Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

ancapailldorcha · 01-07-2019 10:53am

greenfield21 wrote: »

Does no one here really see Trump's ideas, policies etc. gaining further support as time goes on?I don't want to get into the details of immigration and global trade among other topics but there is definitely alot more discussion now and it looks like those topics aren't going to disappear whether Trump's in power or not.

I don't to be honest. Trumpism is effectively a cult of personality and that personality is constrained to two presidential terms. It's possible that Trump may groom a successor but whether or not that individual will have the same appeal remains to be seen.

I think time will show that Trump's approach will not solve any problems long term. Denying climate change and frustrating states' attempts to tackle it will merely exacerbate the situation which will in turn have a knock-on effect on migration. Without bold action on climate change worldwide then we're going to see a lot more mass migration as people abandon their desolate holdings and move to pastures new.

Trump has shown no indication whatsoever that he's even thought about this at all. Instead, he denies climate change and postures for his faithful supporters. When Trumpism fails to show results it will begin to wither and die. The best we can hope for is that the succeeding ideology is more progressive both in terms of addressing migration and climate change as well as tackling inequality in the US.

Water John · 01-07-2019 11:01am

The pen is mightier than the sword. Ivanka has done herself a lot of damage. When the're laughing at you, you're in trouble.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/01/unwantedivanka-awkward-moment-at-g20-prompts-slew-of-trump-parodies

everlast75 · 01-07-2019 11:04am

greenfield21 wrote: »

Does no one here really see Trump's ideas, policies etc. gaining further support as time goes on?I don't want to get into the details of immigration and global trade among other topics but there is definitely alot more discussion now and it looks like those topics aren't going to disappear whether Trump's in power or not.

I think the worrying thing from Trump's perspective is that he isn't winning over any mew supporters. Yes, his "base" remain but he isn't converting anyone over to his side. Truth be told, he is losing supporters due to the dumpster fire administration and it's handling of even the most basic of things.

Quin_Dub · 01-07-2019 11:18am

everlast75 wrote: »

I think the worrying thing from Trump's perspective is that he isn't winning over any mew supporters. Yes, his "base" remain but he isn't converting anyone over to his side. Truth be told, he is losing supporters due to the dumpster fire administration and it's handling of even the most basic of things.

This is the biggest challenge for him.

His win was razor thin across a few states and a not insignificant % of his support came from the "Anyone But Hillary" camp.

I'm not sure that any of the current potential Dem candidates would generate the same level of "anti-Support" as HRC.

Some may stay at home , some may vote for the Dem candidate (if they choose a moderate).

Either way , he is utterly reliant on maximising turn-out from a finite pool of voters so he will continue to ramp up the feverish invective to energise those elements of his base. It's his only chance.

"Open Borders!!!"
"Abortion for all!!!"
"Take away your guns!!!"
etc. etc. etc.

Midlife · 01-07-2019 11:19am

Igotadose wrote: »

I think the discussion of the USD being called into question as the world's reserve currency is pretty important. Trump's accelerating that with his wild actions. Fareed Zakaria of CNN has been talking about this recently, though it came up in this article a year ago: https://qz.com/1403708/donald-trumps-foreign-policy-is-putting-the-dollar-at-risk/

This could be very important if it plays out.

The advantage to the US of dollars being the global currency is what 'leader of the free world' actually brings.

IMO, it's not entirely irrelevant that the first nation to switch oil sales to euros over dollars was Iraq, right before they were invaded and it was switched back by the newly installed government.

Aside from simply the world trading in dollars, what Trump and his suppporters don't at seem to appreciate, or are happy to ignore, is the soft power that makes the US what it is globally.

Reducing America's stance in the world by implementing isolationist MAGA policies or by simply being really really annoying and untrustworthy will have a significant impact on the future of the US.

Penn · 01-07-2019 11:26am

everlast75 wrote: »

I think the worrying thing from Trump's perspective is that he isn't winning over any mew supporters. Yes, his "base" remain but he isn't converting anyone over to his side. Truth be told, he is losing supporters due to the dumpster fire administration and it's handling of even the most basic of things.

I agree. I think he's definitely been losing more supporters than he's gained, and even though his supporters are pretty much being even more fervent in their support for him, he might be unlikely to gain any more going forward.

The question is however, will he lose supporters in the places where it matters, and what lengths will Trump and the GOP go to in order to make sure he doesn't. The latter is the most worrying thing.

pixelburp · 01-07-2019 11:29am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

).

Either way , he is utterly reliant on maximising turn-out from a finite pool of voters so he will continue to ramp up the feverish invective to energise those elements of his base. It's his only chance.

"Open Borders!!!"
"Abortion for all!!!"
"Take away your guns!!!"
etc. etc. etc.

If you listen to his most recent rallies, this is precisely the rhetoric being used, if not even more extreme. The hyperbole re. abortion has gone from "abortions for all" to "they rip full term babies out the womb and kill them". I'd have to dig out the speeches but Trump is making these noises. There's obviously a feeling the argument is being lost on giving even limited abortion services, so Reps have ramped up the emotional elements, using outright scare tactics

As is being said, Trump isn't gaining support, so he's just doubling down on the histrionics his dwindling base will support. 2020 then becomes how the Democrats mobilised the disenfranchised on both sides. I guess this is why they're terrified about a non-centrist candidate, that they're hoping to bring disillusioned Reps to their side?

Quin_Dub · 01-07-2019 11:40am

pixelburp wrote: »

If you listen to his most recent rallies, this is precisely the rhetoric being used, if not even more extreme. The hyperbole re. abortion has gone from "abortions for all" to "they rip full term babies out the womb and kill them". I'd have to dig out the speeches but Trump is making these noises. There's obviously a feeling the argument is being lost on giving even limited abortion services, so Reps have ramped up the emotional elements, using outright scare tactics

As is being said, Trump isn't gaining support, so he's just doubling down on the histrionics his dwindling base will support. 2020 then becomes how the Democrats mobilised the disenfranchised on both sides. I guess this is why they're terrified about a non-centrist candidate, that they're hoping to bring disillusioned Reps to their side?

Absolutely - They are terrified of influencing the "Hold your nose" Trump voters.

They either want them to stay at home or maybe even vote DEM , but if there is a "far-left" Dem candidate, then there is a high risk that those moderate GOP voters will be energised to vote to ensure that a GOP candidate gets in.

amandstu · 01-07-2019 12:24pm

Did Trump not say about N.Korea that they would not get nuclear weapons ("trust me ,it won't happen" or words to that effect )?

Does anyone remember that or can find a ref?

Not saying that we shouldn't try to support his efforts re N.Korea but that would have been a self serving thing to say and, viewed the enormity of the situation quite unforgivable to give false hope as we now see it.

Leroy42 · 01-07-2019 12:33pm

To restate a point a made previously, surely this is just another example that Iran need to get their hands on a nuclear weapon. US, and Trump have proven that without one they will simply push you around, chop up any previous agreements and simply go with whatever they feel like at the time.

BTW, I am not advocating Iran getting nuclear weapons, just that they really have no reason not to look to get those weapons.

everlast75 · 01-07-2019 12:41pm

amandstu wrote: »

Did Trump not say about N.Korea that they would not get nuclear weapons ("trust me ,it won't happen" or words to that effect )?

Does anyone remember that or can find a ref?

Not saying that we shouldn't try to support his efforts re N.Korea but that would have been a self serving thing to say and, viewed the enormity of the situation quite unforgivable to give false hope as we now see it.

He is a complete BS artist. He lies constantly so there is surely a quote of him saying one thing and another saying the exact opposite.

I just can't get passed all the lies and why none of his supporters or fellow "Republicans" have an issue with this. Is it that they have the "win at all costs, **** the ethics" perspective?

If you can't "win" without lying, surely they have to know that their argument cannot stand on its own merits.

That's the problem I find with debating Trump supporters. It's rarely about the facts, its about opinions or interpretations or when facts are presented, it turns into whataboutery. If you can't have a discussion in good faith then don't have one at all.

Christy42 · 01-07-2019 12:42pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

To restate a point a made previously, surely this is just another example that Iran need to get their hands on a nuclear weapon. US, and Trump have proven that without one they will simply push you around, chop up any previous agreements and simply go with whatever they feel like at the time.

BTW, I am not advocating Iran getting nuclear weapons, just that they really have no reason not to look to get those weapons.

Around the time of the Iraq war there was a Bremner Bird and Fortune (I think) sketch to that effect. About an ambassador from a made up country giving an interview saying they wanted nukes so the US would not invade. He described 3 strategies. Say you have them and everyone knows it (N. Korea), say you don't but have them (Israel) or say you have them and don't but that one is risky because then they send weapon inspectors and if they don't find anything then...

Sometimes the Republican playbook doesn't change that much.

Midlife · 01-07-2019 12:54pm

The problem with Iran has very little to do with nuclear weapons. They impact on American interests in the middle east.

North Korea don't so that Trump and current (and previous) governments doesn't really care beyond PR opportunities, global leadership etc.

Iran however are different. They are a direct challenge to US/Saudi dominance of middle east. If the only goal was to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, then why tear up the deal that was in place.

North Korea are a problem all by themselves.

Iran is more about oil, Saudi Arabia and middle east geopolitics in general. As mentioned earlier, a lot of this has to do with countries piushing to replace the dollar with euro when it comes to international trading.

Saudi Arabia is a conservative middle east country sitting on huge oil reserves and happy to cosy up to the US - america loves them.

Iran is a conservatie middle east country sitting on huge oil reserves and doesn't play ball - sanctions.

It's really just new age colonialism.

dr.fuzzenstein · 01-07-2019 1:19pm

12gauge dave wrote: »

Calling trumps voters assholes and getting 10 "thanks" says alot about the clientele in this thread.

There is a certain type I was referring to.
These people say "I'm fed up of all that lefty/SJW/feminist bullsh*t and that's why I voted for Trump, so it's all the fault of de left that Trump is in Power".
So those people are assholes, pure and simple.

volchitsa · 01-07-2019 1:23pm

Midlife wrote: »

The problem with Iran has very little to do with nuclear weapons. They impact on American interests in the middle east.

North Korea don't so that Trump and current (and previous) governments doesn't really care beyond PR opportunities, global leadership etc.

Iran however are different. They are a direct challenge to US/Saudi dominance of middle east. If the only goal was to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, then why tear up the deal that was in place.

North Korea are a problem all by themselves.

Iran is more about oil, Saudi Arabia and middle east geopolitics in general. As mentioned earlier, a lot of this has to do with countries piushing to replace the dollar with euro when it comes to international trading.

Saudi Arabia is a conservative middle east country sitting on huge oil reserves and happy to cosy up to the US - america loves them.

Iran is a conservatie middle east country sitting on huge oil reserves and doesn't play ball - sanctions.

It's really just new age colonialism.

The problem is that the lesson that Iran will take away from the double standards applied to NK compared to them is that to get respect from the Americans they really need nuclear weapons.

And they would not be wrong.

Midlife · 01-07-2019 1:52pm

volchitsa wrote: »

The problem is that the lesson that Iran will take away from the double standards applied to NK compared to them is that to get respect from the Americans they really need nuclear weapons.

And they would not be wrong.

I agree in part..

I think they're well aware that to get respect from the Americans, they need to fall in line in an economic sense. It won't make a difference how advance their nuclear capabilities are.

The thing posted earlier is massive though. Europe and Iran have agreed a go-around to trade oil in return for Euros. Now American interests are more directly challenged by an Iran/Europe combination than Iran ever did on their own.

This is a massive massive own goal for Trump's international statecraft. And a massive massive plus for Europe.

America is now in a far worse position regarding Iran and have to either climb down and go back to the original deal or start sanctioning Europe for sticking to the original deal.

Massive massive blunder and primarly because he wanted to tear down something of Obama's that people said was good.

Seriously seriously bad leadership.

It's almost like they don't know what they're doing.

peddlelies · 01-07-2019 1:54pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

"Open Borders!!!"
"Abortion for all!!!"
"Take away your guns!!!"
etc. etc. etc.

Akin to what? "Putting y'all back in chains" ?

Trump would be stupid not to attack their stances on illegal immigration. During the debate Julian Castro wanted to repeal part of the code which says it’s a federal crime to enter the country without authorization. In the second debate when asked if it should be a civil offence not a crime to enter the country illegally all candidates raised their hands. The night before they did the same thing when asked if illegal immigrants should be provided free Government health care.

Now I don't think the Democrats are for "open borders", but I do think a lot of people will have a problem with what seems like obvious encouragement of illegal immigration, and tax dollars being used to provide healthcare and other incentives to non citizens.

01-07-2019 2:01pm

volchitsa wrote: »

The problem is that the lesson that Iran will take away from the double standards applied to NK compared to them is that to get respect from the Americans they really need nuclear weapons.

And they would not be wrong.

Libya is a more pertinent example.

volchitsa · 01-07-2019 2:18pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Libya is a more pertinent example.

I don't think so. Iran is already a formidable military force that western countries would hesitate to take on directly, even without nuclear weapons. Libya wasn't.

That's why Libya was chosen as the scapegoat for Lockerbie when in fact it was almost certainly Iran, and it's highly likely that the invasion of Iraq was intended to warn Iran off a bit without having to actually tackle them directly.

Of course it went south from there, but that's a different matter.

amandstu · 01-07-2019 3:50pm

everlast75 wrote: »

That's the problem I find with debating Trump supporters. It's rarely about the facts, its about opinions or interpretations or when facts are presented, it turns into whataboutery. If you can't have a discussion in good faith then don't have one at all.

I think I saw that question answered for the Republicans (why they support him) and it was "Google hypocrisy"

Whataboutery is probably a tool for weaker minds.

edit I wonder if all these one on one private meetings he has with foreign leaders is because he actually thinks he can bribe them.

everlast75 · 01-07-2019 4:08pm

It would appear the tiny left hand doesn't know what the tiny right hand is doing. Someone is miffed anyway.

https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/1145646367865528320?s=19

Bolton was in Mongolia when this was happening. Tucker Carlson was, of course, front and centre.

Sean.3516 · 01-07-2019 4:41pm

batgoat wrote: »

You're classifying FDR as a bad president? FDR and Wilson tend to rank as the best US presidents... Obama while not at their level, he still brought them out of the biggest economic crash since the Great Depression... Trump meanwhile has no real achievements to speak of. So can't really think of a reason that he's better than any of them..

FDR’s economic meddling with the New Deal lengthened the Great Depression by about 8 years according to a study by Stanford economists.

Wilson was probably the closest thing the US ever had to a fascist president. He was a eugenecist who wanted America modelled on the German Empire in terms of “social order”. Not to mention he was a vicious racist who had the KKK film “Birth of a Nation” screened at the White House.

As for Obama leading them out of an economic crash. Most Depressions in the US barring large scale economic interventionism are soon followed by a boom of equal magnitude. America’s recovery after the economic crash of 2008 was the slowest recovery the US has ever had.

When people ask what Trump has achieved, first of all he hasnt messed anything up royally yet, despite the tariff silliness. One of the best things any leader can hope to achieve is to not interfere in the lives of it’s citizens and leave them the hell alone.

serfboard · 01-07-2019 4:47pm

everlast75 wrote: »

It would appear the tiny left hand doesn't know what the tiny right hand is doing. Someone is miffed anyway.

John Bolton calling someone else's behaviour "reprehensible" and saying that there should be consequences. That's a laugh.

Stallingrad · 01-07-2019 4:52pm

I know it is impossible to separate Trump from his baggage, but it must be viewed as a good thing that there are meetings like this.

Sure, it could be nothing more than PR and bluster for both of them, but that accusation would be leveled at any meeting of a US President with NK. Would HC have ever met Kim? I doubt it.

Obama warned T that the biggest danger he faced was NK, so typically T is going the extra mile to proves he can do what Obama could not.

The outright sycophancy and praise of Kim are sickening to watch though, but if this grotesque display inches NK toward normality then it will be quickly forgotten about.

Differences get resolved by diplomacy and discussion a lot more effectively than sanctions or war.

Sean.3516 · 01-07-2019 5:21pm

serfboard wrote: »

John Bolton calling someone else's behaviour "reprehensible" and saying that there should be consequences. That's a laugh.

What did Bolton ever do that was so bad?

Igotadose · 01-07-2019 5:33pm

Sean.3516 wrote: »

What did Bolton ever do that was so bad?

He's the worst National Security Advisor in history, by your morality metric:rolleyes:. Previously he was the worst UN Ambassador in history.

Quin_Dub · 01-07-2019 5:46pm

peddlelies wrote: »

Akin to what? "Putting y'all back in chains" ?

Trump would be stupid not to attack their stances on illegal immigration. During the debate Julian Castro wanted to repeal part of the code which says it’s a federal crime to enter the country without authorization. In the second debate when asked if it should be a civil offence not a crime to enter the country illegally all candidates raised their hands. The night before they did the same thing when asked if illegal immigrants should be provided free Government health care.

Now I don't think the Democrats are for "open borders", but I do think a lot of people will have a problem with what seems like obvious encouragement of illegal immigration, and tax dollars being used to provide healthcare and other incentives to non citizens.

This is the point though..

There are perfectly good debates to have about Immigration for example - The Criminal charge vs. Civil charge (Do they get locked up or do get just get turned around and sent home etc.?) or the value of investment in the source countries to help improve their economies to encourage people to stay in their birthplace etc. are discussions that grown-ups could have.

But Trump distills all of the nuance there down to "Democrats love open borders and love MS-13!!!"

Designed , not to get people to understand why his policy/approach might be better , but simply to enrage and energise his base and work them up into a fever-pitch.

He uses no logic in his approach, he simply plays on driving heightened emotions mostly anger and fear to fuel his voters.

Professor Moriarty · 01-07-2019 5:47pm

Sean.3516 wrote: »

What did Bolton ever do that was so bad?

Ironically, he's a self-confessed draft dodger.

Quin_Dub · 01-07-2019 5:49pm

Sean.3516 wrote: »

What did Bolton ever do that was so bad?

His sole foreign policy position is "Bomb them back to the stone-age and replace their leadership with puppets that will do what we tell them"

He hasn't gotten to do it very often thankfully , but it doesn't stop him proposing it at every available opportunity.

Leroy42 · 01-07-2019 5:57pm

Sean.3516 wrote: »

As for Obama leading them out of an economic crash. Most Depressions in the US barring large scale economic interventionism are soon followed by a boom of equal magnitude. America’s recovery after the economic crash of 2008 was the slowest recovery the US has ever had.

How many great depressions/recessions has the US had, and how many recoveries are you talking about for the sample? What were the growth rates and were the financial markets still operational unlike when Bush allowed the messing that lead to the collapse?

Sean.3516 wrote: »

When people ask what Trump has achieved, first of all he hasnt messed anything up royally yet, despite the tariff silliness. One of the best things any leader can hope to achieve is to not interfere in the lives of it’s citizens and leave them the hell alone.

Well except if you are a woman looking for an abortion. Or a farmer trying to export soya beans. Or coloured people in the southern states that are now being faced with open racism again.

Or if you are looking for education in the public arena. Or foodstamps. Or require medical care. He has, at the very least, tried to make these situations worse. And of course due to his failed economic policy (didn't he promise 5% growth to pay for the tax cuts?) Although the GDP continues to rise for 2018 tax revenues actually fell. So in effect the rise in GDP is pointless (except of course for the corporations who benefit. And that is going to negatively impact everyone in the future.

serfboard · 01-07-2019 6:11pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Ironically, he's a self-confessed draft dodger.

Wikipedia wrote:

Bolton was a supporter of the Vietnam War, but purposely avoided military service in Vietnam ...

He wrote in his Yale 25th reunion book: "I confess I had no desire to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy."

Yes John, you didn't want to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy. But you had no problem supporting a policy that would ensure that others did - a classic Chickenhawk:

Wikipedia wrote:

Chickenhawk ... is a political term used in the United States to describe a person who strongly supports war or other military action ... yet who actively avoids or avoided military service

Professor Moriarty · 01-07-2019 6:16pm

serfboard wrote: »

Yes John, you didn't want to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy. But you had no problem supporting a policy that would ensure that others did - a classic Chickenhawk:

Chicken hawk! Equally applies to The Donald.

Kermit.de.frog · 01-07-2019 6:36pm

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

This is the most cringe inducing thing you’ll see this year. Is she there in an official capacity representing the US? I can’t understake Why someone so completely unqualified is even in this situation? Or is she just trumps envoy?
Can anyone explain please?

https://twitter.com/anandwrites/status/1145165584721731584?s=21

She has no business being there. None.

They are 100% right to treat her with disdain when she is always trying to interupt.

Stop moaning ffs · 01-07-2019 6:53pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

She has no business being there. None.

They are 100% right to treat her with disdain when she is always trying to interupt.

If as has been suggested by other more knowledgeable posters than I earlier in the thread, she is actually being groomed to run at some point, you’ll see the video and this type of imagery being used no doubt.
She is completely unqualified to be there. All my American pals are mortified.

##Mod Edit## Meme removed

Igotadose · 01-07-2019 6:55pm

serfboard wrote: »

Yes John, you didn't want to die in a Southeast Asian rice paddy. But you had no problem supporting a policy that would ensure that others did - a classic Chickenhawk:

Both are odious, however in his defense, Bolton did what many young men did during the Vietnam era, took one of the legal deferments available by joining the National Guard. Many young men did.

Of course he was hypocritical about supporting the war and then hiding from the draft. Plenty didn't support the war and did what Bolton did.

But, and it's a big difference, Trump simply bought himself a medical deferment, the well-known bone spurs.

So, Bolton's bad, Trump's still worse, *he* could've joined the national guard but instead banged around studio 54 during the war, as he likes to brag about.

TomOnBoard · 01-07-2019 9:03pm

On top of his chickenhawk warmongering, and probably related, Bolton is a religious bigot with a clear hatred for practitioners of Islam. A poisonous man and a danger to the whole world...

peddlelies · 01-07-2019 9:24pm

TomOnBoard wrote: »

On top of his chickenhawk warmongering, and probably related, Bolton is a religious bigot with a clear hatred for practitioners of Islam. A poisonous man and a danger to the whole world...

I don't like Bolton one iota, but why is it that when people criticize Islam they're "bigots", but the evangelical right in the US are fair game. I'm not saying you personally do it, but it's all a bit baffling to me.

TomOnBoard · 01-07-2019 9:43pm

peddlelies wrote: »

TomOnBoard wrote: »

On top of his chickenhawk warmongering, and probably related, Bolton is a religious bigot with a clear hatred for practitioners of Islam. A poisonous man and a danger to the whole world...

I don't like Bolton one iota, but why is it that when people criticize Islam they're "bigots", but the evangelical right in the US are fair game. I'm not saying you personally do it, but it's all a bit baffling to me.

Bolton doesn't just criticise Islam; he actively promotes lies and misinformation that foments hatreds for practitioners of the religion. He is in a position of huge power and has the ability to bring 'fire and fury' down on the heads of millions of people based on his bigoted beliefs.

That's a long way from commentators on Boards criticising the evangelical right for a complete hypocrisy in their support for a misogynist philanderer who is also a crook and a despot and who (along with his sleazy, leeching progeny) has been legally banned from ever holding a leadership position in a charity of any kind in the whole State of New York.

Are you still baffled or does that sort it out for you?

pixelburp · 01-07-2019 10:02pm

peddlelies wrote: »

I don't like Bolton one iota, but why is it that when people criticize Islam they're "bigots", but the evangelical right in the US are fair game. I'm not saying you personally do it, but it's all a bit baffling to me.

Religion of any extremity is fair game for criticism, but to be fair the "evangelical right" is correctly marked as a fringe (a powerful fringe mind) subset of Christianity with America, nevermind the world. The strawman might be sometimes invoked, but there's little insinuation that the evangelical right === Christians.

Too many discussions on Islam do not make this tacit acknowledgment, note the distinction of there being subsets and variations of Islamic belief; while often a lazy, hostile strawman is quickly invoked as a battering ram as to why Islam is incompatible with "Western" culture, in whatever form that's meant during the argument. And if that's not invoked, you'll get whataboutery to castigate the relative lay people along the lines of "well, why don't the good/normal Muslims protest against the extremists" (they do, but it's hand waved away) See After Hours on this very site to see this kind of mentality.

If bigotry is an unfair descriptor, IMO there's a dishonesty in perspective between the two relative extremes. Muslims are "other"ed far quicker and more aggressively than the evangelicals.

TomOnBoard · 01-07-2019 10:07pm

Trump's been burning a hole in the twitter machine today. This time, he's been screeching about how bad New York is to him and how mean they are there.

There must be some huge development from one or more of the SDNY and NY State investigations about to hit the presses! That might also explain the indecent haste with which the photo op was arranged in Korea yesterday. Deflection, deflection, deflection. ...

Water John · 01-07-2019 10:15pm

Tish, can't remember her full name, NY State Attorney has tweeted she'll go after anyone incl the President who has broken the law.
Here she is Letitia James;
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/451184-new-york-ag-fires-back-at-trump-no-one-is-above-the-law

TomOnBoard · 01-07-2019 11:29pm

More of it!!!

A month ago, Trump's administration announced that Huawei were a danger to the USA and were classified as absolutely off limits for US companies to deal with...

And today, they're grand! Work away and deal with them all ye like. ..

Like, WTF!!! Do they have an iota of a clue there???

peddlelies · 02-07-2019 12:05am

pixelburp wrote: »

Too many discussions on Islam do not make this tacit acknowledgment, note the distinction of there being subsets and variations of Islamic belief; while often a lazy, hostile strawman is quickly invoked as a battering ram as to why Islam is incompatible with "Western" culture, in whatever form that's meant during the argument. And if that's not invoked, you'll get whataboutery to castigate the relative lay people along the lines of "well, why don't the good/normal Muslims protest against the extremists" (they do, but it's hand waved away) See After Hours on this very site to see this kind of mentality.

I think there's actual substance there. I appreciate the genuine reply even though I disagree. This thread isn't for that discussion.

20Cent · 02-07-2019 7:59am

AOC's reports on the internment camps are shocking. There has also been found to be a Facebook group for border agents which is full of racist comments, "jokes" about sexual assault and cruelty. This comes from the top trumps comments make them think this is ok.

pixelburp · 02-07-2019 12:32pm

I saw AOC's impromptu press conference as she left in a car; it's rare to see a politician genuinely enraged as much as she clearly was. She. Was. P*ssed. And as she remarked, what she saw was while everyone was on 'best behaviour' for the appearance of a member of Congress.

It's all well and good chattering about when this policy started and there are those that's say "Oh but Obama started it...", to which the response must surely be ... so what if he did? It doesn't change the guilt by association for any President with a conscience to allow this disgusting, inhumane treatment to continue. Trumps is choosing to allow this institutionalised inhumanity to continue. They are Concentration Camps and fair play to AOC for calling them out as this - especially once the disingenuous started quibbling over the (actually accurate) language.

Still believe AOC's honeymoon will come crashing down at some point, she'll eventually lose the shine of righteousness once <insert scandal here> occurs, but in the meantime I gotta admire her bullish, no-f*cks-given approach. She's part of a rotten system and seems unafraid to call it out. Her savvy social media presence and - let's be honest here - youthful good looks, is getting the message across; I can see why the GOP are obsessed with her.

Leroy42 · 02-07-2019 12:34pm

Check out this answer from Trump about how dirty US cities are (when compared to the cleanliness of Japan).

Clearly Trump hadn't a breeze and was just riffing, but it gives a good insight into his thinking.

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1145891322127114240

He even manages to place the blame on the liberals!

rossie1977 · 02-07-2019 12:35pm

She the smartest politican in the US and the right wing obsession in trying to tear her down is only succeeding in giving her free advertising.

everlast75 · 02-07-2019 12:41pm

pixelburp wrote: »

I saw AOC's impromptu press conference as she left in a car; it's rare to see a politician genuinely enraged as much as she clearly was. She. Was. P*ssed. And as she remarked, what she saw was while everyone was on 'best behaviour' for the appearance of a member of Congress.

It's all well and good chattering about when this policy started and there are those that's say "Oh but Obama started it...", to which the response must surely be ... so what if he did? It doesn't change the guilt by association for any President with a conscience to allow this disgusting, inhumane treatment to continue. Trumps is choosing to allow this institutionalised inhumanity to continue. They are Concentration Camps and fair play to AOC for calling them out as this - especially once the disingenuous started quibbling over the (actually accurate) language.

Still believe AOC's honeymoon will come crashing down at some point, she'll eventually lose the shine of righteousness once <insert scandal here> occurs, but in the meantime I gotta admire her bullish, no-f*cks-given approach. She's part of a rotten system and seems unafraid to call it out. Her savvy social media presence and - let's be honest here - youthful good looks, is getting the message across; I can see why the GOP are obsessed with her.

Off the top of my head and I am open to correction but

1) catch and release was used in Obama's time and according to US agencies it was working. Trump stopped that.

2) Trump introduced the separation of families thing as a deterrent

3) Trump started prosecuting people for the misdemeanor of crossing the borders, not done under Obama

4) Trump closed the border

5) Trump has vilified immigrants - not done under Obama's watch

Again, I could be wrong, but there are marked differences I think

James Brown · 02-07-2019 3:55pm

Good commentary by a lad the other day, (if I find a link).
Basically talking on how Trump is aggressive and argumentative with traditional allies yet gives compliments to the likes of the Saudis, Putin, Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping.
It's possible it's some kind of tactic but the word is N.K will be allowed keep some nukes and both China and Putin do what they like while Trump jokes with and compliments them.
It seems to be a case of Trump wanting to be seen to be a deal maker even if there is no deal or a bad one.

mcmoustache · 02-07-2019 4:25pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It seems to be a case of Trump wanting to be seen to be a deal maker even if there is no deal or a bad one.

It's the same with everything. Trump knows his base and he knows that if he is shown crossing the DMZ that his supporters will think that something of substance was achieved. While he might be ignorant of a lot of things, he understands his base better than most and acts accordingly.

Those whiny tweets, those attacks on Kapaernik, the easily disproven lies, the central park five nonsense, the "emergency" at the border - those aren't a serious effort to bring people to his side. That's Trump giving his base what they want. It's also Trump revealing what he thinks of them.

Now, back to Trump's "historic" moment, at least according to himself and his base. If only there was a way to compare his achievement with that of his predecessors. That way, we could tell whether this was anything of substance or just Trump playing to his base.

Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

Comments