Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

Water John

You are correct. But there is a base, incl some posters here, who disagree with you assessment. Deflection, look over there, seems to be the main defence. The distance between the GOP and the POTUS is widening and that's his biggest threat ATM. They no longer fear him or respect him, but it's up for debate as to which is worse. McConnell and Ryan have shown to be empty hands.

Headshot

This made me laugh

https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/DamagedShowyEeve

Igotadose

WH aides duped by fake e-mail. The clown car rolls on:http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/31/politics/white-house-officials-tricked-by-email-prankster/index.html
Vacationing in Seattle for the last month. In this left-wing bastion of PC, the tension in the air is palpable. People are grim, unhappy and quick-triggered. The weather's been very warm, that doesn't help, and it's mad crowded and very expensive, too. But the unceasing chaos from the POTUS and the WH are clearly contributing to the tension. No one I know that voted for Trump will answer 'would you vote for him again.' Deflect, deflect, change subject, ...

Professor Moriarty

Igotadose wrote: »

WH aides duped by fake e-mail. The clown car rolls on:http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/31/politics/white-house-officials-tricked-by-email-prankster/index.html
Vacationing in Seattle for the last month. In this left-wing bastion of PC, the tension in the air is palpable. People are grim, unhappy and quick-triggered. The weather's been very warm, that doesn't help, and it's mad crowded and very expensive, too. But the unceasing chaos from the POTUS and the WH are clearly contributing to the tension. No one I know that voted for Trump will answer 'would you vote for him again.' Deflect, deflect, change subject, ...

Which means they probably would vote for him again - but are ashamed to say so. Shy Tory syndrome.

swampgas

jooksavage wrote: »

As usual, we'll have to wait until the States wakes up to see how they respond to this one. Heard Richard Painter (Bush-era ethics lawyer) talking about it already. He said that, even taken alone, an outright and immediately disprovable lie from the president in a criminal matter would land that president in impeachment territory.

I'm anticipating the house Republicans will be "concerned" and leave it at that.

You predicted correctly:
Graham troubled by by report of Trump’s role in son’s Russia meeting response

Despite being "bothered quite a lot" he went on to say ...

Still, Graham (R-S.C.) indicated that the possibility still existed for Trump’s presidency to “still be very consequential” if the president is able to refocus on healthcare and other legislative priorities.

Mardy Bum

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Which means they probably would vote for him again - but are ashamed to say so. Shy Tory syndrome.

There is no cure for stupid.

jooksavage

swampgas wrote: »

You predicted correctly:
Graham troubled by by report of Trump’s role in son’s Russia meeting response

Despite being "bothered quite a lot" he went on to say ...

Troubled, right.

I've been wondering for a while what would happen if the infamous "grab 'em" tape had come out after he took office. I assumed it would mean Goodnight Trump but the more I see of the Republicans line up behind him the less I know believe this.

If Mueller gets fired, I have no doubt Flake, Graham, etc will again be "troubled" but would it go any further than that? If Mueller's concludes that collusion occurred, are these really the men who are going to draft articles of impeachment?

Billy86

jooksavage wrote: »

Troubled, right.

I've been wondering for a while what would happen if the infamous "grab 'em" tape had come out after he took office. I assumed it would mean Goodnight Trump but the more I see of the Republicans line up behind him the less I know believe this.

If Mueller gets fired, I have no doubt Flake, Graham, etc will again be "troubled" but would it go any further than that? If Mueller's concludes that collusion occurred, are these really the men who are going to draft articles of impeachment?

It wouldn't have done anything. His campaign has openly admitted to colluding with Russia and it turns out he was the one who gave the order for that, and nothing. A video of a vulgar comment wouldn't do a thing there. Well, apart from raise comments about it being "concerning".

LeinsterDub

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/892370324616089600


Is this suppose to be a good thing? Mega rich getting richer as the GOP battles to deny the poorest healthcare?

Professor Moriarty

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/892370324616089600


Is this suppose to be a good thing? Mega rich getting richer as the GOP battles to deny the poorest healthcare?

Celebrity rich kid and failed businessman The Donald equates rising corporation profits with increased employment. He is too stupid to differentiate between the two. Doesn't give a damn anyway.

jooksavage

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/892370324616089600


Is this suppose to be a good thing? Mega rich getting richer as the GOP battles to deny the poorest healthcare?

It's trickle down economics. If Mr. Billionaire stock broker doubles his profits, Consuela the maid gets a new mop. Obviously new mops don't grow on trees so Mr. Billionaire will need a helping hand. That's where the massive tax cuts for super rich come in. So the super rich get tax cuts, everyone else gets mops and everything is cool.

Nody

To no surprise for anyone 56 retired generals have come out against Trump's transgender ban in the army stating:

The Commander in Chief has tweeted a total ban of honorably serving transgender troops. This proposed ban, if implemented, would cause significant disruptions, deprive the military of mission-critical talent, and compromise the integrity of transgender troops who would be forced to live a lie, as well as non-transgender peers who would be forced to choose between reporting their comrades or disobeying policy. As a result, the proposed ban would degrade readiness even more than the failed ‘don't ask, don't tell’ policy. Patriotic transgender Americans who are serving— and who want to serve—must not be dismissed, deprived of medically necessary health care, or forced to compromise their integrity or hide their identity.

But hey; Trump knows best :rolleyes:

Water John

The ban was particularly mean. Just, to throw a bone to his own base.

aloyisious

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Celebrity rich kid and failed businessman The Donald equates rising corporation profits with increased employment. He is too stupid to differentiate between the two. Doesn't give a damn anyway.

Possibly the same understanding of the US healthcare insurance industry...

aloyisious

Jeff Drewitt [Arizona State Treasurer] asked about the White House troubles on Fox News: Don is doing a great job building bridges, business is booming, the DOW is doing OK.

Sarah Huckabee stonewalling on the help Don Snr gave his son on the press release, attacking the media at the news briefing for taking the Dem Party side, creating a narrative that doesn't exist.

Leroy42

I have to say that Sarah seems to be getting a much easier ride in the media than Spicer did.

IMO, Sarah is a much nastier piece of work. She comes across as condescending, arrogant, it openly hostile to the media, clearly lies in many answers, openly mocks some reporters and overall seems to have complete disdain for the media.

I get it that a press sec job is to protect POTUS and to project the WH version of events to the media, but Huckerbee seems to take pleasure in it and it not even pretending to be working with the media.

Why is she being given such an easy ride? Spicer was torn apart by all the late night shows but, as far as I can see, Huckerbee is being left alone?

rossie1977

White house and fox news spreading fake news..say it ain't so

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/white-house-fake-news-seth-rich-death-russia-distract-fox-news-donald-trump-dnc-staff-lawsuit-a7871321.html

mcmoustache

aloyisious wrote: »

Sarah Huckaby stonewalling on the help Don Snr gave his son on the press release, attacking the media at the news briefing for taking the Dem Party side, creating a narrative that doesn't exist.

Well , she's confirmed that the report is true...

Oh jesus, she just went into a preprepared rant against Hillary. She's detestable.

Billy86

Leroy42 wrote: »

I have to say that Sarah seems to be getting a much easier ride in the media than Spicer did.

IMO, Sarah is a much nastier piece of work. She comes across as condescending, arrogant, it openly hostile to the media, clearly lies in many answers, openly mocks some reporters and overall seems to have complete disdain for the media.

I get it that a press sec job is to protect POTUS and to project the WH version of events to the media, but Huckerbee seems to take pleasure in it and it not even pretending to be working with the media.

Why is she being given such an easy ride? Spicer was torn apart by all the late night shows but, as far as I can see, Huckerbee is being left alone?

I'm sure the Trump supporters can jump on here any moment and let us know it's because she's a woman.

I reckon it has more to do with the lack of cameras.

derb12

Leroy42 wrote: »

I have to say that Sarah seems to be getting a much easier ride in the media than Spicer did.

IMO, Sarah is a much nastier piece of work. She comes across as condescending, arrogant, it openly hostile to the media, clearly lies in many answers, openly mocks some reporters and overall seems to have complete disdain for the media.

I get it that a press sec job is to protect POTUS and to project the WH version of events to the media, but Huckerbee seems to take pleasure in it and it not even pretending to be working with the media.

Why is she being given such an easy ride? Spicer was torn apart by all the late night shows but, as far as I can see, Huckerbee is being left alone?

Yes it's weird. I expected her press briefings to be a total train wreck, but i have to grudgingly say that she does an effective job of deflecting and dispatching questions she doesn't want to answer without getting in a flap. Spicey was too emotional and kind of pathetic (like when he whined about how demoralising all the bad press was) and he got himself into trouble by starting long sentences without knowing where he was going. Once he'd said some stupid stuff on day one and topped up his eejity image every now and then with comments like hitler not using chemical weapons and his statement re the holocaust centres he was just on a downward spiral.

Sarah HS keeps it short by contrast.
I also think the whole "question and answer without a follow up question" format works in her favour - she can shut down a pesky journalist and just take another question from a different journalist who is keen to get their own question answered. Half the problem is that the press are in competition with each other and don't back each other up very often (eg when spicer excluded 6 news agencies from special briefings).

johnnyskeleton

Billy86 wrote: »

I'm sure the Trump supporters can jump on here any moment and let us know it's because she's a woman.

Mod note:

Please see the charter re: trolling comments. Serious contributions only. That means don't try to put words in other people's mouths

For Reals

She's taking the easier route. She's stone walling and being dismissive. They were able to catch Spicer because he was initially trying to carry out the traditional role of press voice for the White house. Unfortunately its more akin to Pee Wee's fun house. Huckabee is just telling the press how it is, as far as the White house is concerned and that's that. 'You people are lucky I'm even bothering' kind of thing.
It must be like a badly written sitcom in there.

Quin_Dub

For Reals wrote: »

She's taking the easier route. She's stone walling and being dismissive. They were able to catch Spicer because he was initially trying to carry out the traditional role of press voice for the White house. Unfortunately it was more akin to Pee Wee's fun house. Huckabee is just telling the press how it is, as far as the White house is concerned and that's that. 'You people are lucky I'm even bothering' kind of thing.
It must be like a badly written sitcom in there.

Exactly - Spicer actually tried to answer the questions and just got himself tied up in knots trying to over-explain.

Huckabee-Sanders just blanks them and says things like "I think I've already explained that clearly" - When she absolutely hasn't or "That's all I'm going to say on that subject".

I did a Media training course a few years ago with work - Basically teaching you how to deal with the media if you were being interviewed and one of the sample questions that the trainer put out was "When did you stop beating your wife?" - Which of course is an impossible question to answer directly without looking awful..

The advice was to simply totally ignore the question , pick a single word/topic from the sentence and just drive on with a long winded response related to that choice.

So for the above the response is "My Wife? , you know my wife and I went to dinner last night , it was amazing , the restaurant was wonderful......long ramble about dinner with the wife".

Huckabee-Sanders is a Master of this tactic - She disappears on long winded tangents that bear no resemblance to the actual subject of the original question.

ECO_Mental

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/01/politics/kushner-russia-interns/index.html

Kushner now putting out a defence that they were too unorganised to collude with Russian, "ha ha they couldnt even collude with thier own staff" that's ok then all is ok.....

EXCEPT! stupidity and ignorance is no defence in a court of law. So this gang are surely going down because they have stupidy and ignorance in abundance

Christy42

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo

In terms of net approval - net disapproval aggregated over multiple polls over time Trump has started to creep down again. At the lowest level now of his presidency at -18.9.

My name is URL

I know this doesn't meet standards regarding discussion but it's too funny not to share

https://imgur.com/dQuhtES

aloyisious

The Mexico border wall might still be alive and due a resurrection, courtesy of Paul Ryan, if Rachel Meadows has her reading of US politics correct. It's up to Don and his advisors now to decide on if they think the wall is of any use, even for distraction.

http://on.msnbc.com/2f5m9Os.

jooksavage

aloyisious wrote: »

The Mexico border wall might still be alive and due a resurrection, courtesy of Paul Ryan, if Rachel Meadows has her reading of US politics correct. It's up to Don and his advisors now to decide on if they think the wall is of any use, even for distraction.

http://on.msnbc.com/2f5m9Os.

I found that surprising. It's almost like Ryan is conceding defeat when it comes to delivering grown-up policies (e.g. the aborted Obamacare repeal, which ironically they hoped would elimitate cover for abortions) so now he's turning to pie-in-the-sky, whack-a-doodle brain-farts from Trump in some kind of attempt to remind people just how awful he really is.

mcmoustache

My name is URL wrote: »

I know this doesn't meet standards regarding discussion but it's too funny not to share

https://imgur.com/dQuhtES

The whole thing is a joke. We had standards. Trump lowered them to such an extent that we're at the mocking stage now.

aloyisious

If Sean Spicer ever did have any thoughts of a WH reprise [which I doubt] this snippet from the NYT would probably put him off. It seems old friends are best when it comes to the position held by Sean and the Mooch..... be advised that as the link below is a copy by an NYT non-subscriber, the link might not work. You may have to google the following to get the report ---- Former Fox News Executive Said To Be Considered For White House Job

---

.

Mr Bill Shine reportedly has no political experience.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi33LmkmLfVAhWpAMAKHYZWBpgQqUMIOjAF&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2017%2F08%2F01%2Fbusiness%2Fmedia%2Fbill-shine-fox-news-white-house.html&usg=AFQjCNGmx5qHHOXV0ScpsgEvKas8U5vwAw

Itssoeasy

So bill shine the guy that was forced out of Fox News and is good friends with the fair and balanced Sean hannity ? Jesus give me a break.

I watched videos of Lawrence O Donnell on MSNBC last night laying out how Donald trump sr dictated the first statement for his son despite the concerns of his own lawyers and family on Air Force one. I mean if this was house of cards you'd say fair enough, but this is real life.

Any rational American should dispair that this is what the White House has come to.

Christy42

jooksavage wrote: »

I found that surprising. It's almost like Ryan is conceding defeat when it comes to delivering grown-up policies (e.g. the aborted Obamacare repeal, which ironically they hoped would elimitate cover for abortions) so now he's turning to pie-in-the-sky, whack-a-doodle brain-farts from Trump in some kind of attempt to remind people just how awful he really is.

It is a repeat of the bill to repeal Obamacare that easily sailed through years ago. It was passed because everyone knee it would fail later. Then it was because of Obama's veto and now it is because of the Senate. We saw that with no veto to protect them from the consequences of their actions they went to pieces on Obamacare repeal. Similarly if there was a chance to get 60 senate votes this would not have gone through the house.

Peregrinus

jooksavage wrote: »

I found that surprising. It's almost like Ryan is conceding defeat when it comes to delivering grown-up policies (e.g. the aborted Obamacare repeal, which ironically they hoped would elimitate cover for abortions) so now he's turning to pie-in-the-sky, whack-a-doodle brain-farts from Trump in some kind of attempt to remind people just how awful he really is.

The "grown-up policy" would be to deliver on their commitment to repeal Obamacare and replace it with something as good or better - something that would deliver a similar or better standard of care to as many or more people at the same or a lower cost.

This is perfectly doable - most of the world manages it - but it would require taking on the vested interests of the health insurers and the medical providers, which the Republican party is not about to do.

Up to now they've been able to hide behind opposition from the Democrats as their excuse for not delivering, but now that they control the White House, the Senate and the House that excuse won't hold water any more. And when they made their healthcare commitments they didn't really plan ahead to the point where they would be in a position to deliver them, and so would have to come up with some different but still plausible excuse for not doing so. That day has now come, hence the stunned mullet act.

everlast75

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So bill shine the guy that was forced out of Fox News and is good friends with the fair and balanced Sean hannity ? Jesus give me a break.

I watched videos of Lawrence O Donnell on MSNBC last night laying out how Donald trump sr dictated the first statement for his son despite the concerns of his own lawyers and family on Air Force one. I mean if this was house of cards you'd say fair enough, but this is real life.

*Any rational American should dispair* that this is what the White House has come to.

Any rational American is full of despair, it's the others that are the problem

20Cent

So todays revelation it that Trump says he spends so much time away from the White House because it is such a dump. Speaking at a golf club. Imagine Obama said that.

Leroy42

20Cent wrote: »

So todays revelation it that Trump says he spends so much time away from the White House because it is such a dump. Speaking at a golf club. Imagine Obama said that.

And this will get probably lots of media coverage.

We will have 'experts' telling us how great the WH is, other 'experts' telling us how poor it is in comparison to Trump Tower.

Of course it doesn't matter. So what if Trump doesn't like the WH, thats a personal opinion and not everybody is the same and I guess for someone used to living in the penthouses the WH can seem quite stuffy.

But the real point that should be talked about is not his like or dislike for the surrounds, but rather why is using that as an excuse for removing himself from the WH. Why did he say prior to being elected that he would never leave and have no time for golf but now he seems intent on spending as much time as possible away from it.

He has a job to do, plenty of people have to work in conditions they don't like but get it down anyway. But of course the media will follow his lead like a puppy and the talk will end up being about when the WH needs to be replaced or something like that!

Akrasia

It's mad. He wants to bring back coal mining, sending men into dark dusty underground mine shafts that often flood, collapse or explode, but he says the white house is too much of a dump to work in.

everlast75

20Cent wrote: »

So todays revelation it that Trump says he spends so much time away from the White House because it is such a dump. Speaking at a golf club. Imagine Obama said that.

What's Melania's excuse for not staying at the WH?

Nody

everlast75 wrote: »

What's Melania's excuse for not staying at the WH?

Trump being there should be excuse enough in my book but originally it was to finish their youngest son school year in his old school.

For Forks Sake

As if Mooch hadn't had a bad enough week already....

Anthony Scaramucci listed as dead by Harvard alumni directory

Hande hoche!

New FBI director confirmed by the senate.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/senate-vote-trumps-choice-lead-fbi-171852193--politics.html

everlast75

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40795122

It is admitted now by the White House that he weighed in on Junior's statement. They really are a pair of dunces.

I am also beginning to despise SHS.

But she maintained he "didn't dictate" the statement and the issue was "of no consequence". It is not for the white house to say whether something is or is not of any consequence. It is the same as saying "nothing to see here folks. We will tell you when something is important"

She then goes on to say..

"The Democrats want to continue to use this as a PR stunt and are doing everything they can to keep this story alive and in the papers every single day," she added. I think you'll find it is your idiot of an employer who cannot manage for one day to keep his bib clean

Trent Houseboat

The voice of the working class thinks 100 room palace where you're waited on hand and foot is a dump.

I wonder at what point people stop pretending they weren't fooled by a cheap con. I understand there's an issue of sunk costs and it's nice to have someone tell you that you're the victim.
Is it not better to cut bait and wait for the next messiah who promises to fix everything than to try to convince yourself and others that whatever self-made calamity Trump is currently fucking himself in the face with is actually seven dimensional chess.

Anecdotally I don't know anyone who has changed their mind. Has anyone on here changed their mind? His supporters may be quieter, but I don't know that they're any fewer. They've probably regressed back to their bubbles/are investigating underground child sex pizzerias.
If the election was rerun tomorrow I don't think he's get a substantially less than his last tally.

Leroy42

The WH, and Trump, can blame MSM for continuing to focus on Russia but it is entirely their own fault.

Even taking the press briefing yesterday. Obviously SHS does a great job of shutting down reporters and avoiding any answers, but does she really think that this approach does anything but get the press backs up and make them smell a rat?

The reason they keep focused on it is that every time we are told that there is nothing to see, everything is up front, another story emerges that throws the last reasons into doubt and raises even more questions. They smell blood and despite what SHS may think as her doing a good job, all she is doing is increasing the tension and the distrust.

Of course that plays out well with the base, and I'm sure many GOP supporters are loving it. But it is not particularly sophisticated and leaves them all open to the next round.

A saw one journalist ask a senator, who started to say that SHS had said that Kelly was now in charge and a gateway etc etc, and the presenter simply asked why they would believe anything SHS said as only Friday she had dais how great Mooch was?

It seems the sole goal of every press briefing os to say as little as possible, to waste time on tangents and then to simply walk out. Its fine as a stand alone strategy, buys you some time, hopefully get over the news cycle until something else takes over. But clearly it is not going to work on this. No matter how many other things have happened, failure of EO on banning muslims, argument over crowd size, pulling out of Paris Agreement, Carrier, job numbers, new aircraft carriers, Scaramucci, Priebus, Spicer etc etc etc, the narrative always returns to Russia. Why, because it appears that the WH strategy is to believe that each new story is totally unconnected and is the last one that will ever come out.

It is a failing media strategy. Not sure what they can do at this stage as it would appear that they do indeed have something to hide and have gone to such lengths to tell everyone that there is nothing that even admitting to low level would constitute and major disaster.

My reading of it is that although I think SHS is being given an easier ride than Spicer was, she is held in the same regard. I don't think the journos are even paying attention to the answers apart from trying to spot and divergence from the central narrative. It is a very hostile daily press briefing.

everlast75

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

The voice of the working class thinks 100 room palace where you're waited on hand and foot is a dump.

I wonder at what point people stop pretending they weren't fooled by a cheap con. I understand there's an issue of sunk costs and it's nice to have someone tell you that you're the victim.
Is it not better to cut bait and wait for the next messiah who promises to fix everything than to try to convince yourself and others that whatever self-made calamity Trump is currently fucking himself in the face with is actually seven dimensional chess.

Anecdotally I don't know anyone who has changed their mind. Has anyone on here changed their mind? His supporters may be quieter, but I don't know that they're any fewer. They've probably regressed back to their bubbles/are investigating underground child sex pizzerias.
If the election was rerun tomorrow I don't think he's get a substantially less than his last tally.

Great post, but I have to disagree with the highlighted segment. I appreciate "substantially" is subjective, but I do believe that people would go into their booths and regardless of what they tell exit polls, vote to get him out.

I think he has done and said enough at this stage to make him a national embarrassment to all but a relatively small percentile and I don't believe electoral college or otherwise, he would get come close to a majority.

recedite

Wray looks to be a good choice for FBI director.

The problem with Comey was that he seemed to delight in leaking information at politically sensitive times, both before the election and after it. He annoyed both sides of the campaign. Then he got himself into a situation where he felt obliged to "balance" his leaks so that he himself would come out of it looking harmless and neutral. It would have been a very tricky strategy to pull off successfully, and in the end he didn't quite manage to succeed.

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

Anecdotally I don't know anyone who has changed their mind. Has anyone on here changed their mind? His supporters may be quieter, but I don't know that they're any fewer. They've probably regressed back to their bubbles/are investigating underground child sex pizzerias.

People rarely change their mind. They just like to rant.

A number of the former Trump supporters on this forum have gone over to politics.ie instead, after repeatedly being banned here, or having their posts deleted, for posting opinions that don't conform to the groupthink.

spacecoyote

everlast75 wrote: »

Great post, but I have to disagree with the highlighted segment. I appreciate "substantially" is subjective, but I do believe that people would go into their booths and regardless of what they tell exit polls, vote to get him out.

I think he has done and said enough at this stage to make him a national embarrassment to all but a relatively small percentile and I don't believe electoral college or otherwise, he would get come close to a majority.

I would actually think that his actual number of votes wouldn't change that drastically, due to the nature of US voting (R vs D) but his overall share of the vote would shrink because I think that the turnout of anti-trump voters would increase significantly

oscarBravo

recedite wrote: »

A number of the former Trump supporters on this forum have gone over to politics.ie instead, after repeatedly being banned here, or having their posts deleted, for posting opinions that don't conform to the groupthink.

Yes. Everyone on this forum shares exactly the same opinions. Everyone who has ever deviated in the slightest from those opinions is immediately banned on sight.

Clearly, you are also a mindless SJW groupthink cuck drone, since you're still posting here. Welcome to the collective, sibling.

recedite

oscarBravo wrote: »

Clearly, you are also a mindless SJW groupthink cuck drone, since you're still posting here. Welcome to the collective, sibling.

That's the kind of passive-aggressive hostility that puts people off this thread/forum.

Christy42

recedite wrote: »

Wray looks to be a good choice for FBI director.

The problem with Comey was that he seemed to delight in leaking information at politically sensitive times, both before the election and after it. He annoyed both sides of the campaign. Then he got himself into a situation where he felt obliged to "balance" his leaks so that he himself would come out of it looking harmless and neutral. It would have been a very tricky strategy to pull off successfully, and in the end he didn't quite manage to succeed.

People rarely change their mind. They just like to rant.

A number of the former Trump supporters on this forum have gone over to politics.ie instead, after repeatedly being banned here, or having their posts deleted, for posting opinions that don't conform to the groupthink.

Have any of them ever posted reasons for supporting Trump (not opposing Hillary or MSM or any other deflection). I come here for a debate. Some posters seem to think their views can't be challenged.

Personally I want to see a well reasoned argument for Trump. I can't think of one but many support him and I figure at least one should be able to defend him. I have searched but have found no sensible ones. If I see a non sensical one I will debate the point which is how these things should be discussed.

The only bans I can remember off hand went far beyond the rules and had nothing to do with their support of Trump. Generally extreme sexism or racism going by the ones I remember.