Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

Professor Moriarty

A Little Pony wrote: »

I remember people saying this guy would be like Hitler. That certainly hasn't came to fruition. The funniest politician in history, yes. A genocidal dictator, no.

He is funny in a buffoonery way and everything you say is factually correct - but it ignores the insidious and cancerous nature of the Trump presidency. The damage he has done to politics, democracy, the media and the office of POTUS has yet to fully play out. History will treat him much as it will treat his alter ego Kim Jong-un. A self-entitled and dysfunctional narcissist propelled by circumstance to a position of power.

PropJoe10

A Little Pony wrote: »

I remember people saying this guy would be like Hitler. That certainly hasn't came to fruition. The funniest politician in history, yes. A genocidal dictator, no.

I don't really find it funny when he's demeaning the office of POTUS and eroding the democratic right to free speech. He's a buffoon, but not a funny one - a dangerous one.

Water John

Pony's post says more about Pony than Trump.

Gbear

The histrionics from the press over the wrestling video don't do them any credit.

If there's a story at all here it's that the president of the US is only capable of communicating through memes and someone with the intellect and temperament of a teenager shouldn't be in such a position.

Trying to suggest it's advocating violence only plays into the narrative that the left, liberals, the media and all that are soft, weak-willed cowards who start whining at the drop of a hat.

There's more than enough real things to attack Trump over and diluting the issues of substance with this guff only plays into his hands.
Russia, his healthcare policy, his attacks on institutions in the US, the abandoning of the environment to big business, using the presidency as a means to enrich himself, spending half the time on the golf course, still having failed to fill numerous positions in his administration despite months having gone by with an overwhelming level of support in the other branches of government.
To a great or lesser extent they're all far more important and they've been shelved in the news because of some inane tripe he's posted on Twitter.

How could they be so stupid?

red ears

What i see is a man trying to implement what he promised the voters he would during a democratic election. The media and a band of self righteous liberals have decided to hell with democracy we don't agree with Donald Trump so we are going to try and sabotage his presidency.

Professor Moriarty

red ears wrote: »

What i see is a man trying to implement what he promised the voters he would during a democratic election. The media and a band of self righteous liberals have decided to hell with democracy we don't agree with Donald Trump so we are going to try and sabotage his presidency.

He's sabotaging his own presidency. Just wind him up and let him off.

Water John

The GOP have the Presidency and both Houses and your whinging that the liberal biased media are stopping the President getting any thing done???

red ears

red ears wrote: »

What i see is a man trying to implement what he promised the voters he would during a democratic election. The media and a band of self righteous liberals have decided to hell with democracy we don't agree with Donald Trump so we are going to try and sabotage his presidency.

Trump and Co. have full control of the US government apparatus. Theres no-one to stop them doing whatever they want, except themselves. Which they are doing in spectacular fashion. While blaming everyone and everything else around them.

Gbear

Gbear wrote: »

The histrionics from the press over the wrestling video don't do them any credit.

If there's a story at all here it's that the president of the US is only capable of communicating through memes and someone with the intellect and temperament of a teenager shouldn't be in such a position.

Trying to suggest it's advocating violence only plays into the narrative that the left, liberals, the media and all that are soft, weak-willed cowards who start whining at the drop of a hat.

There's more than enough real things to attack Trump over and diluting the issues of substance with this guff only plays into his hands.
Russia, his healthcare policy, his attacks on institutions in the US, the abandoning of the environment to big business, using the presidency as a means to enrich himself, spending half the time on the golf course, still having failed to fill numerous positions in his administration despite months having gone by with an overwhelming level of support in the other branches of government.
To a great or lesser extent they're all far more important and they've been shelved in the news because of some inane tripe he's posted on Twitter.

How could they be so stupid?

Got it in one.

Ipse dixit

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Got it in one.

And the media and the Dems won't realise this until Trump manages to get himself re-elected in 2020...

eire4

Deleted User wrote: »

Trump and Co. have full control of the US government apparatus. Theres no-one to stop them doing whatever they want, except themselves. Which they are doing in spectacular fashion. While blaming everyone and everything else around them.

Spot on and on top of the complete control at the federal level they control roughly two thirds of state legislatures and governorships as well as the supreme court. Not since the 1920's before the stock market crash ushered in the depression has a single party had such control of power in the US.

aloyisious

A Little Pony wrote: »

People didn't die under Obama? People who couldn't afford healthcare because of the ACA. If you look at the electoral map, it is astonishing. Actually take a look at the counties map, shows it even more so.

A graph showing the way the health insurance industry has managed to keep health insurance during both presidents terms of office [since ACA came in] down to a cost level manageable by its customers would be better than a map of electoral red.

It is not up to the president to micro-manage the industry. Even Don agrees with that, as shown by how he is intent on removing any form of government involvement in health care.

Billy86

A Little Pony wrote: »

Makes absolutely no sense. He won the most electoral college votes and he is President. Why are some still in denial over this, it happened in November and it is now July. Time some got over it now, surely? 

Anyway, I LOVE the way Trump handles Twitter and it is so entertaining. Looking at the media outlets taking it so seriously when Trump is only using it to distract them, he does it all the time. A master of smoke and mirrors, probably the best in US history at it.

This from the guy lamenting how politicians are not more like Thomas Jefferson anymore. :pac:

aloyisious

red ears wrote: »

What i see is a man trying to implement what he promised the voters he would during a democratic election. The media and a band of self righteous liberals have decided to hell with democracy we don't agree with Donald Trump so we are going to try and sabotage his presidency.

Would you be including the GOP Senators as saboteurs as well, seeing as how they have scuppered the passing of Don's plans through the Senate?

Christy42

A Little Pony wrote: »

People didn't die under Obama? People who couldn't afford healthcare because of the ACA. If you look at the electoral map, it is astonishing. Actually take a look at the counties map, shows it even more so.

Look at the numbers of people who got insurance under ACA vs not. Look at the expected number of people expected to have healthcare under Trump's plan (well the Senate's plan-not like Trump has a clue what is in there).

People will always die. All we can do is minimise it. Trump is set on increasing it. Of course the claim that someone died during Obama's presidency is meant to somehow justify Trump's actions leading to millions more being put at risk?

Come on. Compare the two. Obama's plan was a flawed attempt to help millions. It was not perfect but it did something in this regard. The GOP has a bill that shows it is willing to sacrifice American lives so rich people can have tax breaks.

Anyone want to defend the detail of Trump's plan?

Christy42

red ears wrote: »

What i see is a man trying to implement what he promised the voters he would during a democratic election. The media and a band of self righteous liberals have decided to hell with democracy we don't agree with Donald Trump so we are going to try and sabotage his presidency.

Do I really need to explain that you are still meant to have an opposition after an election? You are still allowed to stand up for whst you believe in even after you lose an election. All the election means is that the power to implement policies goes to a certain place. It does not mean people have to give up on what they believe in and simply let politicians organise tax breaks for themselves and their friends by trading the lives of poor people.

A Little Pony

A Little Pony wrote: »

Makes absolutely no sense. He won the most electoral college votes and he is President. Why are some still in denial over this, it happened in November and it is now July. Time some got over it now, surely? 

Anyway, I LOVE the way Trump handles Twitter and it is so entertaining. Looking at the media outlets taking it so seriously when Trump is only using it to distract them, he does it all the time. A master of smoke and mirrors, probably the best in US history at it.

Smoke and mirrors, but what is he distracting us from exactly? He's not getting anything done. Where's the wall? The travel ban was hardly a success. How's the replacement for Obama care are coming along? He's only succeeding in making himself look like the childish idiot that he is.

Billy86

Christy42 wrote: »

Come on. Compare the two. Obama's plan was a flawed attempt to help millions. It was not perfect but it did something in this regard. The GOP has a bill that shows it is willing to sacrifice American lives so rich people can have tax breaks.

And here's the funny thing - the ACA is a Republican plan called Romneycare repackaged. Obama's initial plan intended to go to considerably further lengths than the ACA but it wound up being where the two parties settled on. Many of the same fund(R)mentalists who have spent the last several years decrying the ACA as just the worstestest thing ever couldn't stop talking about how good a plan it was compared to the original versions of Obamacare back early in his presidency.

Anyone want to defend the detail of Trump's plan?

I'm taking it you've never tried to get a Trump fan to engage on policy beyond one of the "build a wall/ban the muslims/lock her up" catchphrases so let me fill you in - they don't know they're talking about on that front. It's been shown time and again in this thread and the previous ones. They are genuinely, completely unable to engage in any kind of depth on policy - partly because Der Leader doesn't appear to have any depth of policy beyond catchphrases whatsoever himself either.

InTheTrees

A Little Pony wrote: »

I remember people saying this guy would be like Hitler. That certainly hasn't came to fruition. The funniest politician in history, yes. A genocidal dictator, no.

If his "health plan" goes ahead and the old and disabled are being put out on the street then he will actually be approaching "genocidal".

The death toll from his policy will be quantifiable.

Amazing really that this is even an issue, why dont republicans just fix the current system?

Zubeneschamali

InTheTrees wrote: »

why dont republicans just fix the current system?

Because they want tax cuts, not health care for the poor.

InTheTrees

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Because they want tax cuts, not health care for the poor.

I wonder what would happen in Ireland if the government proposed something similar?

Zubeneschamali

InTheTrees wrote: »

I wonder what would happen in Ireland if the government proposed something similar?

I would vote against them. I think most people would.

BabyCheeses

red ears wrote: »

What i see is a man trying to implement what he promised the voters he would during a democratic election. The media and a band of self righteous liberals have decided to hell with democracy we don't agree with Donald Trump so we are going to try and sabotage his presidency.

I thought that Trump is distracting the media?

Can you guys figure out which story to go with, you contradict each other.

aloyisious

There seems to be different views [what's new] on the topic of US insurance healthcare costs. The 1st link covers how the percentage of US citizens has changed since ACA came into law under Obama, plus a mention on how the Pharma industry [rather than Health Insurance Co's profit margin needs] is pushing up customers costs. The 2nd link below is from Forbes and has a graph.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwidx66v5evUAhVPGsAKHUbsCPcQFgglMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftime.com%2Fmoney%2F4503325%2Fobama-health-care-costs-obamacare%2F&usg=AFQjCNGf3yoh0Cxowklexm6UYF-Bgfrcxw

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwidx66v5evUAhVPGsAKHUbsCPcQFggrMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forbes.com%2Fsites%2Ftheapothecary%2F2014%2F06%2F27%2Fprofits-in-health-insurance-under-obamacare%2F&usg=AFQjCNGXflnAt6uc3MnPasmqLdghXIdvbw

One thing I noticed is that some things which were covered [up til recently] like contraception are being dropped by some public companies from their staff health care insurance plans [if what has been mentioned in the US is correct]. If those, due to changes in US law, have been dropped, then it should [in theory] cost the employee-co's and their staff less for cover as the Ins Co's liabilities will be reduced as a result.

aloyisious

BabyCheeses wrote: »

I thought that Trump is distracting the media?

Can you guys figure out which story to go with, you contradict each other.

It's kind'a hard to ignore El Presidente Naranja, try as you will

Leroy42

red ears wrote: »

What i see is a man trying to implement what he promised the voters he would during a democratic election. The media and a band of self righteous liberals have decided to hell with democracy we don't agree with Donald Trump so we are going to try and sabotage his presidency.

How do you see that?

His main promises during the election;

Temporary Muslim travel ban
Build the wall
Drain the Swamp
Repeal and Replace Obamacare

The travel ban was a disaster because he was drafted wrong and his tweets also lead to delays. He might be trying but it appears his trying is making things worse rather than better. As POTUS, he has a large degree of power in this area, all he had to do was stay within the (pretty generous) confines of the constitution. He failed to do that. Had he done this correctly there was nothing anybody could have done to stop it. Correctly being the key word.

Build the wall - Very little movement in the one area that even his detractors can admit he knows something. He knows about construction. He knows people in that business etc etc. And what have we got? Not even a plan yet. His latest is that it will be a solar wall. Mexico were going to pay, remember that? Now he seems intent on looking at ways to offset the costs.

Drain the Swamp - Nothing. I won't say that he has made it worse, that would be very hard to do, but he is done nothing to make it better. The ACHA has been done behind closed doors, he has done little to advance the details and his Press Sec is forever claiming to not know/hasn't talked to POTUS yet.

Repeal and Replace - This has been the biggest disaster of the lot. He has no plan. He didn't even understand healthcare, admitting himself that 'no one know it was this complicated!".
He championed the passing of the house bill, before going on to say lacked heart and was mean. He has done nothing to sell the GOP senate bill to the US people, spending his time using twitter to bash those he feels are against him rather than using twitter to show the key points of the bill.
He has recently moved to saying that repeal is the only real idea, replace is not so necessary.

The above shows that it is nobody 's fault but his own that he is failing. The press have their issues, but his lack of progress cannot be laid at their door. The key question at this stage is whether this is akin to Clinton 1st few months where he performed badly before turning things around, or it is more akin to W Bush, where he was never able to recover and if anything got worse.
All signs so far point to Trump being out of his depth. Not only that, but he seems unwilling to accept that fact and to do anything about it.

He has achieved nothing that any low ranking middle manager wouldn't have been able to achieve given the power that POTUS has and the control of both Senate and House. The most worrying is that is doesn't appear that this is a time issue. It doesn't appear that it is down to lack of time (5 months) but rather a lack of ideas and ability coupled with, and this I find the most strange, a complete lack of leadership.
He doesn't appear to command any sort of leadership from anyone except those that he has direct power over

Count Dooku

Itssoeasy wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/881503147168071680

It seems Donald is using video clips now.

and people like his tweets rather than liberal media brainwashing
https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/881653920560365568

Peregrinus

Well, no. The fact that people retweet his tweets doesn't necessarily mean that they like them, Count Dooku. They could equally be retweeting to say that they find them outrageous, or risible, or pathetic, or crass, or vulgar, or ludicrous, or a new low, or deplorable, or utterly lacking in any kind of common sense or common decency. Or anything, really.

Leroy42

Gbear wrote: »

The histrionics from the press over the wrestling video don't do them any credit.

If there's a story at all here it's that the president of the US is only capable of communicating through memes and someone with the intellect and temperament of a teenager shouldn't be in such a position.

Trying to suggest it's advocating violence only plays into the narrative that the left, liberals, the media and all that are soft, weak-willed cowards who start whining at the drop of a hat.

There's more than enough real things to attack Trump over and diluting the issues of substance with this guff only plays into his hands.
Russia, his healthcare policy, his attacks on institutions in the US, the abandoning of the environment to big business, using the presidency as a means to enrich himself, spending half the time on the golf course, still having failed to fill numerous positions in his administration despite months having gone by with an overwhelming level of support in the other branches of government.
To a great or lesser extent they're all far more important and they've been shelved in the news because of some inane tripe he's posted on Twitter.

How could they be so stupid?

Its a difficult one for the media though. I think they do try to deal with the more substantive issues, but it seems that those that support him are not really interested in articles and long opinion pieces.

They try to ask questions about policy etc, but the Trump WH is happy to simply bat these back as not knowing, will reveal later, still in discussion etc. Has Trump espoused the details of the new Senate health bill for example?

The only time the WH wants to talk about policy, is when the subject they are being asked about (Flynn, tweets etc) is uncomfortable.

look at the level of likes and retweets of Trumps tweets. That is the nature of the conversation that his supporters are engaging in. The media would be only preaching to the converted to ignore this.

Is it wrong that the media report on the what POTUS is saying to the citizens of the country? Would you have questioned the media in the past for discussing a press release from Bush/Obama etc? Trump uses Twitter as his communication channel, it is the new way.

listermint

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, no. The fact that people retweet his tweets doesn't necessarily mean that they like them, Count Dooku. They could equally be retweeting to say that they find them outrageous, or risible, or pathetic, or crass, or vulgar, or ludicrous, or a new low, or deplorable, or utterly lacking in any kind of common sense or common decency. Or anything, really.

Its retweeting out of disbelief rather than 'liking it'
I dont know how anyone can aspire for the president to be using the office of potus for such childish behaviour.

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, no. The fact that people retweet his tweets doesn't necessarily mean that they like them, Count Dooku. They could equally be retweeting to say that they find them outrageous, or risible, or pathetic, or crass, or vulgar, or ludicrous, or a new low, or deplorable, or utterly lacking in any kind of common sense or common decency. Or anything, really.

I don't understand why anyone would retweet something that they don't like. Even a basic understanding of twitter will surely tell you that retweets are a currency, and by simply engaging you are giving credence to whatever message the original poster is trying to achieve.

If people are retweeting because they don't like it then they are causing more damage than helping

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

I don't understand why anyone would retweet something that they don't like. Even a basic understanding of twitter will surely tell you that retweets are a currency, and by simply engaging you are giving credence to whatever message the original poster is trying to achieve.

If people are retweeting because they don't like it then they are causing more damage than helping

Well, no. If I'm an opponent of Trump, and I think Trump's tweets reflect badly on him, are damaging to him, etc, etc, then naturally I'll retweet them. I'll want as many people as possible to see them, won't I?

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, no. If I'm an opponent of Trump, and I think Trump's tweets reflect badly on him, are damaging to him, etc, etc, then naturally I'll retweet them. I'll want as many people as possible to see them, won't I?

I agree that is what is happening, but the truth is that retweets are counted regardless of the motive, and retweets are used as a currency as to the 'value' of the original tweet.

So in effect, all that one is doing by retweeting, is giving Trump (and others like him) exactly what they what. In their minds the tweets are working.

Best thing is to ignore them.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

In their minds the tweets are working.

Best thing is to ignore them.

Disagree. The more he tweets, the more likely he is to incriminate himself.

Also, the more he argues with CNN about wrestling videos, the less time he spends doing his actual day job.

Given what he would like to get done at his day job, this is good. More golf,, more tweet battles, more election rallies please.

JRant

aloyisious wrote: »

There seems to be different views [what's new] on the topic of US insurance healthcare costs. The 1st link covers how the percentage of US citizens has changed since ACA came into law under Obama, plus a mention on how the Pharma industry [rather than Health Insurance Co's profit margin needs] is pushing up customers costs. The 2nd link below is from Forbes and has a graph.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwidx66v5evUAhVPGsAKHUbsCPcQFgglMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftime.com%2Fmoney%2F4503325%2Fobama-health-care-costs-obamacare%2F&usg=AFQjCNGf3yoh0Cxowklexm6UYF-Bgfrcxw

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwidx66v5evUAhVPGsAKHUbsCPcQFggrMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forbes.com%2Fsites%2Ftheapothecary%2F2014%2F06%2F27%2Fprofits-in-health-insurance-under-obamacare%2F&usg=AFQjCNGXflnAt6uc3MnPasmqLdghXIdvbw

One thing I noticed is that some things which were covered [up til recently] like contraception are being dropped by some public companies from their staff health care insurance plans [if what has been mentioned in the US is correct]. If those, due to changes in US law, have been dropped, then it should [in theory] cost the employee-co's and their staff less for cover as the Ins Co's liabilities will be reduced as a result.

I know The Donald previously mentioned importing cheaper pharmaceuticals from Canada in a bid to reduce overall health care costs but haven't a clue if anything is in motion on this.

It brings up the elephant in the room that Obamacare and the proposed ACA don't actually tackle. The cost of drugs and the administrative overheads are extortionate.

JRant

Leroy42 wrote: »

I agree that is what is happening, but the truth is that retweets are counted regardless of the motive, and retweets are used as a currency as to the 'value' of the original tweet.

So in effect, all that one is doing by retweeting, is giving Trump (and others like him) exactly what they what. In their minds the tweets are working.

Best thing is to ignore them.

Not at all. The best disinfectant is sunshine, the more he is retweeted for some of his nonsense the better.

I follow him on twitter, some of the comments he gets back are hilarious at taking the mickey but a large proportion are extremely abusive.

ThisRegard

Count Dooku wrote: »

and people like his tweets rather than liberal media brainwashing

I read his tweets all the time. I don't like them. I also like watching disaster movies and documentaries, but I never want to be involved in one.

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

I agree that is what is happening, but the truth is that retweets are counted regardless of the motive, and retweets are used as a currency as to the 'value' of the original tweet.

Yes, but people who treat retweets as a measure of approval are stupid, obviously. They're a measure of interest, but it may be positive interest or negative interest.

I can't spend my life trying to accommodate the sensibilities of stupid people.

Hippo

As a card-carrying SJW cuck I can safely state that the retweets appearing in my libtard echo chamber are clearly not meant as indicators of approval, but rather in a What the Actual Fcuk sense.

eagle eye

This is why Twitter is so bad, a person can keep picking out tweets suitable for their own agenda.

Igotadose

eagle eye wrote: »

This is why Twitter is so bad, a person can keep picking out tweets suitable for their own agenda.

It's not Twitter - not that I use it. It's people. Blame Trump and his followers, it's where the energy should be spent.

In the US currently on holiday. No special problems with immigration or customs. Most interesting is that the planes weren't full and we had no trouble rebooking seats due to a delay. Don't have great Internet connectivity, but it seems pretty obvious that travel is down. The Trump effect on the tourism industry in the US, I'm sure.

demfad

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Disagree. The more he tweets, the more likely he is to incriminate himself.

Also, the more he argues with CNN about wrestling videos, the less time he spends doing his actual day job.

Given what he would like to get done at his day job, this is good. More golf,, more tweet battles, more election rallies please.

'Democracy dies in the dark' is a 2017 tag-line on a major US paper and it should be considered when viewing the consistent and constant attacks on the media from this US administration.

Experts in authoritanarianism (like Sarah Kendzior) have been warning since the election that this is what the Trump admin would attempt. There seems to be an ominous air of violence around the US. Many Trump supporters do not just want to do violence to the media but feel that liberals are also a legitimate target.

In Portland a Republican has already said he would use a militia for security......


And here is a radio show host to millions implying that violence will be needed to quell teh resistance while endorsing the NRA.

Increasingly it looks like the Trump-Russia investigation if allowed to continue will destroy the Trump administration and the Republican party will take a hammering. They are waiting their moment to control the removal of Trump, and some at least seem to be tied deeper into the mire. This is normal leverage for a would be authoritarian to have over his party.

The Trump admin will either go down over Trump-Russia or he will become an authoritarian ruler of the US. He will crush the media and then in the darkness he will ensure GOP loyalty before killing the investigation.

People have stated that mass mass protests would bring him down but they are ready for this. Some of his advisors are well aware of how Ukraine fell. That wont happen in the US without a civil war.

Edit: Timely tweet from Trump..

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/881847676232503297

Professor Moriarty

demfad wrote: »

'Democracy dies in the dark' is a 2017 tag-line on a major US paper and it should be considered when viewing the consistent and constant attacks on the media from this US administration.

Experts in authoritanarianism (like Sarah Kendzior) have been warning since the election that this is what the Trump admin would attempt. There seems to be an ominous air of violence around the US. Many Trump supporters do not just want to do violence to the media but feel that liberals are also a legitimate target.

In Portland a Republican has already said he would use a militia for security......


And here is a radio show host to millions implying that violence will be needed to quell teh resistance while endorsing the NRA.

Increasingly it looks like the Trump-Russia investigation if allowed to continue will destroy the Trump administration and the Republican party will take a hammering. They are waiting their moment to control the removal of Trump, and some at least seem to be tied deeper into the mire. This is normal leverage for a would be authoritarian to have over his party.

The Trump admin will either go down over Trump-Russia or he will become an authoritarian ruler of the US. He will crush the media and then in the darkness he will ensure GOP loyalty before killing the investigation.

People have stated that mass mass protests would bring him down but they are ready for this. Some of his advisors are well aware of how Ukraine fell. That wont happen in the US without a civil war.

From your Portland link above:

Asked if this meant Republicans making their own security arrangements rather than relying on city or state police, Buchal said: “Yeah. And there are these people arising, like the Oath Keepers and the Three Percenters.”

Asked if he was considering such groups as security providers, Buchal said: “Yeah. We’re thinking about that. Because there are now belligerent, unstable people who are convinced that Republicans are like Nazis.”

Can't decide whether this is stupidity or irony. I think probably both.

demfad

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

From your Portland link above:

Asked if this meant Republicans making their own security arrangements rather than relying on city or state police, Buchal said: “Yeah. And there are these people arising, like the Oath Keepers and the Three Percenters.”

Asked if he was considering such groups as security providers, Buchal said: “Yeah. We’re thinking about that. Because there are now belligerent, unstable people who are convinced that Republicans are like Nazis.”

Can't decide whether this is stupidity or irony. I think probably both.

IMO They are saying what needs to be said to convince the malleable RW base.
'Militias are needed to protect against Democrats'. If/When the mass protests happen, what will these militias do?

Professor Moriarty

demfad wrote: »

IMO They are saying what needs to be said to convince the malleable RW base.
'Militias are needed to protect against Democrats'. If/When the mass protests happen, what will these militias do?

If they turn violent, get shot by police and army hopefully.

demfad

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If they turn violent, get shot by police and army hopefully.

But the militias are legal and legitimized by the ruling party? They can claim that the demonstrators turned violent. I doubt the Trump controlled police/army would disagree. GOP supporters are being prepared for violence by Trump, some Republicans, NRA etc.
Then declare marshall Law. This is how authoritarians consolidate power.

People might ask, surely this couldn't happen in the US?
Thats not the question to ask. The question is are DJT and his backers capable of this to save themselves?
We know the answer. They are and seem to be preparing for it.

Professor Moriarty

demfad wrote: »

But the militias are legal and legitimized by the ruling party? They can claim that the demonstrators turned violent. I doubt the Trump controlled police/army would disagree. GOP supporters are being prepared for violence by Trump, some Republicans, NRA etc.

Craven and all as the GOP is, I don't think they'll let it get that far. Nor would the upper echelons of the FBI, CIA, police, army etc. Anyway, Trump is too stupid to be able to instigate an authoritarian regime. What he is doing is reckless and divisive but I can't see an armed revolution.

demfad

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Craven and all as the GOP is, I don't think they'll let it get that far. Nor would the upper echelons of the FBI, CIA, police, army etc. Anyway, Trump is too stupid to be able to instigate an authoritarian regime. What he is doing is reckless and divisive but I can't see an armed revolution.

Trump is a 'blunt instrument' as Bannon described him he is being used and remember he already fired the FBI head.
I am not describing an armed revolution I am describing a crackdown by this administration on dissent.
'Wouldn't let it happen' is a phrase that all people in authoritarian regimes must have used before it happened. Heck many of the GOP probably tell themselves that. Their problem is that there will never be a good time to dump Trump as their own party is too badly exposed.
As recently as last week the GOP had no problems with Trump ordering Kris Kobach to retrieve voter registration data from every US State. This is under the guise of Trumps ridiculous claim about illegal voters but is clearly for the purposes of voter suppression and gerry mandering. They are OK with it.

Does anyone really believe this admin is going to end of natural causes?

Professor Moriarty

demfad wrote: »

Trump is a 'blunt instrument' as Bannon described him he is being used and remember he already fired the FBI head.
I am not describing an armed revolution I am describing a crackdown by this administration on dissent.
'Wouldn't let it happen' is a phrase that all people in authoritarian regimes must have used before it happened. Heck many of the GOP probably tell themselves that. Their problem is that there will never be a good time to dump Trump as their own party is too badly exposed.
As recently as last week the GOP had no problems with Trump ordering Kris Kobach to retrieve voter registration data from every US State. This is under the guise of Trumps ridiculous claim about illegal voters but is clearly for the purposes of voter suppression and gerry mandering. They are OK with it.

Does anyone really believe this admin is going to end of natural causes?

Yes but many states told him to foxtrot oscar. He (i.e. Bannon and Trump's other manipulators) has been going after the intel services and the media in particular but I think this is backfiring spectacularly and I'm waiting for the thud of the other shoe from the FBI. In all of this, I have faith in his plummeting approval ratings.

Calina

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

demfad wrote: »

But the militias are legal and legitimized by the ruling party? They can claim that the demonstrators turned violent. I doubt the Trump controlled police/army would disagree. GOP supporters are being prepared for violence by Trump, some Republicans, NRA etc.

Craven and all as the GOP is, I don't think they'll let it get that far. Nor would the upper echelons of the FBI, CIA, police, army etc. Anyway, Trump is too stupid to be able to instigate an authoritarian regime. What he is doing is reckless and divisive but I can't see an armed revolution.

I think it is naive to suggest the GOP would not let this happen because they already are. The time to prevent it was to stop him getting the nomination. Every chance they have had since, they have blown. And the issue is not just Trump, it is the people behind him.