nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Quin_Dub

This thread is for the continuing discussion of Donald Trumps's presidency in the US and any related matters.

Please ensure that you are familiar with the charter before posting.

Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

BabyCheeses

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm if the opinion that the world needed a Trump like world leader. A guy who doesn't give a hoot about political correctness, a guy who can just have a huff and tell you to f off at any time.

eagle eye wrote: »

I've been appalled by the treatment that Donald Trump has received since he became President. I personally believe that there should be more respect for the Office than is currently being shown by the media and numerous celebrities.

That's one of the quicker flip flops of political correctness I have seen.

mcmoustache

Podge_irl wrote: »

But this is the thing. He has achieved literally nothing

It's as simple as you described.

I don't understand how some were viewing this as some sort of breakthrough. Kim Jong Un wants the appearance of legitimacy at home. He got that in spades.

The US wants North Korea to stop acting the bollix. They didn't get that at all. They just got some stalling while the North Koreans get their program up and running again.

That people can see this as some clever move by Trump is baffling - especially given what is already plain to see about him.

mcmoustache

BabyCheeses wrote: »

That's one of the quicker flip flops of political correctness I have seen.

Well you see, Baby, when Trump does something, it's the best thing ever. When he walks off a plane with his glorious hair flopping about majestically in the wind, it's evident that he is the anointed one. And Baby, every time he sits on his watery morning throne, he releases the bigliest and most divine spluttery pebbeledash against its inner lower rim with the fury of the Gods. His morning musings to the world at large, Baby, provoke thoughts unheard since Seigfried Sassoon's mind melded with Oscar Wilde's during the great Awakening. This totally stable genius is the Godliest among men. A true example to all in all his glory. MAGA.

PopePalpatine

I'd hardly say Kim Jong-un needs the appearance of legitimacy, he's in charge of the closest thing we've seen to Orwell's "1984". If nothing came of this meeting, North Korean propaganda can simply complain about American imperialism, and how they need Kim to resist them.

If you're talking about Kim's Inner Party, then yeah, I can see your point, but if someone were to stage a coup, how would they get the public on their side?

eagle eye

BabyCheeses wrote:

That's one of the quicker flip flops of political correctness I have seen.

Respect for the office of President is not political correctness.

Christy42

eagle eye wrote: »

BabyCheeses wrote:

That's one of the quicker flip flops of political correctness I have seen.

Respect for the office of President is not political correctness.

Yup it is. You want it to be politically incorrect to speak as badly of the president as many have been doing. Again it is just changing the subject of political correctness from some minority to the current POTUS. One thing you like about Trump is his tendency to tell people to f off and yet seem to dislike that many celebrities do that to him.

Since you were giving out about your post being "attacked" it seems you also want a safe space here where people can't counter your opinion.

Nody

eagle eye wrote: »

Respect for the office of President is not political correctness.

How about Trump actually respecting the office then before you ask the rest of the world to respect it? You know basic things such as following policy, not blatantly lying while being caught on tape about it, breaking traditions or using it to make money etc. You know, the basic stuff you'd expect any person who respects the office would do.

jooksavage

Christy42 wrote: »

Since you were giving out about your post being "attacked" it seems you also want a safe space here where people can't counter your opinion.

For all their talk of snowflakes, no one cowers in the darkness of their safe spaces like the the inahbitants of the Fox News/Breitbart/Infowars echo chamber.

[Deleted User]

eagle eye wrote: »

I've been appalled by the treatment that Donald Trump has received since he became President. I personally believe that there should be more respect for the Office than is currently being shown by the media and numerous celebrities.

I think they're showing a huge amount of respect towards the Office by calling Trump out on his antics. He's the one that is showing absolutely no respect for the position or the status it holds both domestically and around the world.

Trump is disrespecting the position of President by, and this isn't an exhaustive list; lying continuously to the public, inciting hatred, openly defending white supremacists, starting trade wars for no good reason, obstructing jutsice, killing the deal with Iran, alienating key allies, endorsing openly homophobic/racist public figures, mocking other world leaders on twitter.

It goes on and on.

Igotadose

Nice analysis by Saletan @Slate.com about the summit: "Trump isn’t trying to win over North Korea’s leader. He’s using him to win over you

Among other gems in the article, Trump's o.k. with human right's violations in the North, and sees business opportunities there due to nice beaches. Apparently NK saved the winter olympics as ticket sales went up once they said they'd participate.

Oh, and he (Trump) saved "what, 40-50 million people from nuclear war" by having the summit. Nice.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/trumps-deal-with-kim-jong-un-is-a-con-job-and-youre-the-mark.html

pixelburp

eagle eye wrote: »

Respect for the office of President is not political correctness.

To reiterate my own & others' point, respecting the office goes 2 ways: you can't ask or bemoan others for not respecting Trump, when Trump himself clearly does not show deference to the position. Notwithstanding the reality that President is as much an ambassadorial role as it is political - and so his behaviour reflects upon the status of the US - how does he show respect for the office when he ignores or flouts the laws and Constitution itself?

dr.fuzzenstein

eagle eye wrote: »

Respect for the office of President is not political correctness.

Nody wrote: »

How about Trump actually respecting the office then before you ask the rest of the world to respect it? You know basic things such as following policy, not blatantly lying while being caught on tape about it, breaking traditions or using it to make money etc. You know, the basic stuff you'd expect any person who respects the office would do.

Slam. Dunk. Next.

Leroy42

I think Trump is actually given far too much respect because he is POTUS. If he wasn't POTUS he would be torn apart. The media continue to show deference to him, and still abide by the rules in mos cases.

For example, the daily press briefing with SHS. The media should be in meltdown, it should me chaos based on the continued lies that she states on a daily basis. But they sit there, ask a question and allow her to move on.

Trump from even before he got elected was disrespectful. What respect did he show Obama, an 8 year campaign to try to show he was illegal! Then he stated that the whole election was rigged prior to the vote itself. After the vote he claimed 5m illegal voters, without a shred of evidence.

He has given jobs to family. He has kept his business interests. He has used those business interests to enrich himself from both the US and foreign/ He has allowed his family to cash in on his position (Kushner's sister selling apartments for access, Ivanka getting lots of patents in China suddenly)

Manic Moran

First of all one of the major reasons for NK not to attack SK was the fact the American army was there in force to stop them

Not really. Eighth Army isn't what it once was. Its major component is 2ID, which, in practice, has only one combat brigade in the ground at any one time. In terms of ground troops, the Irish Army consists of three brigades. All the rest of Eighth Army consists of support elements: a sustainment brigade, aviation brigade, artillery brigade, and a bunch of other sorts like intelligence, military police, chemical decontamination, and the like. Korea is not the most popular posting in the US Army, has been mainly maintained out of inertia and RoK preference, and I suspect that if President Moon is good with the US Army leaving, the US Army won't object.

The US has moved in recent years to a more rotational model anyway. For example, the combat units today found in Europe are not actually based in Germany like they used to be, they instead arrive at the port (Most recently Amsterdam) and are transited to the operational area such as Poland where they basically set up camp for a few months before rotating out. Modern US military logistics are far better than they were two decades ago, let alone during the Korean War. There are pre-position stock facilities in both Korea and Japan, just add personnel, and there are more tanks and IFVs sitting on ships in Diego Garcia awaiting the order to sail somewhere than are in the armored brigade currently operational in Korea.

The issue is more of optics than of practical effect.

ancapailldorcha

eagle eye wrote: »

Respect for the office of President is not political correctness.

If the US public see fit to wipe their collective backsides with it by electing a walking embodiment of everything wrong with their country, why should anyone here respect it?

Leroy42

eagle eye wrote: »

Respect for the office of President is not political correctness.

Should we respect the leaders of Iran, NK and what about Duerte?

Christy42

I don't see troops being removed for a while. Whatever else it would look like a complete capitulation on the American side without getting much in return.

More likely it is a future goal. Even just the suspending manoeuvres has not been welcomed completely by Trump's allies given he didn't seem to see fit to tell them about this little tit bit. Given they are involved in those exercises a heads up would have been nice.

LuckyLloyd

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think Trump is actually given far too much respect because he is POTUS. If he wasn't POTUS he would be torn apart. The media continue to show deference to him, and still abide by the rules in mos cases.

For example, the daily press briefing with SHS. The media should be in meltdown, it should me chaos based on the continued lies that she states on a daily basis. But they sit there, ask a question and allow her to move on.

Trump from even before he got elected was disrespectful. What respect did he show Obama, an 8 year campaign to try to show he was illegal! Then he stated that the whole election was rigged prior to the vote itself. After the vote he claimed 5m illegal voters, without a shred of evidence.

He has given jobs to family. He has kept his business interests. He has used those business interests to enrich himself from both the US and foreign/ He has allowed his family to cash in on his position (Kushner's sister selling apartments for access, Ivanka getting lots of patents in China suddenly)

I console myself with the idea that this shall pass, and we may only have another 24 months of effective Presidential reign to endure. The fear is obviously that this fundamentally breaks the rules and traditions of constructive societal discourse in the States for good. For, as much as there is much to criticize with regards to America, there was a time where its process to elect a President and the subsequent prosecution of that Presidency was done in a dignified and constructive manner. The 2000 election - shocking at the time for the tenor of its campaign and controversial outcome - seems like a golden age from a time long ago. Just watch five minutes from any of the Bush / Gore debates on youtube. Worlds away from the nonsense and bluster of the past few years.

Leroy42

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I console myself with the idea that this shall pass, and we may only have another 24 months of effective Presidential reign to endure. The fear is obviously that this fundamentally breaks the rules and traditions of constructive societal discourse in the States for good. For, as much as there is much to criticize with regards to America, there was a time where its process to elect a President and the subsequent prosecution of that Presidency was done in a dignified and constructive manner. The 2000 election - shocking at the time for the tenor of its campaign and controversial outcome - seems like a golden age from a time long ago. Just watch five minutes from any of the Bush / Gore debates on youtube. Worlds away from the nonsense and bluster of the past few years.

I think your post answers your own point. The trajectory is pretty clear at this point. Trump is the outcome, not the cause.

It is clear that Trump is being successful, he has taken over the GOP and nearly anyone that speaks out against him either resigns or looses.

Whilst the next may not have the crassness of Trump, the die is pretty much cast. Control the media by saying whatever you want, facts depend on time and context and what you are trying to say etc.

amandstu

Christy42 wrote: »

I don't see troops being removed for a while. Whatever else it would look like a complete capitulation on the American side without getting much in return.

More likely it is a future goal. Even just the suspending manoeuvres has not been welcomed completely by Trump's allies given he didn't seem to see fit to tell them about this little tit bit. Given they are involved in those exercises a heads up would have been nice.

Did the US perhaps not trust the S Korean government to keep its planned concessions confidential?

Are the S Koreans infiltrated by the N Korean secret services?

Professor Moriarty

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I console myself with the idea that this shall pass, and we may only have another 24 months of effective Presidential reign to endure. The fear is obviously that this fundamentally breaks the rules and traditions of constructive societal discourse in the States for good. For, as much as there is much to criticize with regards to America, there was a time where its process to elect a President and the subsequent prosecution of that Presidency was done in a dignified and constructive manner. The 2000 election - shocking at the time for the tenor of its campaign and controversial outcome - seems like a golden age from a time long ago. Just watch five minutes from any of the Bush / Gore debates on youtube. Worlds away from the nonsense and bluster of the past few years.

Guess who is the bookies' hot favourite to be elected POTUS in 2020.

listermint

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Guess who is the bookies' hot favourite to be elected POTUS in 2020.

I wouldnt use the bookies as a guide on this, Easy money for them to make.

Professor Moriarty

listermint wrote: »

I wouldnt use the bookies as a guide on this, Easy money for them to make.

I would. Their job is to get the odds spot on. They have Trump at 7/4. Next closest is Sanders at 12/1. That's a very hot favourite as things stand today - obviously events can change matters radically. Trump is such a hot favourite, by their reckoning, that you would be very foolish to bet on any of the others today.

Hande hoche!

The US, Canada and Mexico to host the 2026 world cup. Any guesses as to how long it will take a certain individual to claim credit?

kunst nugget

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I would. Their job is to get the odds spot on. They have Trump at 7/4. Next closest is Sanders at 12/1. That's a very hot favourite as things stand today - obviously events can change matters radically. Trump is such a hot favourite, by their reckoning, that you would be very foolish to bet on any of the others today.

2 and a half years out from the election and 18 months from the primaries… it's an exercise in pointlessness at this stage to be be talking about hot favourites.

kunst nugget

Hande hoche! wrote: »

The US, Canada and Mexico to host the 2026 world cup. Any guesses as to how long it will take a certain individual to claim credit?

Distance between Canada and Mexico: 3,624 km… That is absolutely ridiculous.

Professor Moriarty

kunst nugget wrote: »

2 and a half years out from the election and 18 months from the primaries… it's an exercise in pointlessness at this stage to be be talking about hot favourites.

I know. Still, it's an indicator that he's a serious contender.

Professor Moriarty

Hande hoche! wrote: »

The US, Canada and Mexico to host the 2026 world cup. Any guesses as to how long it will take a certain individual to claim credit?

That makes perfect sense. The three countries are getting on like a house on fire.

Christy42

amandstu wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

I don't see troops being removed for a while. Whatever else it would look like a complete capitulation on the American side without getting much in return.

More likely it is a future goal. Even just the suspending manoeuvres has not been welcomed completely by Trump's allies given he didn't seem to see fit to tell them about this little tit bit. Given they are involved in those exercises a heads up would have been nice.

Did the US perhaps not trust the S Korean government to keep its planned concessions confidential?

Are the S Koreans infiltrated by the N Korean secret services?

If they have reached the upper cabinet I would be impressed. More impressed if they managed to do something extra with information largely available to North Korean negotiators during the week before the summit when most of the negotiations actually happened.

It also suggests further problems if the allies can't trust share pertinent information with each other.

pixelburp

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I know. Still, it's an indicator that he's a serious contender.

The obvious response to this would be to wonder what the odds were for Trump during the 2016 campaign. IIRC fivethirtyeight were one of the few current-affairs outlets giving him a decent chance of winning (1 in 3 I believe) when all others predicted Clinton to walk it - did the bookies say the same?