Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please 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. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Donald Trump the Megathread part II - mod warnings in OP, Updated 06/06/25

1617618620622623811

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,611 ✭✭✭✭Cluedo Monopoly


    It's South Korea. They are staunch US allies and will absolutely make a deal. You know this.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,881 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    That would be hilarious.

    They've been dying to get into that market for the last decade.

    😂



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,216 ✭✭✭✭Red Silurian


    speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to share details on the meeting

    That spokesperson sounds believable alright. I guess if you want honesty at a time like this you can absolutely trust the major corporations to not try and squeeze the trading block leaders for more money. We all know how honest the corporations are in fairness

    </sarcasm>



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,297 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    The only IRL trump supporter I know in person, all the way up to his inauguration has been saying 'We have to judge him on what he does, not what he says' every time I pointed out the insane plans he had in his speeches and the project 2025

    Even as he starts a global trade war and likely the next great depression, he still thinks Trump had no choice but to 'do something' because the US budget deficit is over a trillion a year.
    When I point out that the budget deficit is almost the same number as the value Trumps own tax cuts from his first term, he just doesn't accept that.

    Its infuriating to talk with him about this topic. Everything else, he's perfectly normal and reasonable

    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,641 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    And to add to that, Vietnam is less than a third the population of the US and the GDP per capita is a tenth that of the USA. How can Vietnam have anything but a trade deficit with the USA? No amount of trade is going to equalize that gap.

    What about Switzerland? 3% of the population of the USA. How the hell are Switzerland expected to equalize trade figures?

    Trump is a conman and this is a shakedown on a worldwide scale of Americans first, and the World second.

    The funny thing is 50% of Americans still think the tariffed countries are paying the tariff because they have Fox News on 24/7.

    Moronic.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,416 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    But you have to put that into context:

    2024: Trump 76% (17/22m)

    2020: Trump 94% (18/19m)

    2016: Trump 45% (14/31m)

    That tells a more complete picture. His total votes, and percent of votes was much lower in 2024 than 2020.
    He's increased votes since 2016, that's the norm after being in office.
    But the biggest stand out for me, is that the turnout was much lower in both years than in 2016. So it's highly likely that the drop in turn out was ~10m republicans who knew it was pointless as he had it in the bag



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,216 ✭✭✭✭Red Silurian


    Well shame on them because now they all look like big dirty MAGA heads



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,881 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Mmmm, sunk cost fallacy is a common issue amongst Trump worshippers. They've expended so much on this guy that they simply cannot back out now and be thought of as a fool for doing so in the face of overwhelming evidence. So they tend to continue digging.

    The magasphere provides these people with all the stock answers and positions that they need to carry on ignoring the obvious. They'll further pass on these answers and positions online and the cycle continues.

    It's been laughable looking at the MAGA responses to this fat disaster that Trump's tariff nonsense has created.

    "But…but…Nancy Pelosi…"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,416 ✭✭✭Field east


    the. I’d terms should give us a very good indication of the true MAGA picture if Trump carries on in the same vein



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 483 ✭✭Will_I_Amnt


    We now switch over to live coverage of tariff negotiations taking place on McDonald Islands



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,641 ✭✭✭10000maniacs


    The Pelosi, Sanders and Obama argument is a fallacy too. Fox News have been spouting it for years.

    All they suggested was targeting China for the actual things that were costing Americans jobs, like Steel and cars.

    Not a blanket tariff. And certainly not a worldwide tariff.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,881 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Exactly.

    A targeted tariff can be of benefit to a country. Blanket tariffs make no real sense at all except as a bully boy tactic.

    Most sensible countries will target a tariff on a specific good, a good that's produced domestically that can't compete with the foreign made equivalent. Trump, on the other hand, has just tariffed whole countries.

    🤪



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,416 ✭✭✭Field east


    if we lay everything bare and start AT THE START again

    . So, on the day of the election for president those who voted for Trump had , at the time a certain idea as to what Trump was going to do as against what Harris was going to do eg bring down the cost of living, clean the swamp, re-energise the rust belt, etc, etc,

    Now, TODAY, the same Republican voter - a lot of them anyway- did not envisage for even one second that things would turn out the way they are ie things have turned out the complete opposite to what they thought when they were voting

    The Mid Terms should give us a true picture of where the voter will be at then re for or against what Trump is doing



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,154 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Lol.

    Mc Donald's is the best, you know , best of American beef , soo strong , you know, so strong !



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,154 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Salutary lesson to those in the Conservative Party ,one would now hope ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,156 ✭✭✭✭briany


    America doesn't have a two party system. It has a system that heavily favours two parties. Other parties exist, but Americans won't vote for them due the idea that voting for one amounts to a wasted vote and is only a net benefit to the 'other side'.

    This could be overcome. Yes, it would take a monumental grassroots effort to get it off the ground, but this isn't impossible. I mean, it's not like the Republican party wanted Trump when he first arrived on the scene, but he had enough appeal to the party base that he could essentially bypass the party apparatus.

    Never more than now does America need a real alternative in the face of the insanity of the Republicans and the fecklessness of the Democrats.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,416 ✭✭✭SaoPaulo41


    SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk sparred on social media Tuesday with White House Senior Counselor Peter Navarro, after Navarro said in an interview Monday that Tesla was a car "assembler" rather than a manufacturer.

    "Tesla has the most American-made cars. Navarro is dumber than a sack of bricks," Musk said in an X post on Tuesday.

    "Navarro is truly a moron," Musk said in a separate post. "What he says here is demonstrably false."

    Both Navarro and Musk are two of Trump’s closest advisors, and Navarro previously served in Trump's first administration as the director of the White House National Trade Council and the director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,908 ✭✭✭Glaceon


    FPTP quickly facilitates minority rule if a third party comes into play. You could have a situation like this:

    Party A: 45%
    Party B: 40%
    Party C: 15%

    In this case, A is elected, despite the fact that the majority of the electorate did not vote for them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 483 ✭✭Will_I_Amnt


    The corruption just keeps getting more blatant. After launching his own cryptocurrency 3 days before inauguration, the Trump admin is now disbanding a unit dedicated to crypto-related investigations. NCET, or the National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Unit, was disbanded “effective immediately” last night as part of the agency’s efforts to comply with Trump’s January executive order on digital assets, which aimed to “establish regulatory clarity” for the industry.

    https://fortune.com/crypto/2025/04/08/doj-ncet-disbands-memo-todd-blanche-trump/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 483 ✭✭Will_I_Amnt


    So.....like the UK and many other countries have had forever?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,007 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Yes its massively undemocratic, the UK have only had 1 government in the last 100 years elected by a majority of voters thanks to FPtP.

    In 2024 Labour won 63% of seats with only 33% of the votes



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 483 ✭✭Will_I_Amnt


    I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just interested.

    Wouldn't you say the lack of opportunity afforded to The Libertarian Party in the US.....the apparent joint effort to stop them gaining any traction in US politics is just as undemocratic?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,156 ✭✭✭✭briany


    The UK has FPTP and several parties which can gain seats in its parliament and usually solves this potential issue via coalitions. I realise that the American political system at its top level is really geared toward oppositionality rather than broad, calm consensus, so the whole idea is quite alien to them, but they have had political coalitions in the distant past, of a sort, in 1854, 1858, 1860 and 1862. The timing of these coalitions does speak to the idea that America's really in trouble if anything disrupts their usual system because it speaks to intense political pressure, but I think America's getting to that point again.

    At the moment, you have the MAGA caucus utterly dominating the Republican party. Moderates don't get much of a say on the party's direction. On the other side, with the Democrats, the corporate centre is quelling any new thinking from the left wing of the party. It used to be that both parties functioned as de-facto coalitions in their own right between several factions or 'caucuses' but this is getting less and less true. MAGA are busy tearing down US democracy while the left of the Democrats are screaming at the party's power brokers to do something, but they just carry on like it's business as usual. Something has to give, here.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,007 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Yes because the reasons for it are again entirely down to FPtP where any significant split for either of the 2 main parties towards a 3rd party will hand any election to the party that doesn't split. For instance if the Libertarian party siphoned off just 10-15% of the republicans support across all states for the midterms they would lose nearly every seat to the Democrats thanks to FPtP.

    But also no because looking at it from the view that its the libertarian party being specifically targeted from gaining political traction is wrong, the 2 main parties cannot have any 3rd party gain traction whatsoever or they will lose everything.

    Some would argue this is why the Republican leadership decided to row so heavily in behind trump as they saw the writing on the wall that if he did trigger a split the Democrats would ultimately decimate them. Just look at the Tories and Reform in the UK 2024 election, Labour likely would have still won but Reform split the vote enough that the Tories were very close to being absolutely decimated.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,252 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 107 ✭✭doyle55




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,884 ✭✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    I am wracking my brain thinking what would China want to buy from the US? Aside from the odd car, and bottles of wine, there's not a whole lot. Certainly nothing crucial. Meanwhile an analyst on CNN last night said that tarrifs could increase the price of the new iPhone to $3000 for Americans.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,130 ✭✭✭greenfield21


    Media reporting that White House has raised tariffs on China again to 104% now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,416 ✭✭✭SaoPaulo41


    Honest question, what do you think the EU will end up having to concede to satisfy the orange buffoon?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,679 ✭✭✭nachouser


    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/exports/china

    Quite a few things, it seems. The same site says about 500bn went the other way in 2023.



Advertisement