If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello All, This is just a friendly reminder to read the Forum Charter where you wish to post before posting in it. :)
Hi all, The AutoSave Draft feature is now disabled across the site. The decision to disable the feature was made via a poll last year. The delay in putting it in place was due to a bug/update issue. This should serve as a reminder to manually save your drafts if you wish to keep them. Thanks, The Boards Team.
Hello all! This is just a quick reminder to ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere.

What is the truth behind Donald Trump?

  • 14-04-2022 6:01pm
    Registered Users Posts: 981 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    He's claiming he was the savior of NATO.

    And that if he was in power now the Ukraine invasion would have never happened.

    I'm not informed on the particulars of these claims but there is contention that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict did in fact (or was allowed to) escalate when Biden replaced him.

    Is Trump just blowing hot air with these claims?



  • Registered Users Posts: 791 ✭✭✭ sameoldname

    If Trump is saying something, it is only to make himself look better, truth be damned. There are no exceptions.

    Granted, to most people that are not him, everything he says makes him look more and more like a moron but that's by the by.

  • Registered Users Posts: 665 ✭✭✭ goldenmick

    I suggest you read the book: "Fire And Fury".

    It will open your eyes to the real Donald Trump... a sleazeball, misogynistic, manipulative, lying, tax evading, thick skinned, dense muppet.

    I don't know who says he would have prevented war. He would in fact have created them.

  • Registered Users Posts: 981 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    In that video segment he does claim to have increased NATO input however, of course many countries only actually increased their NATO GDP allocation when Ukraine was invaded.


    So, his claim he identified low NATO contribution from other member states and initiated procurement of their financial involvement in NATO......... that's just a straight up fairy tale?


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,854 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Nody

    Yup, Trump is very much a revisionist who will claim he never said something even if it's recorded and on video and everything good is because of him somehow even if he was never involved in any way, shape or form. If the weather was hotter in a given day in May you can be sure Trump would claim it was because of him and his policies basically.

  • Registered Users Posts: 981 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush


    It's like politics is one big troll-job.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,501 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Manach

    Trump's policy, embracing nationalism and a pro-quid-pro approach to diplomatic engagements marked both a significant and improved change in US Foreign policy. This seems to have been the premise of books such as "After Obama" by R. Singh. It is unfortunate that the Media lens through which much of Irish public opion has been shaped has been distorted by its reflexive anti-Trump narrative rhetoric.

  • Registered Users Posts: 981 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,592 ✭✭✭ growleaves

    It isn't nonsense.

    "Building the wall" could be a left-populist policy as long as it was framed in a different way (protecting workers from big-business exploitation as being part of it).

    No one has any strong feelings about nuclear deals or know exactly what effect they'll have imo, they just go along with the party line.

    Yes I was concerned that Pfizer and other companies would leave too but commentators pointed out an exodus wouldn't happen and in fact it didn't. As long as this mode of American protectionism doesn't hurt us we have no reason to oppose it. It is also perfectly compatible with Irish conceptions of liberalism and leftism - James Connolly was a protectionist, so was Napper Tandy. It would be conceptualised differently from "America First" (borrowed from Charles Lindbergh?) obviously.

    Jeremy Corbyn and other Old Left people were vaguely supportive of Brexit too. When someone we like (ie Old Labour people) support such a policy we tend to be forgiving of that person.

    I agree re ObamaCare and the Paris Climate Accords but more generally were Irish people upset when Bill Clinton spearheaded economically liberal policies? Democratic Presidents are also adept at dodging "climate" commitments. The Paris Accords date from 2015.

  • Registered Users Posts: 981 ✭✭✭ Sugar_Rush

    I guess probably thee primary issue at the heart of this conflict, was probably well known amongst leaders long ago but Trump was at least outspoken as to it being a crucial strategic error.

    That of course being Europe establishing infrastructure to increase dependence on Russian fuel/energy resources, gas-pipeline etc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,012 ✭✭✭ $hifty

    Nah, he's right.

    You said if he ran on the same policies he'd have been supported by the libs. When challenged, your immediate response is "it could have gone over with the left if he completely changed the reasoning behind it"........i.e. a completely different policy for completely different reasons.

    Also, in what world would "let's build a wall along the border" be coherently framed as "protecting workers from big-business exploitation"?

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,592 ✭✭✭ growleaves

    Reasoning and rhetoric can change while policy stays the same.

    Is that a serious question?

    Cesar Chavez opposed immigration on the grounds of labour protectionism. James Connolly opposed immigration on the grounds of labour protectionism.

    Left-wing thinkers like Noam Chomsky have written about how big business uses labour migration to lower average wages, and exploit incoming illegal immigrants.

    There is a universe of left-wing perspectives on immigration which differ from the present-day policy of the American Democratic party.

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]

    Donald Trump was simply saying the things that a large percentage of the US population were privately saying, hence his overwhelming majority.

    Politically incorrect things perhaps, but his success was speaking the language of ordinary people and not dressing matters up.

    Hindsight now tells us that Donald Trump was right about many things. In fact, a recent poll on Trump v Biden in 2024 showed stark results that do not resonate with the picture you have painted in your post.

    According to those taking part in the survey, 44 percent said they would vote for Trump in 2024, and 42 percent said they would back Biden if they were the two candidates.

    The poll also shows that Biden's approval rating remains low at 38 percent, down from 42 percent in an April survey.

    The Emerson College poll reveals Biden's job approval is lowest among white voters at 33 percent, and highest among Black voters at 61 percent.

    So there appears to be quite a lot of buyer's remorse going around with Biden, and now it seems lukewarm Trump voters are coming back to supporting his direction of politics.

  • Registered Users Posts: 251 ✭✭ myfreespirit

    "It isn't nonsense."

    Everything you post tends towards nonsense, more or less.

    In my opinion.

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,854 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Nody

    Trump never had a majority of the votes in either election; he lost both times so by your own definition that must mean that a majority disagreed with what Trump was saying and did not say it in private.

    Secondly Trump offered easy "solutions" which in reality were not actually solutions and he increased the budget deficit by the highest percentage ever seen in American history since 1945 by borrowing more money. Let's look at his 2016 campaign promises (since he failed in 2020).

    • Build the wall and have Mexico pay for it - Failed - The wall was not built, the section that were added cost more per meter compared to previous wall and the parts built fell partially down in the first storm and the rest is currently failing. Hence even if Trump would magically have gotten to build his wall it would have already fallen apart and be an appropriate monument to Trump; a big waste of money.
    • ‘Repeal and replace’ Obamacare - Failed - Trump did not have any iadeas of what to do nor anyone who could come up with something else. In the end another big Trump failure.
    • Taxes - Succeeded sort of. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passed in December 2017. The signature piece of legislation on Trump’s watch, it did lower the corporate tax rate to 21 percent and Americans across the income scale saw their taxes cut. But wealthier households – those in the 95-99th percentiles of income – got a way bigger break according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center. The tax cuts produced by the TCJA are set to expire in 2025. Let's be generous and say a pass, the average American got a couple of hundred while the ultra rich got millions along with corporations, remember that deficit? Yea, here's a driver for it by borrowing to do tax cuts and those cuts expire in 2025 (but I'm sure the corporations etc. will ensure theirs remain while the average American gets an increase).
    • Muslim ban - Failed - the claim was to restrict "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on”. He later amended his statement to say that the ban would affect Muslims “from any nation that has been compromised by terrorism”. Saudi Arabia anyone? Oh, never banned because of course not.
    • Creating jobs - Failed - Trump pledged to “create a total of 25 million new jobs” and achieve a growth rate of 3.5 percent over the next 10 years. He boasted he would be the “greatest jobs president that God ever created”. Trump, as usual, failed to deliver on anything in relation to jobs. Even before Corona struck he was well behind target delivering same level as Obama. When he left the office he ended up with the record of the worst president in history by highest job losses on his watch.

    In summary, Trump failed to deliver on all but one promise and that promise was a temporary promise that costs over a billion dollar a year in additional borrowing (and that's net after the increased spend is taken into account). What a successful guy, failed to deliver anything with all houses being Republican controlled and only achieved the level of Obama in growth who had the houses against him.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,592 ✭✭✭ growleaves

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]

    I disagree with your interpretation of his policies, and definitely the selective nature of the way you've characterised his presidency. But leaving that to one side.

    Let's not forget that, whilst Trump didn't secure the popular vote in either election, the number of voters who opted for Trump increased from 62,984,828 in 2016 to 74,216,154 in 2020.

    That's a colossal increase, and that's with the electorate having full knowledge of 4-years of what you interpret as "failures".

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 31,186 ✭✭✭✭ Penn

    "But leaving that to one side" = "I don't have a reasonable argument to counter the points you made"

    As for the increase in votes he got between 2016 and 2020, you're being extremely selective in not acknowledging more people voted as a whole in 2020 largely due to the availability of postal votes, and that the Dem vote increased by an even greater amount. Trump increased his vote by about 12m, the Dems by over 15m.

    And considering your point about how the number of people voting for Trump increased despite the "failures" and drop in approval rate he had throughout his Presidency, how can you then use Biden's drop in approval rate as any kind of real sign of anything?

    As is usually the case with approval ratings, barring events of huge significance most US Presidents approval ratings drop for most of their terms. Some sharply, some fairly static and then the occasional bump/drop. But if you're using Biden's approval rating as a signifier that people are heading back towards Trump, that's just nonsense.

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 26,772 CMod ✭✭✭✭ spurious

    His administration's family separation policy alone should see him enter the halls of ignominy.

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]

    You should always value the deterrent quality of certain policies.

    For instance, estimates are that - since 1994 - 10,000 people have died trying to illegally cross the Mexican border into the United States. That's an enormous number of deaths. 650 alone died in 2021, but the actual numbers may be far worse than that.

    If policies can be exacted by the United States to deter families from arriving at the border, this can end up reducing illegal migrant deaths - and that can only be a good thing.