments in China and trump asking China for help he said that we basically shouldn’t take those comments seriously. So basically the us presidents words don’t carry the weight they once did and we need to check to see whether he was being serious.

An overt admission from his own party's senators that should people take Don's statements seriously, we and they would have to recognize them as carrying the legal effect of official presidential policy so they try to brush past them in a pretence that Don was only faking. The kicker for the GOP is that X amount of his believers in the GOP voter numbers do take what he says seriously but the senators can't reach out honestly to those voters with the message "Don was only fooling with you, don't believe what he says" cos they'll be hurt in the process .

Manic Moran

robindch wrote: »

Not in the slightest. What's creating the toxic political environment in the US these days is that one side - the Republican side - is repeatedly and openly dishonest as it continually plays with the fire of identity and race politics. The Democrats, to an almost complete extent, do none of these things.

Your claim that the two are equivalent, and are therefore equally to blame, is quite unconvincing.

Are you living in the same country I am?

You are seriously telling me that Democrats aren't playing with the same toolkit? Did I mistake a number of the current Democrat candidates for President last month commenting on the "Murder" (the word used by some of that subset of them including a former prosecutor) of Michael Brown as an attempt at relevance to the black community? Despite the fact that the FBI, under Holder, at the time, concluded that the evidence supported the officer's position? Did I somehow mishear the figure for hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage done by left-wingers in Berkeley after repeated "protests" somehow turned into violence when the opposition didn't even show up? Why did I see the tolerant and peace-loving anti-Republicans in San Jose wait at the end of a police cordon to then beat up people who made the (gasp) choice to attend a Republican political rally, if they are wiling to discuss issues and not typecast people? (The police were castigated not only for not taking action, like in Portland, but for forcing the rally-goers towards the waiting 'protestors'.) That just as the Republicans do, they will use every tool available to them to 'tilt' elections in their favour, to include gerrymandering which, I say again, made it to the supreme court? And with good reason, blue Maryland is considered to be the second-most gerrymandered State in the country, after red North Carolina. At least in blue California, we voters got pissed off enough to take the power of redistricting away from the politicians, much to the anger of the Democrat state leadership. How bad is is when even the people who are voting for you think you're going too far? Republicans in left-leaning areas simply shut the hell up, because the supposedly tolerant and fair-minded opposition make their lives hell if they don't. When even prominent left-wing commentators are mentioning this problem, it's not exactly something which can be denied. The Democrat position is identity politics at its most political. "If you vote red, you're a racist, hoplophile, islamophobe, climate-change-denying homophobe (And a few other ists-and-phobes) no matter the reality of the average person who votes Republican, and heaven forbid the possibility that the reason people aren't voting Democrat is that they simply don't agree with the Democrat position.

You say it doesn't need to be said, but if one is to take anything from the "thanks" option here, its that one poster agrees with another. I've singularly failed to notice you thanking any post criticising Trump.

How many posts have I thanked supporting Trump, out of interest? I strongly suspect I have actually thanked more on the opposite side. And for the record, I don't give my "thanks" for agreeing with someone. I give it because I appreciate the effort put into the post, the research, or the intelligent commentary. Even if I don't necessarily agree with it. Just because you use "thanks" one way doesn't mean I do.

As for gerrymandering, either party doing is absolutely wrong. My solution (which i posted here) was to set up a non- partisan outside group to determine the issues. I frankly don't remember any comments on rullings on that issue, but now you know my view.

Apparently we are on the same level in that case. I have mentioned the non-partisan solution as enacted in California several times in the past, it's not as if I'm inconsistent here.

If you think that I'm being unfair, i can live with that.

I don't think you're being unfair, I do think you are confusing my position of "A pox on both their houses" with a concept of "If you're not with us, you're with the enemy". I may not be "with you", but I'm don't consider myself "the enemy" either.

everlast75

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1181043719497293824?s=19

A fulfillment of the pre-election promise to pull troops home, or an action to appease a foreign dictator?

Either way, awful payback for former allies who fought alongside U.S. troops

eire4

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1181043719497293824?s=19

A fulfillment of the pre-election promise to pull troops home, or an action to appease a foreign dictator?

Either way, awful payback for former allies who fought alongside U.S. troops

For a guy who supposedly demands and values loyalty so highly he sure likes to leave US allies high and dry while praising to the heavens dictators and authoritarian regimes.

Outlaw Pete

robindch wrote: »

Not in the slightest. What's creating the toxic political environment in the US these days is that one side - the Republican side - is repeatedly and openly dishonest as it continually plays with the fire of identity and race politics. The Democrats, to an almost complete extent, do none of these things.

The Republicans play with the fire of identity and race politics?? Ha!

Almost every damn day some Democrat politician is disingenuously crying racism, sexism, or some-bloody-ism and Twitter leftists will respond by retweeting and liking it in their thousands. Hell, it's the democrats currency of choice these days. I was called a racist myself on this very thread for heaven sake and all because I wouldn't accept that the GOP was the 'party of white supremacy'.

Antifa are the perfect example of leftists using 'the fire of identity and race politics' as a battering ram. They don't believe for a second that the likes of Dave Rubin, Jordan Peterson etc are Nazis, but they'll stamp their feet and scream that they are of course, smashing a few windows (or heads) as they do so and all with the clear objective of silencing those who disagree with them.

Liberals in western society have been throwing around these accusations like confetti for quite a long time and for a very good reason: it works for them. Nobody wants to be labelled a racist or a sexist, given the understandable social stigma which it carries, and so generally whatever behavior it is that has resulted in such an accusation being levelled, whether it's warranted or not, will cease, or at least become less popular ... and that of course is the objective of leftists, to control and silence, it's not out of any genuine belief that the people they are claiming are racists, are actually racists at all, that's immaterial to them. They just want these people, be it Rubin, or Peterson, or whoever, to shut up.

The following tweet from AOC is a good example of how democrats absurdly use ism accusations (in this case antisemitism) as a way of trying to silence and discredit those that don't align with them politically:


https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1180476191951802369

Funny thing is, leftists keep telling us all it's the republicans that are the racists but if anything it is the democrats (or at least the ever growing leftist contingent among them) that are clearly the ones obsessed with race and identity, and willing to attack and abuse anyone who they feel it is different to them. It is these people that are responsible for the toxic political environment with regards to race and identity in western society today and the following clip leaves that in no doubt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4yDeaRbSqY

listermint

I think there are posters here who genuinely think they are in the middle yet only a few months ago said Obama did nothing for them and they left California because it was getting to expensive and lefty.

Sounds right down the middle alright.

And have yet to see the same ire directed at the worst present in the history of the country.

Weird , this being in the middle business all the same

duploelabs

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1181043719497293824?s=19

A fulfillment of the pre-election promise to pull troops home, or an action to appease a foreign dictator?

Either way, awful payback for former allies who fought alongside U.S. troops

Easily to appease Erdogan as it gives the Turks the opportunity to target the Kurds and prevent them from obtaining autonomy

Brian?

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The Republicans play with the fire of identity and race politics?? Ha!

Almost every damn day some Democrat politician is disingenuously crying racism, sexism, or some-bloody-ism and Twitter leftists will respond by retweeting and liking it in their thousands. Hell, it's the democrats currency of choice these days. I was called a racist myself on this very thread for heaven sake and all because I wouldn't accept that the GOP was the 'party of white supremacy'.

Antifa are the perfect example of leftists using 'the fire of identity and race politics' as a battering ram. They don't believe for a second that the likes of Dave Rubin, Jordan Peterson etc are Nazis, but they'll stamp their feet and scream that they are of course, smashing a few windows (or heads) as they do so and all with the clear objective of silencing those who disagree with them.

Liberals in western society have been throwing around these accusations like confetti for quite a long time and for a very good reason: it works for them. Nobody wants to be labelled a racist or a sexist, given the understandable social stigma which it carries, and so generally whatever behavior it is that has resulted in such an accusation being levelled, whether it's warranted or not, will cease, or at least become less popular ... and that of course is the objective of leftists, to control and silence, it's not out of any genuine belief that the people they are claiming are racists, are actually racists at all, that's immaterial to them. They just want these people, be it Rubin, or Peterson, or whoever, to shut up.

The following tweet from AOC is a good example of how democrats absurdly use ism accusations (in this case antisemitism) as a way of trying to silence and discredit those that don't align with them politically:


https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1180476191951802369

Funny thing is, leftists keep telling us all it's the republicans that are the racists but if anything it is the democrats (or at least the ever growing leftist contingent among them) that are clearly the ones obsessed with race and identity, and willing to attack and abuse anyone who they feel it is different to them. It is these people that are responsible for the toxic political environment with regards to race and identity in western society today and the following clip leaves that in no doubt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4yDeaRbSqY

The funny thing is I fully agree that terms like racist, bigot and anti Semite get used far too much. Ditto fascist.

However, Trump regularly says things that are racist and bigoted. He dog whistles, sometimes not even subtly, to anti semites and fascists.

Just because something is wrong sometimes, doesn’t mean it isn’t 100% accurate other times.

I don’t remember Trump ever telling white people they should go home If they were unhappy in the US.

Brian?

listermint wrote: »

I think there are posters here who genuinely think they are in the middle yet only a few months ago said Obama did nothing for them and they left California because it was getting to expensive and lefty.

Sounds right down the middle alright.

And have yet to see the same ire directed at the worst present in the history of the country.

Weird , this being in the middle business all the same

Unfortunately the “middle” has disappeared mostly. Even though both main parties are right wing, by any intelligent definition, the less right party are decried as leftists by the far right party.

The GOP put out a fog of hatred, which can be used to attack anyone from Social Democrats to Latinos.

spacecoyote

Could someone explain the Rick Perry angle to me?

Is the angle Trump is trying to play that its somehow not his fault if he did something wrong because someone else told him to make the call?

That sounds to me something along the lines of some guy, lets say his name is "Ronald", killing someone, and evidence coming out for it.

Then his defence becomes, but this friend of mine, lets say his name is "Mick", told me to do it, so I can't have known there was anything wrong, and can't be blamed for it.

I didn't realise that you can't be blamed for doing something wrong, if someone, who is one of the best people, told you to do it

Igotadose

spacecoyote wrote: »

Could someone explain the Rick Perry angle to me?

Is the angle Trump is trying to play that its somehow not his fault if he did something wrong because someone else told him to make the call?

Perry was the go-between for wealthy Trump donors, via Trump's administration, to the Ukraine. Perry tried to meddle in Ukraine oil politics to the benefit of Trump's donors. So, Perry had indeed been on numerous calls with the Ukraine and in all likelihood he urged one that involved Trump and Zelenskyy, though its likely (in my opinion) that call was about oil, not Bidens. Trump's just conflating things - Perry claims not to have been on the "Biden" call.

https://apnews.com/d7440cffba4940f5b85cd3dfa3500fb2

quick summary: another garden-variety scandal for the Trump admin being conflated, by Trump, with the Biden scandal.

everlast75

spacecoyote wrote: »

Could someone explain the Rick Perry angle to me?

Is the angle Trump is trying to play that its somehow not his fault if he did something wrong because someone else told him to make the call?

That sounds to me something along the lines of some guy, lets say his name is "Ronald", killing someone, and evidence coming out for it.

Then his defence becomes, but this friend of mine, lets say his name is "Mick", told me to do it, so I can't have known there was anything wrong, and can't be blamed for it.

I didn't realise that you can't be blamed for doing something wrong, if someone, who is one of the best people, told you to do it

When you are a narcissist, you are incapable of accepting responsibility.

It's really that simple.

As someone else said in here, the story evolved.

Firstly, there was nothing wrong with the call.

Then, the WB story breaks. Rather than accept that Trump was to blame, he releases a redacted version of the typed notes of the call, believing, as he does, that he can do nothing wrong and it will exonerate him (TM Trump).

When that doesn't work, he cannot believe people don't get that he did nothing wrong, so he comes out and says it on national tv. Yet again, the logic being that it is not he who is wrong, its just the public don't get what he did was "perfect".

When the people still don't get it, he is all out of options so simply blames Perry.

robindch

Manic Moran wrote: »

robindch wrote: »

What's creating the toxic political environment in the US these days is that one side - the Republican side - is repeatedly and openly dishonest as it continually plays with the fire of identity and race politics. The Democrats, to an almost complete extent, do none of these things.

You are seriously telling me that Democrats aren't playing with the same toolkit?

Please read what I wrote :rolleyes: I said that the Republicans regularly play with the incendiary politics of identity and race (amongst other incendiary things), while the Democrats, largely, do not. That does not mean that the occasional Democrat doesn't occasionally behave in this disgraceful fashion, but that the majority do not.

Your attempt to pull a "very fine people on both sides" - or in this case, "very bad people on both sides" - suggests that you're having difficulty differentiating the existence of something (which nobody is disputing) from the scale of something (which people are disputing).

EltonJohn69

I see Pelosi is also guilty of treason!
When future generations are looking at this stuff, they will be wondering how it was allowed to continue..... its like a fully insane King from medieval times

EltonJohn69

If Trump was allowed, do you think he would have these people he has accused of treason stand trial ?

Water John

If Trump was allowed, he wouldn't bother with the trial, remember 'lock her up'.

The shafting of the Kurds is absolutely disgraceful. Without them the battle with ISIS would not have been won. This will rate as one of the worst betyrals in modern history.

circadian

Water John wrote: »

If Trump was allowed, he wouldn't bother with the trial, remember 'lock her up'.

The shafting of the Kurds is absolutely disgraceful. Without them the battle with ISIS would not have been won. This will rate as one of the worst betyrals in modern history.

I agree. I don't think people realise the ramifications of backing off and allowing Turkey to move into Kurdish areas. There will almost certainly be genocide as a result of this not to mention the wholesale destruction of the only functioning modern democracy in the area, even if it is only just finding it's feet. The kurdish controlled areas are usually a mix of different ethnic groups and religions Co-existing, they are also adapting more modern approaches to society like equal voting rights, women can join the military.

I wonder why this decision was made. Who or what has put pressure on Trump to enable this, my suspicion is the Russians since Erdogan is trying to align with Russia.

rossie1977

Dave Rubin is a complete fraud. Became a 'right winger' suddenly after the Koch Brothers gave him a big pile of cash.

Most of these so called talking head conservatives on Youtube are bought and paid for by big corporations and the wealthy elite.

peddlelies

rossie1977 wrote: »

Most of these so called talking head conservatives on Youtube are bought and paid for by big corporations and the wealthy elite.

Unlike the liberals?

I'm pretty sure the biggest one, Steven Crowder, is self funded. It was a big liberal corporation ( Vox ) that tried to get his channel shutdown.

rossie1977

peddlelies wrote: »

Unlike the liberals?

I'm pretty sure the biggest one, Steven Crowder, is self funded. It was a big liberal corporation ( Vox ) that tried to get his channel shutdown.

Why would corporations sponsor left wing talking points? It's in their best interests to make the audience believe that gun control is bad, we must have lower taxes, regulation is wrong, renewable energy is stupid.

Talk radio for 20 years in America was 99% right wing. Youtube is new talk radio.