Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VIII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

nthclare

I know but in fairness I don't like what the Democrats have to offer either.
Any suggestions ?

weisses

nthclare wrote: »

I know but in fairness I don't like what the Democrats have to offer either.
Any suggestions ?

What specifically don't you like about what democrats have to offer ?

robinph

greenfield21 wrote: »

Because the US is the most profitable market for pharma companies, I doubt they even care about Europe or any other country. As much as I'd like to see other countries invoke emergency act to make drugs. It's unlikely as they know they are basically getting all the benefit and no of the costs from these us pharma companies. The long term implications could be huge.

They might be getting the best return on their investments per patient by charging the US health insurers vastly inflated costs, but I would think a market of 7 billion people paying a fraction of the price would be more valuable than one of 350 million who are overcharged. There is only so much money they can gouge out of that 350 million people.

Leroy42

nthclare wrote: »

I know but in fairness I don't like what the Democrats have to offer either.
Any suggestions ?

If you are a voter you face a stark choice.

Vote back in the man that has lied, played massive amount of golf, used his position to enrich himself and his family, failed to protect soldiers, failed to deliver on his election promises.

Or vote for the Democrats, for which you are no so sure.

It would be great if there was another option, but there isn't. So the options are Vote Trump, Vote Biden or don't vote all.

valoren

Carl Bernstein reporting that, during a phone call, he called Merkel stupid and in the pocket of the Russians. The psychological projection is telling.

Quin_Dub

valoren wrote: »

Carl Bernstein reporting that, during a phone call, he called Merkel stupid and in the pocket of the Russians. The psychological projection is telling.

That would be Dr. Merkel - PhD in Chemistry.

Quin_Dub

Just played around a bit on the RCP Site looking at the Electoral College

The 1st Image is the current state of play as seen by RCP , they have Biden with 222 EC votes in the bag so only needing ~50 to win. Compared to Trump only have 125 locked in.



You can make changes to it yourself , so I adjusted and any State where either candidate had a lead greater than the current polling margin of error I moved to "leaning" (the paler colour) , the grey ones are where the lead is inside the MOE which includes Texas - which is just crazy.

Doing that , shows Biden with a pretty decisive victory right now.

StringerBell

That's why I'm becoming optimistic about the election. There are so many paths to victory for Biden now regulating Trump back to trying to hit that inside straight again to pull it out of the bag.

Nody

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Just played around a bit on the RCP Site looking at the Electoral College

Is not the problem (and reason for Gerrymandering) that it's not only about the votes but where the votes are thrown as well? I.e. minimize the vote weight by grouping the "bad" once in one area to minimize their overall weight? As in while let's take Arizona may lean Biden but with Gerrymandering the actual vote while Biden overall state wide the electoral college setup ensures it goes Trump instead.

Penn

https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1278340731975856128?s=20

So the White House are now saying the Russia Bounty story was in the daily brief, but the person reading the brief to Trump didn't read it, but it was still serious enough that the US told their allies. So Trump didn't actually know about it even though everyone else did and it was in the briefing but someone decided not to read that part to him.

Which also means that if you go with the idea Trump didn't know about it but everyone else did, nobody thought to bring it up when Trump was trying to get Russia back into the G7, or any time Trump spoke with Putin afterwards. Nobody thought "... Wasn't the bounty thing in his briefing...?"

Dillonb3

Leroy42 wrote: »

If you are a voter you face a stark choice.

Vote back in the man that has lied, played massive amount of golf, used his position to enrich himself and his family, failed to protect soldiers, failed to deliver on his election promises.

Or vote for the Democrats, for which you are no so sure.

It would be great if there was another option, but there isn't. So the options are Vote Trump, Vote Biden or don't vote all.

You can throw in the Supreme Court judges as well. Next 2 likely justices to retire are both liberal leaning ones and Trump/McConnell will definitely push for conservative ones to lock it down for years to come

Leroy42

Penn wrote: »

https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1278340731975856128?s=20

So the White House are now saying the Russia Bounty story was in the daily brief, but the person reading the brief to Trump didn't read it, but it was still serious enough that the US told their allies. So Trump didn't actually know about it even though everyone else did and it was in the briefing but someone decided not to read that part to him.

Which also means that if you go with the idea Trump didn't know about it but everyone else did, nobody thought to bring it up when Trump was trying to get Russia back into the G7, or any time Trump spoke with Putin afterwards. Nobody thought "... Wasn't the bounty thing in his briefing...?"

And of course if true, why is Trump not freaking out about it? WHy is he hitting out at the media when clearly the media had the crux of the story correct. That person (who reads the brief) needs to be fired for a start.

Second, why hasn't Trump, now that he finally knows, been out to publicly condemn Russia over this. Instead we get silence. Seems he is more interested in getting out his version(s) of what happened then looking to pull Russia to tasks over this.

I said from the start, when and if Trump knew is the wrong point to talk about. He will lie, and his people will lie, and do so regardless of what question is ther.

The real story is what to do about it now that it is known about. What is Trump going to do. Will he call for increased sanctions? Will be row back on his calls for G8? Will be demand answers and assurances from Putin?

check_six

Leroy42 wrote: »

The real story is what to do about it now that it is known about. What is Trump going to do. Will he call for increased sanctions? Will be row back on his calls for G8? Will be demand answers and assurances from Putin?

Couldn't agree more. So he didn't know THEN because he cannot read? Ok, that's history.

He knows NOW.
We all know he knows now.
What is he going to do about it?

Should be hounded on this point.

Itssoeasy

Penn wrote: »

https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1278340731975856128?s=20

So the White House are now saying the Russia Bounty story was in the daily brief, but the person reading the brief to Trump didn't read it, but it was still serious enough that the US told their allies. So Trump didn't actually know about it even though everyone else did and it was in the briefing but someone decided not to read that part to him.

Which also means that if you go with the idea Trump didn't know about it but everyone else did, nobody thought to bring it up when Trump was trying to get Russia back into the G7, or any time Trump spoke with Putin afterwards. Nobody thought "... Wasn't the bounty thing in his briefing...?"

Oh so the WH are saying it's the briefers fault then ? Ah well that's that settled then(sarcasm klaxon) Ffs, I mean the question is why wasn't the Russian part of that PDB read to him ? It's serious stuff contained in it, it's not the pick and mix.

I really wonder if the whole reason he is so vehemently opposed to the world seeing his tax returns isn't that it will expose him as not being as successful or as rich as he claims, but the russian connection is glaring. I mean one or both of the sons have said on the record they got money from Russia.

Quin_Dub

Nody wrote: »

Is not the problem (and reason for Gerrymandering) that it's not only about the votes but where the votes are thrown as well? I.e. minimize the vote weight by grouping the "bad" once in one area to minimize their overall weight? As in while let's take Arizona may lean Biden but with Gerrymandering the actual vote while Biden overall state wide the electoral college setup ensures it goes Trump instead.

Gerrymandering is far less of a problem at the State level - regardless of where you section off the voters to they still all roll up and count overall. I don't believe that any of the states run a "mini electoral college" , they are all just FPTP total count to the best of my knowledge.

It's a huge issue at the Congressional House and State-house level though.

The risk in National Elections is simply voter suppression.

StringerBell

Dillonb3 wrote: »

You can throw in the Supreme Court judges as well. Next 2 likely justices to retire are both liberal leaning ones and Trump/McConnell will definitely push for conservative ones to lock it down for years to come

This is what I think Trump should be basing his re-election campaign on. It's pretty much all.he has anyway, he may even pull back some of the more moderate but still traditional conservatives into the fold, to suffer him for another 4 years to guarantee a future they would like to see with the SC being completely conservative for at least a generation.

Can't believe he hasn't been pushing that angle and instead is retweeting **** with people shouting white power and anti Muslim groups, well I can, but still.

briany

One thing you have to say about the Trump presidency is that it looks like he's made the common-or-garden type of POTUS look really good in the eyes of the average voter (if polls are to be believed), despite the fact that the old style of POTUS was what American people were clamouring to get rid of with Trump on the Republican side, and Bernie on the Democratic side. People who promised to overhaul the whole damn system.

So a quietly sad outcome of a one-term Trump presidency will be that the people will, for a term at least, probably sit down and gratefully accept whatever president they're offered, pretty much. Corruption will be largely not spoken of if it is backed with the comforting words of a traditional-style POTUS.

Trump may go away, but what gave rise to Trump will spew forth again at some point in the future if it is not addressed. If you defeat Trump but not Trumpism, it couldn't come as much surprise when this does come to pass.

Igotadose

briany wrote: »

If you defeat Trump but not Trumpism, it couldn't come as much surprise when this does come to pass.

The definition of Trumpism is key. America is in a bad place intellectually because of abject failure of its political and educational systems, both supported fully by Democrats, Republicans, liberals and conservatives. I don't know how it can be fixed, frankly. It never was about Trump or due to Trump. Trump's just a con, not terribly bright, with a bad case of NPD who felt insulted at the WH Correspondents dinner a number of years ago and finally listened to his tGOP buddies about running for POTUS.

Next time around, they'll have a better candidate, I think that Senator Cotten from Arkansas would be a smoother version of Trump and wouldn't be surprised at all to see him running in 2024.

But, it's America that's the problem. The politicians are what the country is becoming.

Muahahaha

Im presuming that the leak to the NYT about the Russian bounties in Afghanistan came from John Bolton, it might even have been a full chapter in his book but he wasnt allowed publish it under national security rules. Would wonder what other scandals from the Oval Office werent allowed to be published in his book but now will instead be leaked to the national media.

Rjd2

Igotadose wrote: »

The definition of Trumpism is key. America is in a bad place intellectually because of abject failure of its political and educational systems, both supported fully by Democrats, Republicans, liberals and conservatives. I don't know how it can be fixed, frankly. It never was about Trump or due to Trump. Trump's just a con, not terribly bright, with a bad case of NPD who felt insulted at the WH Correspondents dinner a number of years ago and finally listened to his tGOP buddies about running for POTUS.

Next time around, they'll have a better candidate, I think that Senator Cotten from Arkansas would be a smoother version of Trump and wouldn't be surprised at all to see him running in 2024.

But, it's America that's the problem. The politicians are what the country is becoming.

Cotton will run and fail thankfully. An incredibly bland speaker.

Hawley will probably be the Trumper choice, telegenic, articulate and I can see the Tucker element of the party lining up behind him.

Water John

pixelburp wrote: »

America First in action it seems: the US has bought 90% of world supplies of a key CoVid treatment drug, leaving the rest of the world lacking for the next 3 months. Only one company holds the patent (insert Big Pharma rant here). Says a lot IMO when an institution supposedly meant to make sober, considered actions behaves like a panicky hoarder buying up all the loo roll.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/30/us-buys-up-world-stock-of-key-covid-19-drug

TMK Gilead manufacture the drug in Carrigtowhill in Cork. Perhaps the EU should requesition drugs made in the EU?

briany

Igotadose wrote: »

The definition of Trumpism is key. America is in a bad place intellectually because of abject failure of its political and educational systems, both supported fully by Democrats, Republicans, liberals and conservatives. I don't know how it can be fixed, frankly.

I've often heard that American public education systems are under-resourced and overstretched. How bad is it that it can lead to some of the discourse you see being employed over there?

Like, specifically, what kinds of things are not being taught over there that we get taught here such that we don't have such a deeply divided politics and susceptibility to conspiracy theories? (not saying we're totally without guilt on either count).

Inquitus

Water John wrote: »

TMK Gilead manufacture the drug in Carrigtowhill in Cork. Perhaps the EU should requesition drugs made in the EU?

There's no evidence that it improves outcomes, from research done so far it reduces the time people spend seriously ill in hospital by up to 50%, but had no impact on the mortality rate. If this bears out then its only useful for freeing up space in hospitals, and preventing health care systems becoming overstretched, rather than actually directly saving lives.

So the long and the short of it is, with our outbreak well under control for now, Remdesivir offers little to patients in the EU at this point.

moon2

briany wrote: »

I've often heard that American public education systems are under-resourced and overstretched. How bad is it that it can lead to some of the discourse you see being employed over there?

Like, specifically, what kinds of things are not being taught over there that we get taught here such that we don't have such a deeply divided politics and susceptibility to conspiracy theories? (not saying we're totally without guilt on either count).

Teaching the Bible in science class as if it were factual feels like it's a contributing factor here. To support Trump, to a greater or lesser extent, is to choose to believe in things which are objectively not true. To teach and encourage children to reject facts in favour of belief is a problem.

I don't want to get too sidelined into this topic in this thread though.

Edit: just as an example: 40% of practising Christian's do not believe in evolution. I assume this disbelief in evolution has a pretty good chance of stretching across more aspects of the scientific community. Perhaps this was the first visible sign of the rejection of reason and fact we are seeing today.

sid waddell

briany wrote: »

I've often heard that American public education systems are under-resourced and overstretched. How bad is it that it can lead to some of the discourse you see being employed over there?

Like, specifically, what kinds of things are not being taught over there that we get taught here such that we don't have such a deeply divided politics and susceptibility to conspiracy theories? (not saying we're totally without guilt on either count).

Destruction of public education is one element of building a population that will buy into right-wing culture wars.

But imperialism in the educational culture and the culture of a country in general is a key element. That doesn't just mean the educational system itself, but what people read, listen to and look at, and by look at, I include statues in this. Statues are an important element in the official culture of a country. The official culture is like the air we breathe, we cannot exist independently of it, and it shapes us.

Imperialism was always about the hegemony of the "macho" straight, white Christian male. The type who believed he was superior, because, well, he just was, or so he believed. The type who believed in "might is right". The type that did not believe in listening, but in telling others what to do, and telling others, others he believed were inferior, to shut up. The type that believed in his bones that any gain in rights for others meant a loss of rights for him.

That's Trumpism in a nutshell, it's Brexit, it's Putin, it's Modi, Erdogan, Bolsonaro, Xi, Netanyahu, Salvini, Le Pen, Orban, and the DUP.

In the educational system itself history and how it is portrayed is a key element towards grooming young people into a right-wing mindset, so it makes perfect sense how there's a continual effort among right-wing politicians in general across the US and Europe to downgrade and indeed ridicule history and liberal arts subjects, because liberal arts subjects are designed to give people the ability to think, which is not what right-wing politics wants in people.

If there is no real reckoning with the evils of slavery, imperialism or genocide in the official culture of a country, and there has never really been such in the US, UK, France, Russia and Australia among others, it's totally unsurprising then that much of the population will carry an essentially racist, imperialist mindset through their lives and be hostile to critical examination of that past and, on an individual level, be hostile to self-examination as to how it has shaped their mindset.

Being a small country I think is an advantage in terms of reality-based politics. Small countries tend not to carry delusions of greatness. They know they have to work with other smaller states, and indeed bigger ones, in order to prosper. That said, being small is not a foolpoof innoculation against fascism and authoritarianism by any means.

But in Ireland, I think our history of being colonised has been an advantage to us in this era. We have no "glorious history" to hark back to, which is an advantage in guarding against fascism. Our history of colonisation gives most of us, I would like to think, anyway, an identification with the underdog and the "other", though that is not to say we do not have significant problems with racism. Our youth as a state gives us an appreciation for education as a means of continuing to that build that young state, in a positive sense.

I often think there are uncanny comparisons between the hegemonic political and media culture in the US, the UK and Australia and their conceited belief in national "greatness", compared to their smaller and seemingly more sensible neighbours, Canada, Ireland and New Zealand.

That said, for the first 60/70 years of this state's history, the official culture was a backward looking, insular one, and even though the official culture and ruling politicians were not fascist, the culture did contain some elements which are essential to fascism. It seems to me that a lot of small countries which gain independence have to go through a period of reactionary post-colonial insularity and political conservatism based on nationalism and ethnicity. I think we're seeing that in many of the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact countries.

What I think is a common thread between the right-wing fascist or crypto-fascist cultures which exist in the US, the UK, France, Russia, Australia, China, India and Turkey is an obsession with national "greatness" which usually harks back self-consciously to an imagined glorious past associated with military might, but also the classic fascist traits of ultra-nationalism based on ethnicity or religion, and a willingness to blithely dismiss the pain of others who are not part of the dominant ethnic group.

Our one real vulnerable area in terms of guarding against an Irish fascism is the North - it's easy to see how a toxic Irish nationalism could develop if the prospect of a united Ireland is seen to be within reach, or after it happens.

"National greatness" is a truly dreadful concept. It leads to ignorance, arrogance, delusion, fake victimhood, the worst kind of sickening sentimentality, and ultimately mass stupidity in a culture.

Nobody should want to live in a "great" country, just a good, decent, open, free, compassionate one.

pixelburp

Igotadose wrote: »

The definition of Trumpism is key. America is in a bad place intellectually because of abject failure of its political and educational systems, both supported fully by Democrats, Republicans, liberals and conservatives. I don't know how it can be fixed, frankly. It never was about Trump or due to Trump. Trump's just a con, not terribly bright, with a bad case of NPD who felt insulted at the WH Correspondents dinner a number of years ago and finally listened to his tGOP buddies about running for POTUS.

Next time around, they'll have a better candidate, I think that Senator Cotten from Arkansas would be a smoother version of Trump and wouldn't be surprised at all to see him running in 2024.

But, it's America that's the problem. The politicians are what the country is becoming.

Indeed, I'd like to see Biden win purely as an antidote to the national madness happening over there, but a return to normalcy is to also embrace the swamp the Trump 2016 ostensibly claimed to fight. On the face of it, fighting corruption is to be championed. To extend the conversation of BLM, there's systemic problems with America across the board and it does beg the question as to how long the centre can hold. Is it just a country destined to limp along with its thin veneer of dysfunctional democracy or is there a breaking point?

Whatever its problems there's still a unified identity that seems to hold the country together. There's no real enclave of separatists, no state or city that thinks itself slightly distant from Washington, be it through culture, ethnicity or whatnot. But then equally, it feels like the precipice of unrest and discontent can't go on forever. There surely must be a drop somewhere. Maybe the swing to social democracy will be loud and painful - that is the American way.

TomOnBoard

robinph wrote: »

They might be getting the best return on their investments per patient by charging the US health insurers vastly inflated costs, but I would think a market of 7 billion people paying a fraction of the price would be more valuable than one of 350 million who are overcharged. There is only so much money they can gouge out of that 350 million people.

The key here is that Gilead knows that the value of Remdesivir is extremely short-term and they have been able to sell the 2 months production of the drug at an astronomically higher price than the benefit warrants purely on the back of fear, uncertainty and doubt coupled with timing from the need for the Administration to minimise deaths at ALL costs up to November. The drug will be proven to have limited benefit and the 2months supply bought by the US will add little to Covid treatment stories.

Gilead could never supply the needs of the 7 billion, if the drug was that miraculous. And if it was that miraculous, it would be copied by India and China in a heartbeat, and **** patent laws.

TomOnBoard

ShatterAlan wrote: »

It's pointless even talking to McEnany. Listening to her being interviewed is a car-crash. She is a compulsive liar. Trump will tell a blatant demonstrable lie and she will say "The President has never lied to the American people"

On her day 1 presser, as soon as she said “I will never lie to you", it was over.

She lied then... She's lying now... If she's talking, she's lying!

TomOnBoard

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Just played around a bit on the RCP Site looking at the Electoral College

The 1st Image is the current state of play as seen by RCP , they have Biden with 222 EC votes in the bag so only needing ~50 to win. Compared to Trump only have 125 locked in.



You can make changes to it yourself , so I adjusted and any State where either candidate had a lead greater than the current polling margin of error I moved to "leaning" (the paler colour) , the grey ones are where the lead is inside the MOE which includes Texas - which is just crazy.

Doing that , shows Biden with a pretty decisive victory right now.

Great find. I'm awaiting my PhD in the post so I can understand it and be able to use it..

Does it translate into Senate and House majority projections?

Inquitus

TomOnBoard wrote: »

On her day 1 presser, as soon as she said “I will never lie to you", it was over.

She lied then... She's lying now... If she's talking, she's lying!

Agreed, I thought it would be hard to find a Press Secretary as deceitful as Sarah Sanders, but in Kayleigh he has outdone himself, I can't bear to watch her sidestep questions, tell lies and generally cover his ass for him.