Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

mattser

Happy anniversary POTUS. Begrudgers will be begrudgers, and are hurting today.

pitifulgod

mattser wrote: »

Happy anniversary POTUS. Begrudgers will be begrudgers, and are hurting today.

Year one, shutdown the government. Had record lows in approval ratings. Had fights with leader of North Korea via twitter and made racist jabs about Africa, more than once. Also facing an investigation into Russia, may have engaged in obstruction of justice by firing head of FBI over Russia too. Great job for a first year. Plus he's got the Neo Nazis on side!

mattser

pitifulgod wrote: »

Year one, shutdown the government. Had record lows in approval ratings. Had fights with leader of North Korea via twitter and made racist jabs about Africa, more than once. Also facing an investigation into Russia, may have engaged in obstruction of justice by firing head of FBI over Russia too. Great job for a first year. Plus he's got the Neo Nazis on side!

Suck it up. You're probably one of those who didn't give him a month. :D

dudara

aloyisious wrote: »

With ref to Don, has he set up this office [To improve the working relationship with Congress, presidents in recent years have set up an Office of Legislative Affairs. Presidential aides have kept abreast of all important legislative activities]? I was wondering why the Senate [as a whole] doesn't say to Don: while you can convene or adjurn Congress, the deal-street is two-way, treat us with respect and you'll get the same in return, keep attacking our independence and you can forget any of your legislation being passed by us.

Trump just can’t help himself. Whenever someone criticises him or goes against his opinion, he reacts. It’s reflexive from him. He doesn’t appear to stop and consider the merits of what was said or the potential implications of his reaction. He just kicks back like a mule with no thought for the consequences.

He could agree with Congress, and mean it 100% when he does. However, if one member went against him, then he’d kick back again overthrowing the whole apple cart and not even realising why. His word is worthless in that sense, because he will always take priority in his own mind.

Leroy42

mattser wrote: »

Suck it up. You're probably one of those who didn't give him a month. :D

The ability to remove a sitting POTUS is extremely limited, for good and obvious reasons, and so I doubt there are many who thought he would be gone in a month.

But similarly, making it to 1 year is also nothing to celebrate and it is nearly impossible not to.

Rather one needs to consider what has been achieved and on that front I see very little. His main claims revolve around the economy and stockmarket, both of which were set on that path by Obama. He has managed to create a government shutdown whilst at the same time being in control of all 3 parts.

He has failed to even begin to bring a divided nation closer together, has done little to tackle both the current and looming issues facing the US (a stronger China, falling education standards, opioid crisis, crime rates, gun violence, environmental protection, consumer protection, healthcare, cost of education and dealing with student debt, infrastructure, tackling poverty trap etc etc).

Larbre34

mattser wrote: »

Happy anniversary POTUS. Begrudgers will be begrudgers, and are hurting today.

Its not begrudgery, most of us dont have enough invested in American life to call it begrudgery. They ceased being the 'leaders of the free world' after Reagan. I pity them. I see my family in Florida and I see what the priorities of their community are, I see the division, the paranoia, the fear, the skepticism, the selfishness, the prohibitive cost of keeping loved ones in health care, the underclasses and the lack of basic protections that are core to European socialism, with a small 's'.

I pity them that out of >320 million souls,all they could find to elect was that dengenerate moron to beat the other tainted old hag. What a lack of hope there must be.

In wishing Trump a happy anniversary, why dont you tell us what is happy about it, what achievements he can list, what he has achieved on behalf of ALL americans? How the trajectory of this 'great' nation is anything to be celebrated?

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

He has failed to even begin to bring a divided nation closer together, has done little to tackle both the current and looming issues facing the US (a stronger China, falling education standards, opioid crisis, crime rates, gun violence, environmental protection, consumer protection, healthcare, cost of education and dealing with student debt, infrastructure, tackling poverty trap etc etc).

He's actively trying to worsen most of those. The EPA has been gutted, consumer protection regulations rolled back and Betsy DeVos is there to destroy the education side of things.

HivemindXX

pitifulgod wrote: »

Year one, shutdown the government. Had record lows in approval ratings. Had fights with leader of North Korea via twitter and made racist jabs about Africa, more than once. Also facing an investigation into Russia, may have engaged in obstruction of justice by firing head of FBI over Russia too. Great job for a first year. Plus he's got the Neo Nazis on side!

Don't forget undermining the environment by quitting the Paris agreement.

As far as I can see if the metric was not to embarrass himself and his country he didn't make it a week before he started acting like some message board troll.

Larbre34

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He's actively trying to worsen most of those. The EPA has been gutted, consumer protection regulations rolled back and Betsy DeVos is there to destroy the education side of things.

This is one of the most important points, that the federal govt and agencies are haemorraging experienced and decorated professionals who just wont be part of it anymore

Manach

Obviously as a non-American I can only comment on how President Trump has conducted his international actions. This would be compared to both his immediate predessor and the historical trends in US overseas governance. For the former, Trumps championing of nationalist and his willingness to support his military in terms of respect and resources constants to President Obama’s poor choices and his ham fistedness in dealing with military culture (ref: Dueck’s Obama Doctrine). For the latter, Trump while having yet no formal doctrine, harkens back to more assertive phase in the US Gilded age (ref: Kinzer's, True Flag) and shows a willingness (perhaps too much influenced by personal relationships) to back perceived allies and not risk being seen as vacillating in front of foes such as North Korea which under previous administrations such as Clinton was seen as a green light to develop nuclear devices (ref Rhodes', Twilight of the Bombs).

Overall, a solid start to the presidency.

Leroy42

But therein lies the great lie of Trump. People keep claiming that he has been tough on NK, and via Twitter and speeches he has but practically he has done nothing more than the previous POTUS.

In fact, one could argue, that previous POTUS have not had the same level of provocation and outright divisiveness as NK has shown since Trump was elected and yet all Trump has done is call on others to do more and sent childish tweets.

Think, for a moment, what the GOP and indeed Trump, would be saying if Obama were still POTUS and faced with multiple missile launches, despite being warned after each one that this was the final straw, simply did nothing.

Extra embargoes! Really. Thats exactly what Obama et al did and that was on an assumption that NK were working on a bomb rather than direct evidence that they had one.

I agree with Trumps rhetoric that something needs to be done with regards to NK, but then all previous POTUS have said the same. But to try and paint Trump as doing anything different, in real terms, is simply to buy into the PR.

Water John

Not sure how many countries have nuclear arms. Is it as low as 8/9?
The only country to ever use one, it's well to remember, is the USA.

USSR fell apart. That was a serious, risk time. Any extreme element could come into power or seize them, in any of the countries with NA.
Would much prefer of course, if NK and Iran did not develop the capability. But, it has to be put in context.
Many may despise the ruler in NK and how he treats his own people but he is proving a fairly shrewd operator.

In general.far more worried about how Israel might kick off.

Inquitus

robinph wrote: »

That's also not uncommon for companies wanting to protect their name.

listermint wrote: »

Agreed

Water John wrote: »

Not sure how many countries have nuclear arms. Is it as low as 8/9?

India, Pakistan, Israel, USA, Russia, North Korea, France, United Kingdom, China, so aye, just 9!

pitifulgod

Water John wrote: »

Not sure how many countries have nuclear arms. Is it as low as 8/9?
The only country to ever use one, it's well to remember, is the USA.

USSR fell apart. That was a serious, risk time. Any extreme element could come into power or seize them, in any of the countries with NA.
Would much prefer of course, if NK and Iran did not develop the capability. But, it has to be put in context.
Many may despise the ruler in NK and how he treats his own people but he is proving a fairly shrewd operator.

In general.far more worried about how Israel might kick off.

He's actually created a scenario where South and North Korea are in unilateral discussions which is to the North's advantage.

JRant

Water John wrote: »

Not sure how many countries have nuclear arms. Is it as low as 8/9?
The only country to ever use one, it's well to remember, is the USA.

USSR fell apart. That was a serious, risk time. Any extreme element could come into power or seize them, in any of the countries with NA.
Would much prefer of course, if NK and Iran did not develop the capability. But, it has to be put in context.
Many may despise the ruler in NK and how he treats his own people but he is proving a fairly shrewd operator.

In general.far more worried about how Israel might kick off.

Sometimes I have to wonder, I really do.

Yes, the US are the only country to use a nuke in anger but context is everything. Those were extraordinary times, ones we can hardly even comprehend in today's world.

Calling Little Rocket Man a shrewd operator? Really.
This is a person presiding over the most oppressive state the world has ever seen and see's nothing wrong with starving millions of people.
Sure, hate on Trump, he deserves everything he gets but to then show even a tiny bit of admiration for such an evil human being as Kim is an incredible set of double standards.

mrhoppy

Leroy42 wrote: »

The ability to remove a sitting POTUS is extremely limited, for good and obvious reasons, and so I doubt there are many who thought he would be gone in a month.

But similarly, making it to 1 year is also nothing to celebrate and it is nearly impossible not to.

Rather one needs to consider what has been achieved and on that front I see very little. His main claims revolve around the economy and stockmarket, both of which were set on that path by Obama. He has managed to create a government shutdown whilst at the same time being in control of all 3 parts.

He has failed to even begin to bring a divided nation closer together, has done little to tackle both the current and looming issues facing the US (a stronger China, falling education standards, opioid crisis, crime rates, gun violence, environmental protection, consumer protection, healthcare, cost of education and dealing with student debt, infrastructure, tackling poverty trap etc etc).

The reason America is so divided is because the Democrats and left in general focused on identity politics, while those who opposed identity politics were shunned as "racist", or "homophobic" or whatever.

When you embolden the left and silence the right to the point where the left can take no criticism without breaking down in fits of rage or crying like children, as what happened in particular during Obama's second term, the right will react accordingly. The reason Trump won in the first place is not because of "racism" or whatever, but rather because the same people who voted for Obama twice felt screwed. The blacks who voted Trump felt screwed by Obama because their communities were just as impoverished and ghettoised as ever before. The working men/women in the rust belt who voted Trump felt screwed by Obama because their industries crumbled and fell to pieces under countless regulations imposed on them by the left. Everyday Americans who voted Trump felt screwed by Obama because their language and speech was policed and censored by the left. When you call someone racist, or homophobic, or transphobic because they don't want a 40-something year old tranny having a **** beside their 6-year-old daughter in a Chuck E. Cheese, they're going to vote for someone who will reverse those policies for their own safety. Christians who voted for Trump felt screwed by Obama because they were forced to bake gay cakes and pay for other people's abortions through taxes, despite this going against their beliefs.

Trump has accomplished or is working on the vast majority of the promises made on his campaign. Here's a list:

-> US Stock Market has gained $2,000,000,000,000 ($2 trillion) in wealth since his inauguration
-> Decreased US debt in first 100 days by $100,000,000,000 ($100 billion)
-> US Manufacturing Index soared to a 33-year high (highest since President Reagan)
-> Illegal immigration down 67%
-> Travel ban
-> Border wall progressing slowly but surely
-> Exiting Trans-Pacific Partnership
-> NATO allied spending up $10 trillion
-> Funding cut for sanctuary cities
-> Mandating for every regulation to eliminate two previous regulations
-> ISIS down to >1000 fighters
-> Expanding religious freedom laws
-> Giving veterans better care
-> Reinstated the Mexico City Policy

I dunno.. seems like he's achieved quite a bit

iomega

Forget any TV show, for me Trump in the white house has been the most entertaining thing of the year hands down. Almost everyday something mad is happening. I've always been fascinated by horrible people and he is one horrible human being. Its not really his policies I have a huge problem with, its him, The obnoxious, arrogant, lying spoilt rich kid that he is. I could never support anyone like him, nor would I want a penny of my money ending up in his pocket.

reece289

mrhoppy wrote: »

The reason America is so divided is because the Democrats and left in general focused on identity politics, while those who opposed identity politics were shunned as "racist", or "homophobic" or whatever.

When you embolden the left and silence the right to the point where the left can take no criticism without breaking down in fits of rage or crying like children, as what happened in particular during Obama's second term, the right will react accordingly. The reason Trump won in the first place is not because of "racism" or whatever, but rather because the same people who voted for Obama twice felt screwed. The blacks who voted Trump felt screwed by Obama because their communities were just as impoverished and ghettoised as ever before. The working men/women in the rust belt who voted Trump felt screwed by Obama because their industries crumbled and fell to pieces under countless regulations imposed on them by the left. Everyday Americans who voted Trump felt screwed by Obama because their language and speech was policed and censored by the left. When you call someone racist, or homophobic, or transphobic because they don't want a 40-something year old tranny having a **** beside their 6-year-old daughter in a Chuck E. Cheese, they're going to vote for someone who will reverse those policies for their own safety. Christians who voted for Trump felt screwed by Obama because they were forced to bake gay cakes and pay for other people's abortions through taxes, despite this going against their beliefs.

Trump has accomplished or is working on the vast majority of the promises made on his campaign. Here's a list:

-> US Stock Market has gained $2,000,000,000,000 ($2 trillion) in wealth since his inauguration
-> Decreased US debt in first 100 days by $100,000,000,000 ($100 billion)
-> US Manufacturing Index soared to a 33-year high (highest since President Reagan)
-> Illegal immigration down 67%
-> Travel ban
-> Border wall progressing slowly but surely
-> Exiting Trans-Pacific Partnership
-> NATO allied spending up $10 trillion
-> Funding cut for sanctuary cities
-> Mandating for every regulation to eliminate two previous regulations
-> ISIS down to >1000 fighters
-> Expanding religious freedom laws
-> Giving veterans better care
-> Reinstated the Mexico City Policy

I dunno.. seems like he's achieved quite a bit

Identity politics in action eh?

Claiming both religious and nra votes through taking money and telling lies is also Identity politics.

I agree with neither the far left or right, and believe people whitewashing the other side with the worst of either is a great way to divide. You have done it here as have many on the other side. Makes your points near impossible to take on board as you are showing clear bias before you even try to argue your point.

vetinari

The reason people who oppose "identity politics" tend to get branded as racist is that they tend to be racist.
Take Trump's recent "****hole countries" comment, most of his base were okay with it.
Hard to argue you're not racist if you agree with only taking immigrants from places like "Norway" as opposed to Africa.
There's not much pretense in that statement.

Water John

I think we are finding intervening against nasty leaders of other countries doesn't work out too well.
Libya,Iraq and Syria come to mind.
This doesn't mean, I condone any of them or esp the boy in NK.

Nody

Water John wrote: »

Not sure how many countries have nuclear arms. Is it as low as 8/9?

USA, UK, France, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel (unconfirmed officially), North Korea and Iran though to be partially on the way but not there yet. So 8 officially, 9 in practice with at least 1 more on the way (for some odd reason countries being called the axis of evil wants nuclear weapons; who'd thought...) currently. South Africa did have 6 weapons for a while in the 80s but dismantled them in the 90s.

C14N

vetinari wrote: »

The reason people who oppose "identity politics" tend to get branded as racist is that they tend to be racist.
Take Trump's recent "****hole countries" comment, most of his base were okay with it.
Hard to argue you're not racist if you agree with only taking immigrants from places like "Norway" as opposed to Africa.
There's not much pretense in that statement.

I've noticed in response to the "sh1thole" scandal that there seems to be a school of thought in American politics that goes something like "this isn't racist; it's something many people believe". It's basically predicated on the unspoken, but very strongly asserted, assumption that being racist is, by definition, a fringe opinion, and therefore if a large number of people believe it, it ceases to be racist. Ditto on discussions of something being sexist/homophobic/etc. We got similar arguments with the pussy grabbing remark, that it's not misogynistic because lots of men behave and speak that way.

People have a really hard time grasping that actually, a lot of people might say or think racist things, including you or me. You don't have to be in a klan hood burning a crucifix outside a black family's house to have unchecked racist thoughts.

Now whenever I hear that "many people are sick of being called racist", in my mind I just hear "many people like to be racist". I think reece289 mrhoppy demonstrated this well by claiming to be sick of being called transphobic right before making an openly transphobic comment.

reece289

C14N wrote: »

I've noticed in response to the "sh1thole" scandal that there seems to be a school of thought in American politics that goes something like "this isn't racist; it's something many people believe". It's basically predicated on the unspoken, but very strongly asserted, assumption that being racist is, by definition, a fringe opinion, and therefore if a large number of people believe it, it ceases to be racist. Ditto on discussions of something being sexist/homophobic/etc. We got similar arguments with the pussy grabbing remark, that it's not misogynistic because lots of men behave and speak that way.

People have a really hard time grasping that actually, a lot of people might say or think racist things, including you or me. You don't have to be in a klan hood burning a crucifix outside a black family's house to have unchecked racist thoughts.

Now whenever I hear that "many people are sick of being called racist", in my mind I just hear "many people like to be racist". I think reece289 demonstrated this well by claiming to be sick of being called transphobic right before making an openly transphobic comment.

Erm?

VonZan

vetinari wrote: »

The reason people who oppose "identity politics" tend to get branded as racist is that they tend to be racist.
Take Trump's recent "****hole countries" comment, most of his base were okay with it.
Hard to argue you're not racist if you agree with only taking immigrants from places like "Norway" as opposed to Africa.
There's not much pretense in that statement.

Identify politics by its very nature is silly as is just a bunch of generalisations based on your race, religion, caste, sexuality, nationality etc. Identity politics by its very nature is divisive.

C14N

reece289 wrote: »

Erm?

they don't want a 40-something year old tranny having a **** beside their 6-year-old daughter in a Chuck E. Cheese, they're going to vote for someone who will reverse those policies for their own safety.

I don't see why you're confused. As I'm sure you're aware, "tranny" is a derogative slur to demean transgendered people. Referring to them with that word is pretty obviously transphobic, in much the same way as referring to a Mexican person as a "spic" is racist. And then you add onto that the unfounded and transphobic stereotype that a transgender person is somehow going to be more dangerous to their children than any other woman.

Edit: Sorry, I just realised that I wrongly named you when I meant to name the person you were quoting, mrhopppy

reece289

VonZan wrote: »

Identify politics by its very nature is silly as is just a bunch of generalisations based on your race, religion, caste, sexuality, nationality etc. Identity politics by its very nature is divisive.

Very true. However it's cause is important. People have been racist, sexist ect. Hence people have tried to protect against this by clumping together to gain a voice.

I agree that this causes a different problem, however the first issue needs to be dealt with also.

People go to far on both sides. People's ability to get offended needs to be tempered in order for people to understand each other.

reece289

C14N wrote: »

I don't see why you're confused. As I'm sure you're aware, "tranny" is a derogative slur to demean transgendered people. Referring to them with that word is pretty obviously transphobic, in much the same way as referring to a Mexican person as a "spic" is racist. And then you add onto that the unfounded and transphobic stereotype that a transgender person is somehow going to be more dangerous to their children than any other woman.

Edit: Sorry, I just realised that I wrongly named you when I meant to name the person you were quoting, mrhopppy

I see a quote but not a thread or date or anything. Care to be more specific?

Ah I see your post above.

Schorpio

Right okay then mrhoppy. I'm not going to pick up every point, because this post would be even longer, but off the top of my head -

-> US Stock Market has gained $2,000,000,000,000 ($2 trillion) in wealth since his inauguration

What has Trump actually done to achieve this? I mean - specifically? If you look at the market, you'll see the crash and subsequent recovery trend which has been happening steadily since Obama.There's nothing to indicate that Trump has had any effect on this whatsoever. However, that hasn't stopped him claiming it.

-> Decreased US debt in first 100 days by $100,000,000,000 ($100 billion)

Where are you getting this figure from? The National Debt did fall during the early days of Trump's presidency, but again this was not attributable to anything Trump did. Since then, the debt ceiling has had to be raised (something Trump approved). Not to mention the projections that the Tax Plan will greatly contribute to the Debt.

-> Illegal immigration down 67%

Where are you getting either of these figures? Here are the actual illegal immigrant stats. Note the trend? Yep, it's been falling significantly for years. Long before Trump's been in office. Not to say there hasn't been an additional fall since Trump took office mind. Can't say I blame them - given who's running the place.

-> Travel ban

Legally challenged time and time again, and looks set to be again (3rd time's a charm). I'll bet that without looking it up, you can't even tell me which countries are currently banned.

-> Border wall progressing slowly but surely

Very slowly. And also very scaled back. It turns out that 'Build the wall!' actually translated to 'Build the wall, except where there are already natural deterrents, oh and also count refurbishing existing fences'. Which may, or may never happen.

-> Mandating for every regulation to eliminate two previous regulations

Yep, Trump said he would do that. Do you have any actual evidence that he has? How's about you read this. Trump hasn't introduced much regulation, and his deregulation has consisted of stopping Obama's pending regulations.

-> ISIS down to >1000 fighters

Again, what exactly has Trump done to achieve this? You can't just state things and somehow expect that they are linked to Trump.

-> Expanding religious freedom laws

Evidence? And would this really be a good thing?

-> Giving veterans better care

Really? This article examines veteran care and finds, like everything Trump, the statements are overrated. Also, what about Trump's attempts to repeal Medicaid with a bill no one was allowed to see, reducing the level of care available to a lot of ordinary citizens.

Now let me counter your list:

- Failing to take any significant action in the wake of a mass shooting in Las Vegas
- Failing to condemn racial violence ('good people')
- Failing to provide care for US citizens in Puerto Rico in the wake of a natural disaster
- Vilifying every media outlet which prints a critical story
- Falsely claiming that he was wiretapped by the Obama administration
- Introducing a tax plan which will make him vast sums of money (while claiming it won't)
- Failing to release his tax returns
- Referring to Africa countries as sh*tholes
- Supporting a suspected child molester in a run for Senate
- Spending 25% of his time golfing
- Pardoning a Sheriff convicted illegally profiling Latino people
- Overseeing a Government shutdown, despite controlling all branches of Government
- Claiming he didn't say the words recorded on the Access Hollywood Bus (despite having previously admitted to it).
- The recent uncovering that he cheated on his most recent wife with a pornstar
- Everything he has said on twitter
- Putting the lives of US staff at risk by 'recognising' Jerusalem as the capital, and critising the UN when it doesn't follow suit
- Cancelling a trip to the UK amid the threat of protests.

....and that's just what springs to mind now!

The religious freedom order doesn't seem to be much of an accomplishment.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/332017-what-does-trumps-religious-freedom-order-actually-do

Doltanian

I propose an interesting question? What is wrong with being a racist or holding differing viewpoints considered racist? People have the right to think what they want and associate with who they wish and form their own opinions whether I disagree with them or not. It is not an Orwellian society where we can control the masses despite the best efforts of CNN and the politically correct types promoting what is essentially cultural marxism.

If you tell someone they should do this or that and try and enforce your opinion on others then quiet often they will do the exact opposite. In a free democracy people can do as they wish and support who they like and if the American people were to vote for a racist leader democratically then who are we to judge them.

Some people want to be left and alone and do their own things and most really don't give a damn about other peoples judgement and if what they say or do upsets others then usually it gives them a feedback loop.

I am merely examining the whole racist mentality, reasons behind and in its position in the American context. I don't condone racism but what I am trying to do is understand it and the reasons for it and these reasons are best addressed rather than dismissed. Having one side shouting racist and claiming the moral high-ground whilst the other may have very genuine grievances which are not racial at all but maybe socio-economic are a much better solution to dialogue between differing and contrasting viewpoints.