Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Hurrache

Well at least the whataboutery has moved on from the But Hillary variant.

Christy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Rjd2 wrote: »

Have you studied the Cruz proposals? They seem to be favoured by many Republicans online. David French of the NR seems very receptive.

https://twitter.com/DavidAFrench/status/1008835703931842560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftownhall.com%2Ftipsheet%2Fguybenson%2F2018%2F06%2F19%2Fsensible-ted-cruzs-good-plan-to-alleviate-child-separation-crisis-n2492229

Can't say I have. Doesn't seem that problematic, note how it increases the budget to allow the continuation of the zero tolerance policy. Previous administrations have had concerns that there simply was no support infrastructure to do it. So the border is more rigidly policed, families aren't separated, Trump still wins.

The people are not arrested so it is not a continuation of zero policy?

Unless those shelters are simply renamed prisons which would simply continue the issue.

No funding for Trump's monument at least and it would immediately stop Trump's inhumane treatment of children.

Politically I am not sure Trump would gain or lose anything. His supporters would cheer that he attained his goal via the suffering of kids and toddlers (his goal being whatever ends up agreed). If nothing is agreed they will blame the Dems.

Anyone else can see that this is a madman willing to torment and hurt innocent children. Actually at this point everyone can see that. It is just whether or not they see it as a particularly bad quality in a leader is the issue.

Greaney

I have a feeling Godwins Law doesn't apply here. I've honestly studied Hitler and his rise, and at every step, good people didn't speak up, or honestly thought the checks and balances would kick in and keep the tyrant in his place.

Well, once again, that hasn't happened here.:(

Just looked up Mike Godwin and he 'suspended' his law with regard to Trump in August 2017 according to his twitter account
https://twitter.com/sfmnemonic

Leroy42

Wait, Rigolo, so only countries that have 100% perfection have the ability to make statements about anything?

The point being debated here is whether Trump is correct is demanding that this policy be driven as it is. Do you, or don't you, think that separating children from their parents, detaining them in cages in the desert, is correct.

It really is quite a simple question, and the answer is either yes or no.

From that you can build the argument.

Just on the nonsense about MS13. Do you even know what that means? What levels are we taking about? How many gang members? And who are these people that you claim are not support the law enforcement fight against them?

RIGOLO

Water John wrote: »

Trump and Haughey, both corrupt. Lack of respect for the democratic process, populists.

Ahh so you see yourself anti-populist. I find that an interesting stance. 
Does your knowledge of the history of American populism only start in 2016 and you think it all began with DT, or does it go further back.


I trust you know the roots of 'populism' , and know American populism history goes back to post civil war late 19th century fight for agrarian revolt, poor farmers, equality for black farmers and even stretched to moving off the gold standard to break the hegemony of the bankers.

So being anti-populism does this mean you are in favour of the 2-party stranglehold  the DNC/GOP have on US politics considering that the Populist/Peoples Party (circa 19^th century) represented a real chance a 3^rd party could gain traction in the US 2 party system , they ran a Presidential candidate , and took 5 states and 22 electoral college votes.
And being anti-populism does this mean you align yourself with the 'Democratic party white elite supremacy that set out in the 19th century,  to violently destroy the original Populist Party and increase segregation and prevent black farmers from gaining a foothold in the emerging economy post civil war.
Populism in American was born (circa 19thC) out of improvements for poor farmers, less segregation, equality for black farmers , breaking the ‘gold’ standard financial hold the elites had among other things.
Black populist party was also one of the earliest civil rights movements fighting for equality.


The Populist Party was extremely progressive, pro-immigrant, looking for direct elections, called for the end of the electoral college (remember this is late 1800s) .
Isnt it ironic if the Populist party had evolved and done away with the electoral college then Hilary would be president based on popular vote.
 
People should keep all this in mind the next time they trash ‘populism’, and accuse Trump of being a populist.  If your knowledge of history extends back further than 2016 then perhaps being aligned with the founding fathers of American Populism would in fact be a badge of honour.
And if your too busy to read a history book , you could watch The Wizard of Oz, there is a theory that it’s a populist allegory promoting workers and farmers rights against the gold standard and bankers. 

Captain Obvious

RIGOLO wrote: »

The hypocrisy is in full flow today .
All this whatabout the children, yet very few would support Trumps fight against the MS-13 gangs that some of these families are fleeing, all because well he wasnt 'our gal' HRC.

What specific policies targeting MS-13 are you referring to?

pixelburp

RIGOLO wrote: »

The hypocrisy is in full flow today . 
All this whatabout the children, yet very few would support Trumps fight against the MS-13 gangs that some of these families are fleeing, all because well he wasnt 'our gal' HRC.  

And the hypocrisy is summed up in Simon Coveneys attack on the US Administration border policy, the same Simon Coveney who supports taking tax payers money to fund banks so they can sell mortgage loans to hedge funds that can then evict families from a stable home environment and put them onto the streets forcing more tax payer money be spent to house these people in hotels owned by party benefactors, hedge funds and wealthy elites rock stars. Lets party on with our dentention centres in Butlins and the nouveau millionaires  and rising rents and homeless crisis in Irl., whilst taking the high moral ground condeming another nations attempts to deal with their immigration issue

HYPOCRISY ... another result of the law of unintended consequences.. Trumps presidency and its policies (right or wrong) have exposed the hypocrisy must people, who would see themselves as the antithises of POTUS , are knee deep in .

Oh well, if you want to draw equivalence here, we could always talk about the Irish government's approach to homelessness, versus America's (where IIRC in many states being homeless is a crime under laws regarding 'public camping'), or perhaps we'll talk about Ireland's approach to mental health versus America's - because I'm confident enough to say Ireland will come out better, even if our own problems with homeless families is pretty sorry. Culturally we actually want to help, fund and talk about these issues - not without flaws mind you - as opposed to many American states that like to either prosecute the homeless, or use those with mental health problems as scapegoats for shootings.

Honestly, if the best that can be done is draw some form of conspiratorial moral equivalence between the US government forcibly & INTENTIONALLY taking children away only to lock them in cages, versus some wing-nut theory about homeless families in Fine Gael hotels - then the argument is already lost. Frankly it comes off like you know what's happening in these child detention centres is wrong and just trying to whataboutery it away.

Every country has demons (look to the Mother & Baby home in Tuam to see that in full effect), but frankly the excuse of glass-houses is up there with trotting out the Nazis and Godwins Law. Or making some mealy mouthed excuse about 'protecting borders'. We all want secure borders, but if you're seriously telling me America is better & safer for locking children up in tiny metal cages, then the USA is lost. Watching the excuses roll in from the likes of Ann Coulter or Tucker Carlson would be as if... I dunno, John Waters or Ronan Mullen defended the Tuam gravesite (actually, you know what, he probably would).

listermint

RIGOLO wrote: »

Ahh so you see yourself anti-populist. I find that an interesting stance. 
Does your knowledge of the history of American populism only start in 2016 and you think it all began with DT, or does it go further back.


I trust you know the roots of 'populism' , and know American populism history goes back to post civil war late 19th century fight for agrarian revolt, poor farmers, equality for black farmers and even stretched to moving off the gold standard to break the hegemony of the bankers.

So being anti-populism does this mean you are in favour of the 2-party stranglehold  the DNC/GOP have on US politics considering that the Populist/Peoples Party (circa 19^th century) represented a real chance a 3^rd party could gain traction in the US 2 party system , they ran a Presidential candidate , and took 5 states and 22 electoral college votes.
And being anti-populism does this mean you align yourself with the 'Democratic party white elite supremacy that set out in the 19th century,  to violently destroy the original Populist Party and increase segregation and prevent black farmers from gaining a foothold in the emerging economy post civil war.
Populism in American was born (circa 19thC) out of improvements for poor farmers, less segregation, equality for black farmers , breaking the ‘gold’ standard financial hold the elites had among other things.
Black populist party was also one of the earliest civil rights movements fighting for equality.


The Populist Party was extremely progressive, pro-immigrant, looking for direct elections, called for the end of the electoral college (remember this is late 1800s) .
Isnt it ironic if the Populist party had evolved and done away with the electoral college then Hilary would be president based on popular vote.
 
People should keep all this in mind the next time they trash ‘populism’, and accuse Trump of being a populist.  If your knowledge of history extends back further than 2016 then perhaps being aligned with the founding fathers of American Populism would in fact be a badge of honour.
And if your too busy to read a history book , you could watch The Wizard of Oz, there is a theory that it’s a populist allegory promoting workers and farmers rights against the gold standard and bankers. 

No one in here wants to read your bold enlarged text. Why cant you keep it to normal font, or is this part of an aggressive stance you've taken ?

Corkblowin

listermint wrote: »

No one in here wants to read your bold enlarged text. Why cant you keep it to normal font, or is this part of an aggressive stance you've taken ?

Copy and pasting between multiple sites / platforms is difficult.

Professor Moriarty

RIGOLO wrote: »

Water John wrote: »

Trump and Haughey, both corrupt. Lack of respect for the democratic process, populists.

Ahh so you see yourself anti-populist. I find that an interesting stance. 
Does your knowledge of the history of American populism only start in 2016 and you think it all began with DT, or does it go further back.


I trust you know the roots of 'populism' , and know American populism history goes back to post civil war late 19th century fight for agrarian revolt, poor farmers, equality for black farmers and even stretched to moving off the gold standard to break the hegemony of the bankers.

So being anti-populism does this mean you are in favour of the 2-party stranglehold  the DNC/GOP have on US politics considering that the Populist/Peoples Party (circa 19^th century) represented a real chance a 3^rd party could gain traction in the US 2 party system , they ran a Presidential candidate , and took 5 states and 22 electoral college votes.
And being anti-populism does this mean you align yourself with the 'Democratic party white elite supremacy that set out in the 19th century,  to violently destroy the original Populist Party and increase segregation and prevent black farmers from gaining a foothold in the emerging economy post civil war.
Populism in American was born (circa 19thC) out of improvements for poor farmers, less segregation, equality for black farmers , breaking the ‘gold’ standard financial hold the elites had among other things.
Black populist party was also one of the earliest civil rights movements fighting for equality.


The Populist Party was extremely progressive, pro-immigrant, looking for direct elections, called for the end of the electoral college (remember this is late 1800s) .
Isnt it ironic if the Populist party had evolved and done away with the electoral college then Hilary would be president based on popular vote.
 
People should keep all this in mind the next time they trash ‘populism’, and accuse Trump of being a populist.  If your knowledge of history extends back further than 2016 then perhaps being aligned with the founding fathers of American Populism would in fact be a badge of honour.
And if your too busy to read a history book , you could watch The Wizard of Oz, there is a theory that it’s a populist allegory promoting workers and farmers rights against the gold standard and bankers. 

Your post is so full of non sequiturs and bizarre logic that it doesn't warrant a meaningful response. That's what you get from harvesting diverse tracts of text from various websites. May I just nod in the direction of your use of The Wizard Of Oz to defend The Donald and his vicious populism in the context of children being detained in cages. Breathtaking.

Zubeneschamali

Greaney wrote: »

I have a feeling Godwins Law doesn't apply here.

Mike Godwin, originator of Godwin's law, has personally stated on Twitter that it is OK to compare this crowd to the Nazis:

https://twitter.com/sfmnemonic/status/896884949634232320

jooksavage

Greaney wrote: »

I have a feeling Godwins Law doesn't apply here. I've honestly studied Hitler and his rise, and at every step, good people didn't speak up, or honestly thought the checks and balances would kick in and keep the tyrant in his place.

Well, once again, that hasn't happened here.:(

Just looked up Mike Godwin and he 'suspended' his law with regard to Trump in August 2017 according to his twitter account
https://twitter.com/sfmnemonic

Walter Shaub put it well last night:

https://twitter.com/waltshaub/status/1009244330018705414

Greaney

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Mike Godwin, originator of Godwin's law, has personally stated on Twitter that it is OK to compare this crowd to the Nazis:

https://twitter.com/sfmnemonic/status/896884949634232320

I've studied the rise of Hitler myself, and I really do think we're in the same place. What upsets me, as a believer, is the support he had from folk who claim to be Christian. Although many Christians don't support him and didn't from the start, a significant amount of high profile TV Christians did. I'm furious about that.

I'm delighted that the Methodist church are taking a stance on the obvious glee that Jeff Sessions seemed to take in quoting scripture out of context to support the administrations stand on taking children from their parents

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/19/17479232/united-methodist-church-charges-expel-jeff-sessions-migrant

I think what is happening is obscene. They would do well to remember

Galations 6v7 Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. (Shakespeare)

Danzy

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Mike Godwin, originator of Godwin's law, has personally stated on Twitter that it is OK to compare this crowd to the Nazis:

https://twitter.com/sfmnemonic/status/896884949634232320

It denigrates what the Nazis did to pretend that though.

For some that is the goal, for others it is just a way to be dramatic, hyperbole.

one armed dwarf

The parallel to me seems to be in the volume of kids detained, it has a whiff of the logistics 'crisis' posed by the 'Jewish Question' which led to the formulation of a more efficient Final Solution at Wannsee.

But I don't think the admin is evil as the Nazis, just inept. But through the likelihood of the kids being neglected while detained I can see many of them dying. It's all so ugly and horrible.

kilns

The funny thing is that if this was any other country the US would be plotting a way of overthrowing the current President and putting in a Govt. of their liking by creating a war

Professor Moriarty

Danzy wrote: »

It denigrates what the Nazis did to pretend that though.

For some that is the goal, for others it is just a way to be dramatic, hyperbole.

A right-wing populist administration targets a particular cohort of people and interns them without trial while separating the children from their families. Hyperbole? Nah. Disingenuous smoke and mirrors won't deflect from the very obvious, copious and factual similarities.

Leroy42

Danzy wrote: »

It denigrates what the Nazis did to pretend that though.

For some that is the goal, for others it is just a way to be dramatic, hyperbole.

Again, nobody is saying that they are like the final version of the Nazi's. Why do people insist on thinking that the Nazi's started out as we now recall them.

Hitler didn't get voted in on the basis of gassing the Jews. He got in on a mandate to making Germany great again, to take back control, so stop being the punchbag for the rest of the world (which really meant Europe and US).

Many in Germany were unaware until towards the end of the war what was really going on (or at least that is the claim). IMO, they were aware but chose not to think about the logical outcome of the policies.

So, no, nobody is saying that Trump is Hitler. Nobody is saying that Trump is going to gas anyone. What people are pointing out, not just here but academics with extensive knowledge of the rise of Hitler, is that there are eerie similarities to the creep that took over in Germany.

josip

kilns wrote: »

The funny thing is that if this was any other country the US would be plotting a way of overthrowing the current President and putting in a Govt. of their liking by creating a war

The US only do this when there is a potential financial upside.
'Regime change' by the US in recent times has never been on humanitarian grounds.

kilns

Where is the opposition politicians, they need to be held accountable, how vocal are Pelosi and Schumer.  How many are getting in front of cameras and calling Trump out on a daily basis on his abuse of human rights and his lies.  Their silence is deafening and is a disgrace.  The fact that it takes late night show comedians to pull Trump on all his lies etc says it all about American Politics.  The greatest democracy in the world my arse

Leroy42

Nobody is going to listen to Pelosi, certainly not those in the GOP. So her standing up would only result in Trump lashing out with insults on Twitter, which would do nothing but deflect the story.

https://www.axios.com/kim-jong-un-nancy-pelosi-favorable-poll-e675f74a-eebb-4fa3-a661-10dd008a123b.html

Poll: Republicans favor Kim Jong-un more than Nancy Pelosi. I mean, you have a similar favourability factor between a democratically elected member of the House as against a brutal dictator that only months ago was openly threatening the US and has held US citizens captive as political prisioners

kilns

Who cares, no one is calling him out, he throws out facts and not one public representative calls him out on them on a regular basis.

jooksavage

Danzy wrote: »

It denigrates what the Nazis did to pretend that though.

For some that is the goal, for others it is just a way to be dramatic, hyperbole.

No.


We're not at "lebensraum" but the unprecedented attacks on the rule of law, the promises to imprison political rivals, the dehumanizing treatment of immigrants, the cosying up with bona fide tyrants, the refusal to condemn actual nazis... Comparisons with previous authoritarian regimes is not hysterical anymore. We're scarcely 18 months into the Trump presidency and the US is becoming unrecognizable. It's past time for the legislative branch of government to start checking Trump's power before the situation deteriorates any further and the comparisons become even more apt.

Blowfish

kilns wrote: »

Who cares, no one is calling him out, he throws out facts and not one public representative calls him out on them on a regular basis.

Pretty much all of the Dems are calling him out and some of the Repubs too. The Dems have already created legislation aimed at keeping immigrant families together and every Dem senator has signed on to it.

In addition, they are using public feeling on it and the upcoming midterms to force Republicans hand. A perfect example of this is Beto O'Rourke who is challenging Ted Cruz's seat in Nov. On Fathers day, he led a march on the tent housing for separated children in Texas. Two days before that, Ted Cruz had been defending Trumps policy of separating children, but because of public backlash and Beto challenging him on it, he's now one of the Republicans drafting their own legislation to stop it.

kilns

Blowfish wrote: »

kilns wrote: »

Who cares, no one is calling him out, he throws out facts and not one public representative calls him out on them on a regular basis.

Pretty much all of the Dems are calling him out and some of the Repubs too. The Dems have already created legislation aimed at keeping immigrant families together and every Dem senator has signed on to it.

In addition, they are using public feeling on it and the upcoming midterms to force Republicans hand. A perfect example of this is Beto O'Rourke who is challenging Ted Cruz's seat in Nov. On Fathers day, he led a march on the tent housing for separated children in Texas. Two days before that, Ted Cruz had been defending Trumps policy of separating children, but because of public backlash and Beto challenging him on it, he's now one of the Republicans drafting their own legislation to stop it.

I am talking about appealing to the nation as a whole, how many are prominent on national TV cameras on a daily basis.  Who could you name as the democrat who is standing up to Trump in public challenging him, I dont see any.  Jesus even Stormy Daniels lawyer was better at it

looksee

kilns wrote: »

Where is the opposition politicians, they need to be held accountable, how vocal are Pelosi and Schumer.  How many are getting in front of cameras and calling Trump out on a daily basis on his abuse of human rights and his lies.  Their silence is deafening and is a disgrace.  The fact that it takes late night show comedians to pull Trump on all his lies etc says it all about American Politics.  The greatest democracy in the world my arse

While I can see the counter arguments, I have to agree with this. So long as there is no obvious and vocal structure for people opposed to Trump and the GOP to attach themselves to, the Rep (ie Trump) arguments will dominate. Even if the blatant lies were challenged (politically) it would be something. The Democrats are not offering any reasons why anyone would vote for them, except as a protest vote.

oscarBravo

kilns wrote: »

I am talking about appealing to the nation as a whole, how many are prominent on national TV cameras on a daily basis.  Who could you name as the democrat who is standing up to Trump in public challenging him, I dont see any. 

Leroy42 wrote: »

Nobody is going to listen to Pelosi, certainly not those in the GOP. So her standing up would only result in Trump lashing out with insults on Twitter, which would do nothing but deflect the story.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Christy42

kilns wrote: »

Blowfish wrote: »

kilns wrote: »

Who cares, no one is calling him out, he throws out facts and not one public representative calls him out on them on a regular basis.

Pretty much all of the Dems are calling him out and some of the Repubs too. The Dems have already created legislation aimed at keeping immigrant families together and every Dem senator has signed on to it.

In addition, they are using public feeling on it and the upcoming midterms to force Republicans hand. A perfect example of this is Beto O'Rourke who is challenging Ted Cruz's seat in Nov. On Fathers day, he led a march on the tent housing for separated children in Texas. Two days before that, Ted Cruz had been defending Trumps policy of separating children, but because of public backlash and Beto challenging him on it, he's now one of the Republicans drafting their own legislation to stop it.

I am talking about appealing to the nation as a whole, how many are prominent on national TV cameras on a daily basis.  Who could you name as the democrat who is standing up to Trump in public challenging him, I dont see any.  Jesus even Stormy Daniels lawyer was better at it

Trump seems scared of Stormy. Everyone else, no matter how insignificant who has stood up to him has received a twitter tirade at one time or other. If memory serves he has left Stormy alone and settled for official statements.

It is all a bit weird.

I think the issue is is that it is very hard to get a sensible message across against the craziness. It is like having an important accounting meeting with clowns running around the place. No matter how important the clowns are getting the attention there. I remember people saying the same about Hillary but she had plenty of detail about her stated aims and policies up online for everyone to see.

Soundbites and simple statements win the day unfortunately.

amandstu

Christy42 wrote: »

Trump seems scared of Stormy. Everyone else, no matter how insignificant who has stood up to him has received a twitter tirade at one time or other. If memory serves he has left Stormy alone and settled for official statements.

It is all a bit weird.

I think the issue is is that it is very hard to get a sensible message across against the craziness. It is like having an important accounting meeting with clowns running around the place. No matter how important the clowns are getting the attention there. I remember people saying the same about Hillary but she had plenty of detail about her stated aims and policies up online for everyone to see.

Soundbites and simple statements win the day unfortunately.

Well Avenatti is supposedly going to represent some of those involved
in the "Summer Camps". He is a good communicator and I feel he might perhaps do some damage the way things are looking.

Captain Obvious

Danzy wrote: »

It denigrates what the Nazis did to pretend that though.

For some that is the goal, for others it is just a way to be dramatic, hyperbole.

Only if you compare the start of the Trump regime with the Nazis when they were in full swing.