Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III
Comments
-
And the GOP, Fox News etc are willing and vocal cheerleaders in it0
-
Give over with the hysteronics. Let me guess, you know better than all those deplorables, am I right?
Stick the kettle on, have a cuppa out in the garden, forget about Trump (he really isn't that bad) and get on with your day.
I've read some ****ë on this thread but this takes the biscuit. Aliens? Lava? Absolute nonsense more like.
He isn't just bad. He's Panto bad. He's Dr. Evil bad.
He is straight from a cartoon, he's otherworldly bad. I simply cannot express in adequate terms what a ridiculous figure he is.
As I said, he could be the villain in an epsiode of the Power Puff Girls.
What gets me is that supposedly sane people with an IQ that should be in the roomtemperature range have decided that this panto should pass for sense and reason and be applicable to the real world.
Maybe in the end Trump will even achieve something, simply because he managed to somehow Forrest Gump his way through his presidency.
If he does, I'll be genuinely impressed. In the meantime I'll pray they put a squirrel in charge instead of him.0 -
everlast75 wrote: »I've read some ****ë on this thread but this takes the biscuit.
Indeed, let’s blame Trump for aliens not visiting us, seems legit alright
"Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"
0 -
The problem here is that possession is 9 tenths of the law and the chimps now have the levers of power.
This is why the chimp's supporters are tickled to goad us-it is all they have really (they haven't realized they will go down in the boat with the rest of us)
This is not to say that democracies in general have not been going through a hard time before this last US election and the term "decadent democracies" may apply but we fail to apply due attention to the creaky democratic structures at our peril.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 34601
Give over with the hysteronics. Let me guess, you know better than all those deplorables, am I right?
Stick the kettle on, have a cuppa out in the garden, forget about Trump (he really isn't that bad) and get on with your day.
I've read some ****ë on this thread but this takes the biscuit. Aliens? Lava? Absolute nonsense more like.
Is Trump really 'that bad'? You know, I don't think he is KNOWINGLY bad or evil so to be fair you're probably half-right. Rather, he's grossly out of his depth, has demonstrably poor decision making skills from his business days, is politically inexperienced to the point of ignorance or naivety, and doesn't possess the humility or self-awareness to know any of this or defer to those with better judgement.
He's an accidental danger to normal operating democracy, who'd easily fluke his way into an autocracy, simply because of the US political status quo, and his preference to run the government like his businesses (ie, Trump at the top, everyone else fighting for his favour).0 -
everlast75 wrote: »If you thought that post was about aliens you really need to realign your cognitive functions
Nice personal insult there. My cognitive functions are perfectly fine."Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"
0 -
Is Trump really 'that bad'? You know, I don't think he is KNOWINGLY bad or evil so to be fair you're probably half-right. Rather, he's grossly out of his depth, has demonstrably poor decision making skills from his business days, is politically inexperienced to the point of ignorance or naivety, and doesn't possess the humility or self-awareness to know any of this or defer to those with better judgement.
He's an accidental danger to normal operating democracy, who'd easily fluke his way into an autocracy, simply because of the US political status quo, and his preference to run the government like his businesses (ie, Trump at the top, everyone else fighting for his favour).
I agree, he is completely out of his depth in pretty much any metric you can imagine. I just don't see him as "end of the world" dangerous as outlined in that post."Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"
0 -
Join Date:Posts: 15023
Is Trump really 'that bad'? You know, I don't think he is KNOWINGLY bad or evil so to be fair you're probably half-right. Rather, he's grossly out of his depth, has demonstrably poor decision making skills from his business days, is politically inexperienced to the point of ignorance or naivety, and doesn't possess the humility or self-awareness to know any of this or defer to those with better judgement.
He's an accidental danger to normal operating democracy, who'd easily fluke his way into an autocracy, simply because of the US political status quo, and his preference to run the government like his businesses (ie, Trump at the top, everyone else fighting for his favour).
I'd largely agree with that , but the fundamental thing that drives Trump is Greed and Self-Service.
Every decision he makes is predicated solely on "what's in it for me?" - Whether that's to make himself feel/look better or to actually make him richer.
That's as big a risk in my view.0 -
I agree, he is completely out of his depth in pretty much any metric you can imagine. I just don't see him as "end of the world" dangerous as outlined in that post.
Climate change is an "end of the world "(as we know it ) scenario and we do not have the luxury of taking "time off" with this absurdity of an administration which should be the primus inter pares amongst the democratic nations.
Similarly nuclear non proliferation is not an area that can be left to whims of the likes of them (a very hard area of concern that needs all concerned to show seriousness and not to give up what has been achieved up to now)0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 34601
I agree, he is completely out of his depth in pretty much any metric you can imagine. I just don't see him as "end of the world" dangerous as outlined in that post.
I think it's kill or cure though; given all what I said, can you not see a situation where the political class nod, smile and dissemble while Trump dismantles normal structures via his bruised ego, attempts to hide increasingly suspect business dealings, or just the mistaken belief that only he knows what to do. I certainly can. His cronies and those installed into power are getting away like bandits, yet the undereducated or propaganda channels trumpet him as a champion against the 'deep state'.
And as I've said before, what I REALLY fear is not so much Trump, but the man or woman who comes after, sees his style and perfects it. Trump's a moron - I really don't think that's hyperbole, had he not his father's fortune he'd be nowhere - and doesn't understand any kind of diplomacy or basics of political manoeuvrings. If a Trump 2.0 comes along with a better knowledge of this, America truly will be toast because they'll never see it coming.0 -
'.
And as I've said before, what I REALLY fear is not so much Trump, but the man or woman who comes after, sees his style and perfects it. Trump's a moron - I really don't think that's hyperbole, had he not his father's fortune he'd be nowhere - and doesn't understand any kind of diplomacy or basics of political manoeuvrings. If a Trump 2.0 comes along with a better knowledge of this, America truly will be toast because they'll never see it coming.
That is the sentiment I came across on one of the "Nazi" sites. It was who would follow this man .They like him but they want their own successor (tbh I only came across this expressed the once but I don't go there much and I could see their "point")0 -
dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »He isn't just bad. He's Panto bad. He's Dr. Evil bad.
He is straight from a cartoon, he's otherworldly bad. I simply cannot express in adequate terms what a ridiculous figure he is.
As I said, he could be the villain in an epsiode of the Power Puff Girls.
What gets me is that supposedly sane people with an IQ that should be in the roomtemperature range have decided that this panto should pass for sense and reason and be applicable to the real world.
Maybe in the end Trump will even achieve something, simply because he managed to somehow Forrest Gump his way through his presidency.
If he does, I'll be genuinely impressed. In the meantime I'll pray they put a squirrel in charge instead of him.
You are absolutely correct.... but the thing that is more frightening to me is the fact Pence is there to replace him
There is no good outcome whatever way you look at it imo0 -
I think it's kill or cure though; given all what I said, can you not see a situation where the political class nod, smile and dissemble while Trump dismantles normal structures via his bruised ego, attempts to hide increasingly suspect business dealings, or just the mistaken belief that only he knows what to do. I certainly can. His cronies and those installed into power are getting away like bandits, yet the undereducated or propaganda channels trumpet him as a champion against the 'deep state'.
And as I've said before, what I REALLY fear is not so much Trump, but the man or woman who comes after, sees his style and perfects it. Trump's a moron - I really don't think that's hyperbole, had he not his father's fortune he'd be nowhere - and doesn't understand any kind of diplomacy or basics of political manoeuvrings. If a Trump 2.0 comes along with a better knowledge of this, America truly will be toast because they'll never see it coming.
Oh I think you are pretty much spot on. The political class will be watching this with great interest to see exactly what they can/can't get away with. I don't think this is a new phenomenon though and has been standard fare in US politics for a long time now.
The key to undoing Trump's "legacy", if you will, rests with the DNC. They can't afford another debacle like the Hillary campaign. If they put up a reasonable middle of the road candidate against him then they should walk back into the White House. If they keep doubling down on their current tackle then I fear the worst."Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"
0 -
Is Trump really 'that bad'? You know, I don't think he is KNOWINGLY bad or evil so to be fair you're probably half-right. Rather, he's grossly out of his depth, has demonstrably poor decision making skills from his business days, is politically inexperienced to the point of ignorance or naivety, and doesn't possess the humility or self-awareness to know any of this or defer to those with better judgement.
He's an accidental danger to normal operating democracy, who'd easily fluke his way into an autocracy, simply because of the US political status quo, and his preference to run the government like his businesses (ie, Trump at the top, everyone else fighting for his favour).
I would argue "yes", he is.
He is demonstrably corrupt, lacking in any integrity or moral compass, a bully, a profound and prolific liar, insecure, impatient and extremely insecure.
If anyone has any issue with any or all of the above words, I can provide a number of clear examples.
I am not name calling here. I am stating facts.
Any one of those traits would be critical news for the character of a president. However, when one combines ALL of those traits, it is by any reasonable analysis a ****ing awful extremely "bad" (evil is hyperbole IMHO) person, with dire consequences for that Country and the rest of the world as a consequence.0 -
Oh I think you are pretty much spot on. The political class will be watching this with great interest to see exactly what they can/can't get away with. I don't think this is a new phenomenon though and has been standard fare in US politics for a long time now.
The key to undoing Trump's "legacy", if you will, rests with the DNC. They can't afford another debacle like the Hillary campaign. If they put up a reasonable middle of the road candidate against him then they should walk back into the White House. If they keep doubling down on their current tackle then I fear the worst.
HC should have walked into the WH, and under all previously known standards she would have. Trump is new, the way people treat him is new.
Look at the evangelicals (fundamentalists). For years they excoriated anyone that they felt failed to meet their standards. But with Trump they have accept a known liar, womaniser, divorcee, ex martial affairs, one time abortion supporter. They are accepted all of on the basis that they may still get what they want. Nobody could have predicted that 5 years ago.
On many of Trumps tweet the replies are flooded with quotes from the bible etc. SUre many of these are bots, but it speaks to a particular segment of America that truly believes God helps America. And yet Trump has shown only a very passing interest in Christianity. One gets the feeling that it serves a purpose for him, votes, and nothing else. Yet they continue to back him.
Those firmly on the Trump train have little time for middle of the road. Obama was the very definition of that, painfully so in some cases. Yet the GOP etc hated him.
Nearly all of their professed standards have been allowed to slip at the altar of Trump. Trump is openly, and repeatedly, calling into question the very fabric of the American state through his continued attacks on the FBI, the CIA. And let us not forget his statement that Russia was no worse than America in terms of blood on their hands. That should have seen him strung up for the very people that say they support him.
HC is accused of having shading business dealings, Trump is very open about it and yet he is seen as simply using the system, being smart, HC is seen as a traitor.
The key lies with the GOP and the voters. Shifting the blame onto the DNC is just that, shifting the blame. Whomever the DNC come up with they will be relentlessly attacked by the GOP.
You can be absolutely assured that unless it is Jesus himself (although even then I have my doubts) you will not get many GOP supporters turning away from Trump.0 -
HC should have walked into the WH, and under all previously known standards she would have. Trump is new, the way people treat him is new.
Look at the evangelicals (fundamentalists). For years they excoriated anyone that they felt failed to meet their standards. But with Trump they have accept a known liar, womaniser, divorcee, ex martial affairs, one time abortion supporter. They are accepted all of on the basis that they may still get what they want. Nobody could have predicted that 5 years ago.
On many of Trumps tweet the replies are flooded with quotes from the bible etc. SUre many of these are bots, but it speaks to a particular segment of America that truly believes God helps America. And yet Trump has shown only a very passing interest in Christianity. One gets the feeling that it serves a purpose for him, votes, and nothing else. Yet they continue to back him.
Those firmly on the Trump train have little time for middle of the road. Obama was the very definition of that, painfully so in some cases. Yet the GOP etc hated him.
Nearly all of their professed standards have been allowed to slip at the altar of Trump. Trump is openly, and repeatedly, calling into question the very fabric of the American state through his continued attacks on the FBI, the CIA. And let us not forget his statement that Russia was no worse than America in terms of blood on their hands. That should have seen him strung up for the very people that say they support him.
HC is accused of having shading business dealings, Trump is very open about it and yet he is seen as simply using the system, being smart, HC is seen as a traitor.
The key lies with the GOP and the voters. Shifting the blame onto the DNC is just that, shifting the blame. Whomever the DNC come up with they will be relentlessly attacked by the GOP.
You can be absolutely assured that unless it is Jesus himself (although even then I have my doubts) you will not get many GOP supporters turning away from Trump.
And yet ,if the GOP do not win their bet they may be gone for good. Trump will be in their DNA ** and they may well go down with him.
The mid terms seem very important to me and I would be surprised if the Dems don't get Congress one way or another.
**a more polite way of saying he has shafted them(as well as all of us,mind)0 -
And yet ,if the GOP do not win their bet they may be gone for good. Trump will be in their DNA ** and they may well go down with him.
The mid terms seem very important to me and I would be surprised if the Dems don't get Congress one way or another.
**a more polite way of saying he has shafted them(as well as all of us,mind)
I wouldn't be too sure. Turnouts in mid-terms are usually low (even by US standards) and, although I stand to be corrected on this, I would assume that party activists and supporters make up a large proportion of that turn-out.
Trump has very much made the mid-terms about protecting him. So if you are even a soft Trump supporter they are making the case that a vte for the DNC is a vote to impeach Trump.
I can see very few previous Trump supporters wanting to go this route, and indeed the DNC are trying very hard to keep the debate away from this issue as they understand there is little benefit to them. They would rather focus on what Trump has, and in most cases failed to do while he is in office.
Certainly there will be seat losses for the GOP, realistically then only way is down, but I cannot see the Blue Wave that is mentioned as happening. It really comes down to the DNC getting the voters out. New or disengaged voters. They should have a good split of these which could tip the balance.0 -
I wouldn't be too sure. Turnouts in mid-terms are usually low (even by US standards) and, although I stand to be corrected on this, I would assume that party activists and supporters make up a large proportion of that turn-out.
Trump has very much made the mid-terms about protecting him. So if you are even a soft Trump supporter they are making the case that a vte for the DNC is a vote to impeach Trump.
I can see very few previous Trump supporters wanting to go this route, and indeed the DNC are trying very hard to keep the debate away from this issue as they understand there is little benefit to them. They would rather focus on what Trump has, and in most cases failed to do while he is in office.
Certainly there will be seat losses for the GOP, realistically then only way is down, but I cannot see the Blue Wave that is mentioned as happening. It really comes down to the DNC getting the voters out. New or disengaged voters. They should have a good split of these which could tip the balance.
No I am not sure either but if they do lose I think it could be a watershed moment.**
I have heard that the number of female candidacies has shot up and that could be an additional factor....
**though America's divisions will not go away....0 -
Join Date:Posts: 34601
Short of an actual, literal smoking gun, or some quantifiable 'ground level' act of criminality, I can't honestly see Trumps base abandoning him after any mid-terms that might put Democrats in control.
In fact, I think the opposite will occur: if we think it's a sh*tshow now, if the Democrats get control of the Houses then I can only see Trump doubling down on his conspiratorial rhetoric, riling up his base by pointing at the odds stacked against him and claiming "there's the Deep State in action. Witch hunt!" - all of which making the political landscape even more divisive and borderline untenable for moderates. All these rallies are basically laying the groundwork for martyrdom when the axe invariably falls. It's only going to get uglier IMO, IF the Democrats succeed in November.0 -
Advertisement
-
Schiff was on Maddow last night saying that a member of government and also an intelligence agency head told him last night that the only meeting today was the gang of 8 (contrary to what was reported being the 2 meetings as i mentioned earlier).
Apparently the two meetings are going ahead.
To be clear, a gang of 8 meeting should not happen. So the other meeting preceding that should definitely not happen.
Yet another line crossed by trump et al.
The only optimism coming out of this shítshow afterwards (after Trump gets impeached/resigns whatever) is that firmer rules are put in place so as to ensure these depths of abuse are not repeated in the future.0 -
HC should have walked into the WH, and under all previously known standards she would have. Trump is new, the way people treat him is new.
Look at the evangelicals (fundamentalists). For years they excoriated anyone that they felt failed to meet their standards. But with Trump they have accept a known liar, womaniser, divorcee, ex martial affairs, one time abortion supporter. They are accepted all of on the basis that they may still get what they want. Nobody could have predicted that 5 years ago.
On many of Trumps tweet the replies are flooded with quotes from the bible etc. SUre many of these are bots, but it speaks to a particular segment of America that truly believes God helps America. And yet Trump has shown only a very passing interest in Christianity. One gets the feeling that it serves a purpose for him, votes, and nothing else. Yet they continue to back him.
Those firmly on the Trump train have little time for middle of the road. Obama was the very definition of that, painfully so in some cases. Yet the GOP etc hated him.
Nearly all of their professed standards have been allowed to slip at the altar of Trump. Trump is openly, and repeatedly, calling into question the very fabric of the American state through his continued attacks on the FBI, the CIA. And let us not forget his statement that Russia was no worse than America in terms of blood on their hands. That should have seen him strung up for the very people that say they support him.
HC is accused of having shading business dealings, Trump is very open about it and yet he is seen as simply using the system, being smart, HC is seen as a traitor.
The key lies with the GOP and the voters. Shifting the blame onto the DNC is just that, shifting the blame. Whomever the DNC come up with they will be relentlessly attacked by the GOP.
You can be absolutely assured that unless it is Jesus himself (although even then I have my doubts) you will not get many GOP supporters turning away from Trump.
I don't think it's shifting the blame at all. Look at the numbers Obama got in his 2 successful campaigns, where have those middle of the road voters gone exactly? They haven't disappeared off the face of the planet.
The GOP and the DNC have been attacking one another relentlessly for as long as I can remember, this is nothing new. Whoever the DNC put up is going to be "attacked" and vise versa.
You are correct that the DNC need to focus on his results and more importantly have a clear set of policies to win back the voters they had under Obama. The core base for both parties is going to change very little, it's the rest that need convincing."Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"
0 -
In the event of the Dems winning control of the upper and lower houses, it'd be interesting to see what they will/would do in regard to the investigation, let it roll on, give it more backing from the houses or try and see if they can "persuade" some sensible people on the GOP side of the houses to "retire" Don early for the safety and sanity of the US and offer Mike a pleasant stay in the White House with zero intrusive actions [SC seats filling included] on his part for the remainder of his term in office provided he retires then, his quid-pro-quo being a bonus he leaves with his name unstained. Dangle a Nobel prize for re-unification of Korea in fron of him.
The quid-pro-quo for the GOP being that Don and his extended family will face only civil court monetary action and not criminal court action, in a "it's better to bust/destroy him/them financially than criminally" way, put him/them out of commission in terms of political office completely on the grounds of financial irregularities when running for and sitting in office. Don's a memory best left a'mouldering in his grave", the bogeyman story for the Houses On The Hill folk "be careful for what you wish, the electorate might give it to you".0 -
Before you had some capacity to work together.HC should have walked into the WH, and under all previously known standards she would have. Trump is new, the way people treat him is new.
Look at the evangelicals (fundamentalists). For years they excoriated anyone that they felt failed to meet their standards. But with Trump they have accept a known liar, womaniser, divorcee, ex martial affairs, one time abortion supporter. They are accepted all of on the basis that they may still get what they want. Nobody could have predicted that 5 years ago.
On many of Trumps tweet the replies are flooded with quotes from the bible etc. SUre many of these are bots, but it speaks to a particular segment of America that truly believes God helps America. And yet Trump has shown only a very passing interest in Christianity. One gets the feeling that it serves a purpose for him, votes, and nothing else. Yet they continue to back him.
Those firmly on the Trump train have little time for middle of the road. Obama was the very definition of that, painfully so in some cases. Yet the GOP etc hated him.
Nearly all of their professed standards have been allowed to slip at the altar of Trump. Trump is openly, and repeatedly, calling into question the very fabric of the American state through his continued attacks on the FBI, the CIA. And let us not forget his statement that Russia was no worse than America in terms of blood on their hands. That should have seen him strung up for the very people that say they support him.
HC is accused of having shading business dealings, Trump is very open about it and yet he is seen as simply using the system, being smart, HC is seen as a traitor.
The key lies with the GOP and the voters. Shifting the blame onto the DNC is just that, shifting the blame. Whomever the DNC come up with they will be relentlessly attacked by the GOP.
You can be absolutely assured that unless it is Jesus himself (although even then I have my doubts) you will not get many GOP supporters turning away from Trump.
I don't think it's shifting the blame at all. Look at the numbers Obama got in his 2 successful campaigns, where have those middle of the road voters gone exactly? They haven't disappeared off the face of the planet.
The GOP and the DNC have been attacking one another relentlessly for as long as I can remember, this is nothing new. Whoever the DNC put up is going to be "attacked" and vise versa.
You are correct that the DNC need to focus on his results and more importantly have a clear set of policies to win back the voters they had under Obama. The core base for both parties is going to change very little, it's the rest that need convincing.
Look at the lengths Obama went to to cross the aisle and get Obamacare through.
Certainly things have been heading this way for a while but this has been a massive plummit in inter party relations.
I also don't know why it is all up to the DNC to fox everything either. Certainly they are the best hope but purely because the Republicans are unwilling. Why can't they deal with the chaos their party has created?
I feel like the Republicans need to step up as well. Especially as it requires a massive blue wave for Democrats to match Republicans in terms of power in things like the mid terms. Regions are far too Gerrymandered for it to be a straight fight.0 -
Before you had some capacity to work together.
Look at the lengths Obama went to to cross the aisle and get Obamacare through.
Certainly things have been heading this way for a while but this has been a massive plummit in inter party relations.
I also don't know why it is all up to the DNC to fox everything either. Certainly they are the best hope but purely because the Republicans are unwilling. Why can't they deal with the chaos their party has created?
I feel like the Republicans need to step up as well. Especially as it requires a massive blue wave for Democrats to match Republicans in terms of power in things like the mid terms. Regions are far too Gerrymandered for it to be a straight fight.
Yeah, that's very true. The GOP really ramped up it's hostility towards Obama, especially in his second term. The DNC have simply returned this with interest since Trump took office. As you say it is going to take both parties to grow up and stop acting in such a partisan manner.
I also agree that the GOP have an awful lot to answer for in all this. From their outright hatred of Obama, the Tea-party, and now Trump."Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"
0 -
Trump gave a voice to many people who felt they were forced to accept Obama and his liberal ways. The GOP had spent the previous 8 years doing everything they could to do him down, but unfortunately for them Obama was good enough to be able to convince people on the campaign.
HC was never in the same level as Obama, even the DNC knew this hence why Obama was chosen ahead of her. But the policies that Obama had followed were pretty much the same as HC was stating. So what changed? GOP had been very successful at running a very long campaign to constantly pick away at HC. Trump didn't suffer from this as he was a blow in.
The overt racism, the MAGA, the calls to cut immigration ,these IMO, were all a result in part from having to endure the Obama years. People felt that had enough of the liberals with their facts and empathy and understanding and concern for the planet. They wanted to go back to the previous years when they were in control.
Trump gave them the licence to not only believe all that but openly tout it. That resulted in the Neo-Nazi march. These people didn't suddenly come to think like that, the main leaders always thought that way but Trump had given them the confidence that they could parade openly about it and those softers supporters felt emboldened by the crowd.
And that is why, although clearly the DNC made many mistakes, the Trump presidency cannot be landed at their door. Despite all of this they still managed to win a majority of voters, so even now the liberal view point is the majority in the US, but due to the system they use it feels at times that it is in retreat.
GOP have played a very active role in getting Trump to office. He wasn't the 1st choice but when it became clear he was capable of doing it they fully endorsed him and since then have been pretty much 100% him (save for some that largely vote with the GOP in the end anyway).
What can the DNC to avoid the same fate? Very difficult to know since all the previous rules about scandals and voting groups red lines have been overturned with Trump. That is why I think that the targeting of new and disengaged voters is the way to go.0 -
-
Its naive to think 2016 and Trump was when the backlash began.
In Obamas era (I know , your not allowed mention him on this thread) , between 2008 and 2016 the Democratic party lost over 1000 legislative seats.
Yes thats over 1000s local, state, house and senate seats lost .
Trump didnt anounce his candidacy until June 2015 , one would have thought the Democrats would have been concerned at their losses in the 7 years before Trump even arrived on the scene.
Philip Bump did a good piece in The Washington Post on the Decimation of the Democratic Party where he explained where all teh Dems legislative seats were lost. .
Trump (2015) just rode a wave that had been building since 2008.
Personally Id like to see the DNC get their act together , they need to clean out the old and in with the new kids. The 3 top Dems in Washington Pelosi, Hoyer, Clyburn are all over 78 , and Feinstein is 84 and seeking re-election. The DNC is nearly 5 years older on average than the GOP in Congress.
I mean that cant be good, if the Dems want to defeat Trump in 2020 they need to get some fresh blood and some fresh ideas .0 -
I wonder why you were able to post this ahead of ,for example the BBC.Hande hoche! wrote: »
It is the same source and ,I would have thought completely authoritative (the WH or T's twitter account)
I wonder why they waited a few minutes...just normal procedure and a wish to flesh out the story to a minimal degree perhaps?0 -
Advertisement
-
I wonder why you were able to post this ahead of ,for example the BBC.
It is the same source and ,I would have thought completely authoritative (the WH or T's twitter account)
I wonder why they waited a few minutes...just normal procedure and a wish to flesh out the story to a minimal degree perhaps?
Yeah probably a desire to add a bit more "meat" to the story and possibly making sure they don't report incorrect developing news.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement