Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

rossie1977

Obama got 65,915,795 votes in 2012, Hillary got 65,853,514 votes in 2016 so not a vast difference or some major shift away

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

As Ive said there are now adults in The Whitehouse administration ALWAYS thinking long term.

Still ignoring my request for a reply to my post on that very topic I see in favour of delivering the GOP missive?

Vestiapx

rossie1977 wrote: »

Obama got 65,915,795 votes in 2012, Hillary got 65,853,514 votes in 2016 so not a vast difference or some major shift away

That seems very close, were there more voters in the recent election or was it a process of the electoral college?

RIGOLO

RIGOLO wrote: »

 As Ive said there are now adults in The Whitehouse administration ALWAYS thinking long term.

Who are these people. All I see from this shambles of an administration is the liar Huckabee-Sanders, the ridiculously corrupt Scott Pruitt, racist Jeff Sessions, inept Ben Carson and the clown Rick Perry who didn't even know what his department did when he was given the job. Larry Kudlow has apparently been more wrong about the economy than anyone alive, yet Trump picked him as an advisor. Ryan Zinke is up to his eyeballs in questionable deals with oil companies.
I'm sure I've missed some but these are the best people, the grown ups as you put it. Ridiculous. It's a clown car of a presidency, and it will end in tears.

Inquitus

Deleted User wrote: »

Who are these people. All I see from this shambles of an administration is the liar Huckabee-Sanders, the ridiculously corrupt Scott Pruitt, racist Jeff Sessions, inept Ben Carson and the clown Rick Perry who didn't even know what his department did when he was given the job. Larry Kudlow has apparently been more wrong about the economy than anyone alive, yet Trump picked him as an advisor. Ryan Zinke is up to his eyeballs in questionable deals with oil companies.
I'm sure I've missed some but these are the best people, the grown ups as you put it. Ridiculous. It's a clown car of a presidency, and it will end in tears.

Don't forget the wonderful, and highly talented Betsy DeVos!

Inquitus

Inquitus wrote: »

Don't forget the wonderful, and highly talented Betsy DeVos!

Knew I missed one alright!

FingerDeKat

Inquitus wrote: »

Don't forget the wonderful, and highly talented Betsy DeVos!

and Sean Spicer hiding in bushes to avoid the press:pac::pac::pac:

jooksavage

One of the few folks in there that brings any measure of dignity to the administration is Mattis and God only know how much longer he can last. The video where he makes an impromptu speech to some troops asking them to "hold the line until our country gets back to respecting each other" really says it all about what he thinks of the situation at the top

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnyYhTk1OUg

Manic Moran

aloyisious wrote: »

Ta for the reply. It would seem sensible for the RN to simply fly Pers to nearest US base, request & get gear for a Seebee-type Op, airlift it to commonwealth island near disaster zone & transport same by sea using RN commandeered shipping, unload using whatever the usual [naval] way is. while proper ships are on way from distance. We do have a reputation for making do & getting the job done while civvies look on amazed, excelling in doing the miraculous daily. I think it's called adapt and overcome. While the adage is the job ain't complete til the paperwork is done. we're not talking about a toiler-seat task. :-)
.

When we went into Iraq for our tour, one of the problems they warned us about was what, if I recall correctly, they termed the “moon landing effect”. The concept being that the US is so huge and advanced, it could put people on the moon, for god’s sake that there is little it can’t do if it puts a mind to it, and so there would be a level of expectation for healthcare, hospital building, electrical infrastructure, roads, etc. Sometimes we used the reputation to our advantage (eg pretending that our sunglasses were x-ray capable), sometimes it was a liability.

Of course, the reality was that the moon landing was something of a small operation, and building an infrastructure is a tad more difficult.

Is this reported new activist-force inside the D-party something the GOP should be worried about?

I wouldn’t think so. As I observed a few days ago, there seem to be three wings to the Democratic Party right now. The traditional lot, typified by the current leadership, the Bernie crowd such as won in New York, and the centrists, such as won in Pennsylvania. That’s quite the split. Conor Lamb’s political campaign adverts showed him firing off his AR15s. Worked great to get a D seat in the house in swing-State, but it’s poison in NYC where O-C just won.

What is interesting about North Korea is that the internal propaganda has changed. It’s no longer anti-American, they cancelled last week’s Anti-Imperialism Day, and is a lot more peaceful and talking about progress no enmity. I have no idea if this was done before, but given the nature of how DPRK sets the tone to its people, I think it more significant than the tech research facility.

FreudianSlippers

Christy42 wrote: »

Unemployment was not 40%.

Just under half the population did not get left behind. You have provided 0 evidence for this claim that an awful lot of people (and I want a large proportion of those who voted for Trump).

They believed Trump could make their problems go away because he promised them that. He also told them they were in far more trouble than they were and they believed him. He fed off of Republican lies about Obamacare. After he was elected people looked at Obamacare and realised how good it was and it quickly became popular and untouchable. Within months of the administration taking office we saw a sudden turn from complaining about the economy to praising it with very little actually changing.

If they were left behind why are they still not angry at being left behind because things are not better?

Trump lies.

Unemployment does not have to be 40% for people to believe they got left behind - in fact, "coal country" is a prime example of the "employed" people that are Trump supporters because they were left behind.

I don't know anyone with money who isn't either (i) a lifelong Republican (who isn't a fan of Trump) or (ii) a racist who is a fan of Trump. This is not a case of the wealthy supporting the Republican candidate; this is the disenfranchised uneducated supporting a President that they believe represents their "values".

Sophia S.

How do you all think the midterm elections will play out in November? For, or against Trump?

Christy42

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

Unemployment was not 40%.

Just under half the population did not get left behind. You have provided 0 evidence for this claim that an awful lot of people (and I want a large proportion of those who voted for Trump).

They believed Trump could make their problems go away because he promised them that. He also told them they were in far more trouble than they were and they believed him. He fed off of Republican lies about Obamacare. After he was elected people looked at Obamacare and realised how good it was and it quickly became popular and untouchable. Within months of the administration taking office we saw a sudden turn from complaining about the economy to praising it with very little actually changing.

If they were left behind why are they still not angry at being left behind because things are not better?

Trump lies.

Unemployment does not have to be 40% for people to believe they got left behind - in fact, "coal country" is a prime example of the "employed" people that are Trump supporters because they were left behind.

I don't know anyone with money who isn't either (i) a lifelong Republican (who isn't a fan of Trump) or (ii) a racist who is a fan of Trump. This is not a case of the wealthy supporting the Republican candidate; this is the disenfranchised uneducated supporting a President that they believe represents their "values".

Sure but Trump was making a point of the unemployment rate. That is where the argument is going that the economy was not as good as claimed. Well what changed? The economy now is largely an extension of two years ago. So surely those left behind should be furious right?

People keep claiming this but I see little evidence. Low played workers voted for Hilary. Trump supporters claimed the economy was terrible and then a few months later when everything was the same they claimed it brilliant.

Honestly if they feel Trump supports their values then there are other issues with them. See throwing kids in overcrowded cages.

FreudianSlippers

Sophia S. wrote: »

How do you all think the midterm elections will play out in November? For, or against Trump?

My gut is badly.

My desire is badly.

The reality is probably a minor democratic majority (save this post for posterity - because I'd ****ing LOVE to be wrong).



The only positive I can see is that Trump has not managed to improve the lives of the middle class in the USA. The problem is that the lower class seem to have entirely bought into him.

FreudianSlippers

Christy42 wrote: »

Sure but Trump was making a point of the unemployment rate. That is where the argument is going that the economy was not as good as claimed. Well what changed? The economy now is largely an extension of two years ago. So surely those left behind should be furious right?

People keep claiming this but I see little evidence. Low played workers voted for Hilary. Trump supporters claimed the economy was terrible and then a few months later when everything was the same they claimed it brilliant.

Honestly if they feel Trump supports their values then there are other issues with them. See throwing kids in overcrowded cages.

No, Trump's trick is convincing the low paid ****ty job workers that their job isn't ****ty and low paid... tricking coal workers into thinking that we're going back to a coal economy.

Obama worked to ensure these people were re-educated, but many people refuse. There's not a lot we can do about that.

Rjd2

Sophia S. wrote: »

How do you all think the midterm elections will play out in November? For, or against Trump?

I wouldn't be as confident of the slaughter of the republican party as I was a while ago. One thing that always motivates the Republican base is the supreme court and from all accounts the Koch brothers are going to get very seriously involved due to that. Very brave man to make any prediction atm.

2 Scoops

Was a bit of debate about the Democratic Socialists of America beliefs after Cortez's upset victory and whether or not she was extreme. Her party in NYC didn't leave much to the imagination.

https://twitter.com/nycDSA/status/1012808259818926080

https://www.dsausa.org/constitution

Their own constitution reads

"We are socialists because we reject an economic order based on private profit, alienated labor, gross inequalities of wealth and power, discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, disability status, age, religion, and national origin, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo,"

So yeah, pretty extreme one could say.

Igotadose

In FLOTUS news, an awkward moment incoming for the First lady - seems like in the last year, she earned between $100,00 and $1m through photo licensing. But, only to 'positive stories.' An image of the First Family (the current one, not the one with Ivana or Marla), adorns the White House calendar for sale in the gift shop.

No response yet, I'm sure the earnings all were donated to charities like the Trump Foundation

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/news-media-paid-melania-trump-thousands-use-photos-positive-stories-n883111

Christy42

2 Scoops wrote: »

Was a bit of debate about the Democratic Socialists of America beliefs after Cortez's upset victory and whether or not she was extreme. Her party in NYC didn't leave much to the imagination.

https://twitter.com/nycDSA/status/1012808259818926080

https://www.dsausa.org/constitution

Their own constitution reads

"We are socialists because we reject an economic order based on private profit, alienated labor, gross inequalities of wealth and power, discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, disability status, age, religion, and national origin, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo,"

So yeah, pretty extreme one could say.

America is overly beholden to private profit but yeah I would oppose no borders. I reckon the vast majority of democrats do as well. Granted to curb the worship of profits I would more look at stuff like campaign donations. The funding for elections over there is crazy dumb.

America is however going to its extremes. The right got there a while back and got stuck there, we may see an unfortunate counter from the left.

Midlife

RIGOLO wrote: »

Trump filed his paperwork for re-election , HOURS, yes HOURS after his inauguration, on the same day Jan 20th 2017.
He trademarked the logo 'Keep America Great' a few days later. 
He announced his formal campaign in Feb 2018, nearly 1,000 days before the election .
His reelection campaign has over 40 million gathered. 
The same guy Brad Parscale who ran his digital campaign first time round has been given the job of Campaign Manager, and is already blitzing a digital 2020 campaign message. 
And yes all the current day to day events are played out on short term immediate basis , on the mid-term cycle but also  long term as part of the 2020 campaign. 
And the American voter does take this strategy into his voting decisions for mid-term. They weigh up executive, legislative and judicial balance and decide where to cast their vote in the 2 and 4 year cycles.

 As Ive said there are now adults in The Whitehouse administration ALWAYS thinking long term.

You're talking about Trump's campaign now. Not parties.

Obviously Trump is only concerned about the next election he'll be in. He doesn't run for Senate.

You've dropped that 'adults' line many many times too. Would those be the initial ones, you know the ones the adult-in-chief fired or moved on, or the replacement adults?

The fact that you need to be so repeatedly provocative, and so obviously wrong (like Trumps administration are somehow more mature than previous ones) kind of belies your true intentions here. This thread and forum would be much better if people just focused on making their point rather than provoking a rise from others.

Manic Moran

Sophia S. wrote: »

How do you all think the midterm elections will play out in November? For, or against Trump?

Trump isn’t running in November, though.

There is historically a swing against the incumbent president’s party, but it is so common an effect that it seems to happen regardless of if the President himself is popular or not. Plus, as the saying goes, “all politics is local”. If the Ds do not put forward engaging congressional candidates, the amount of folks who don’t care who represents them, but do care enough to go to the polls (historically mid terms have lower turnout) and will vote a protest vote is not, I don’t believe, as large a figure as many are hoping.

My prediction, a moderate gain in the House, maybe enough to give them a small majority. Maybe. Senate stays red. Maybe even the Republicans make a gain, simply by how many Ds are up for re-election compared to Rs, and where they are from.

Leroy42

The Mid Terms really should eb a test of the Dems ability to get out the vote.

A low of stuff is posted about their inability to get out their message, that they don't have a message, that voters simply don't like them, and superficially that all lokes grand.

Except that the voters do like them. The majority voted for HC for example. What, IMO, they need to do is increase the voter turnout. They have been poor at that, particularly in the last presidential election where a few states cost HC. It was painted as a trounching but in reality a bit better vote management and she would have walked it.

Can they get the younger/non-voting voter out? If they can't at the current time when Trump is such a lightning rod of opinion, they are in real trouble.

When you see the level of marches about gun-control, against the separation at the border etc, there is a big groundswell out there looking for change. The GOP have shown themselves totally unable to deliver that change. The key now is whether the Dems can convince people that even if they don't like the Dems, to get change you need to first take out the problem.

The Dems need to remember that Trump won not because he had all the policy areas, not because he had a considered and thought out agenda, but because he promised change. Some posters here seem to be forgetting that and thinking that the Dems cannot win because they don't have a singular strategy, but what they really need is to show that the lack of any real policy on the GOP is hurting America and that change is required.

B0jangles

Leroy42 wrote: »

The Mid Terms really should eb a test of the Dems ability to get out the vote.

A low of stuff is posted about their inability to get out their message, that they don't have a message, that voters simply don't like them, and superficially that all lokes grand.

Except that the voters do like them. The majority voted for HC for example. What, IMO, they need to do is increase the voter turnout. They have been poor at that, particularly in the last presidential election where a few states cost HC. It was painted as a trounching but in reality a bit better vote management and she would have walked it.

Can they get the younger/non-voting voter out? If they can't at the current time when Trump is such a lightning rod of opinion, they are in real trouble.

When you see the level of marches about gun-control, against the separation at the border etc, there is a big groundswell out there looking for change. The GOP have shown themselves totally unable to deliver that change. The key now is whether the Dems can convince people that even if they don't like the Dems, to get change you need to first take out the problem.

It is important to note that there has been an active and enthusiastic effort to repress democrat voters in republican-controlled states. It's not always voter apathy, sometimes it's de facto voter disenfranchisement.


https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a15912246/north-carolina-voter-suppression-tactics/


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/13/america-history-voter-suppression-donald-trump-election-fraud


https://www.thenation.com/article/wisconsins-voter-id-law-suppressed-200000-votes-trump-won-by-23000/

everlast75

In more "how much lower can this administration go" news, you will recall that DTJ said at a rally last week that the press were the enemy of the people. He whipped up his crowd up, as he does, to a state where they were shouting at reporters.

Then, there was a shooting at the news outlet in Maryland. 5 journalists died. One could be forgiven into thinking at first blush that this attack was as a result of the latest and most direct in a long line of incendary comments made by him at the press. It transpires however, that he was not the cause in this instance.

After the shooting at the news outlet, he changed his tune to a more conciliatory one and said "'Journalists should be free from fear of being violently attacked".

You might be stunned into thinking that perhaps he has learned to treat them more humanly.

But no.... a couple of days later and he is back to being his sh1tty self...

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1014028608711614464

Call Me Jimmy

oscarBravo wrote: »

Oh, she's not just a socialist now, she's a frigging champagne socialist? Jesus wept.

I would suggest that some of you people research the concept of "democratic socialism", but that would be attributing to ignorance what's more adequately explained by mindless partisanship. It's utterly bizarre how threatened some people are by the mere idea of treating people like human beings instead of parasites.

Just want to highlight this gem again

RIGOLO

Midlife wrote: »

RIGOLO wrote: »

Trump filed his paperwork for re-election , HOURS, yes HOURS after his inauguration, on the same day Jan 20th 2017.
He trademarked the logo 'Keep America Great' a few days later. 
He announced his formal campaign in Feb 2018, nearly 1,000 days before the election .
His reelection campaign has over 40 million gathered. 
The same guy Brad Parscale who ran his digital campaign first time round has been given the job of Campaign Manager, and is already blitzing a digital 2020 campaign message. 
And yes all the current day to day events are played out on short term immediate basis , on the mid-term cycle but also  long term as part of the 2020 campaign. 
And the American voter does take this strategy into his voting decisions for mid-term. They weigh up executive, legislative and judicial balance and decide where to cast their vote in the 2 and 4 year cycles.

 As Ive said there are now adults in The Whitehouse administration ALWAYS thinking long term.

You're talking about Trump's campaign now. Not parties.

Obviously Trump is only concerned about the next election he'll be in. He doesn't run for Senate.

You've dropped that 'adults' line many many times too. Would those be the initial ones, you know the ones the adult-in-chief fired or moved on, or the replacement adults?

The fact that you need to be so repeatedly provocative, and so obviously wrong (like Trumps administration are somehow more mature than previous ones) kind of belies your true intentions here. This thread and forum would be much better if people just focused on making their point rather than provoking a rise from others.

Its here in pictures... Does anyone remember HRC and her Russia RESET RED BUTTON .... 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/03/17/the-failure-of-the-u-s-russia-reset-in-9-photos/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7ececb6c4aa8
The US Secretary of State presents the Russian Foreign Minister with a little RED BUTTON to signify US-Russian relations reset, it was embarassing, lets present Putin with a red button, or as the articla says, " she gave him a device with a red knob "  The US state dept could'nt even get the name right. 
So yes there are adults in the WhiteHouse now, dealing very effectively with US Foreign Policy , and dealing effectively with authoritarian regimes .  The Trump Administration wont be presenting any red buttons to Foreign leaders.

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

Its here in pictures... Does anyone remember HRC and her Russia RESET RED BUTTON .... 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/03/17/the-failure-of-the-u-s-russia-reset-in-9-photos/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7ececb6c4aa8
The US Secretary of State presents the Russian Foreign Minister with a little RED BUTTON to signify US-Russian relations reset, it was embarassing, lets present Putin with a red button, or as the articla says, " she gave him a device with a red knob "  The US state dept could'nt even get the name right. 
So yes there are adults in the WhiteHouse now, dealing very effectively with US Foreign Policy , and dealing effectively with authoritarian regimes .  The Trump Administration wont be presenting any red buttons to Foreign leaders.

At this stage, you have to be a wind up merchant?

The reset button idea was an idea to reset international relations. Bush did something similar too. Trump wanted the same thing. He said so in his lead up to the inauguration. The major difference being that Russia didn't annex Crimea when Clinton and Bush tried it. Trump still wanted to be best buddies after he annexed Crimea and got kicked out of the G8.

If you want to slag off initiatives as being embarrassing (a red knob), how about Trump's tarrif Bill acronym being called "The US FART Act" ffs.

And you still haven't answered my question regarding the incompetency in dealing with NK.

The US has ostracised themselves with the other G8 members and imposed tariffs on their allies.

If that is your definition of good relations, I would hate to see how you treat your friends.

weisses

RIGOLO wrote: »

Its here in pictures... Does anyone remember HRC and her Russia RESET RED BUTTON .... 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/03/17/the-failure-of-the-u-s-russia-reset-in-9-photos/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7ececb6c4aa8
The US Secretary of State presents the Russian Foreign Minister with a little RED BUTTON to signify US-Russian relations reset, it was embarassing, lets present Putin with a red button, or as the articla says, " she gave him a device with a red knob "  The US state dept could'nt even get the name right. 
So yes there are adults in the WhiteHouse now, dealing very effectively with US Foreign Policy , and dealing effectively with authoritarian regimes .  The Trump Administration wont be presenting any red buttons to Foreign leaders.

Here is something to chew on

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/opinion/trump-classified-data.html

He is thus the all-time record-holder of the Dunning-Kruger effect, the phenomenon in which the incompetent person is too incompetent to understand his own incompetence.

Sounds about right

Trent Houseboat

I've said it before, the Dunning Kreuger effect is best exemplified by the phrase "I know words, I have the best words"

pixelburp

Interesting piece with some statistics about the White House staff; looks like the Trump administration has broken records for the highest turnover:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-white-house-sets-turnover-records-analysis-shows-n888396

Over the course of a single year (Jun 2017-2018), 141 staffers have left, amounting to a 61% turnover (the stats don't even include mayflies such as Scaramucci). The next highest turnover is the Clinton admin at 42%, while according to other sources the Bush II era has the lowest at only 5% turnover. Saw no mention of the Obama admin, so I guess it was somewhere in between; I dunno, maybe 25%?

In any other walk of life, any other industry or business that kind of turnover of staff would be crippling from a logistical or functional point of view. How can there possibly be any kind of continuity of basic, daily administration with that level of churn? Clearly the world of US politics is a fluid, fast-moving career path but the stats demonstrate other administrations didn't have that kind of chaos - and certainly not losses of senior officials either.

RIGOLO

everlast75 wrote: »

RIGOLO wrote: »

Its here in pictures... Does anyone remember HRC and her Russia RESET RED BUTTON .... 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/03/17/the-failure-of-the-u-s-russia-reset-in-9-photos/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7ececb6c4aa8
The US Secretary of State presents the Russian Foreign Minister with a little RED BUTTON to signify US-Russian relations reset, it was embarassing, lets present Putin with a red button, or as the articla says, " she gave him a device with a red knob "  The US state dept could'nt even get the name right. 
So yes there are adults in the WhiteHouse now, dealing very effectively with US Foreign Policy , and dealing effectively with authoritarian regimes .  The Trump Administration wont be presenting any red buttons to Foreign leaders.

At this stage, you have to be a wind up merchant?

The reset button idea was an idea to reset international relations. Bush did something similar too. Trump wanted the same thing. He said so in his lead up to the inauguration. The major difference being that Russia didn't annex Crimea when Clinton and Bush tried it. Trump still wanted to be best buddies after he annexed Crimea and got kicked out of the G8.

If you want to slag off initiatives as being embarrassing (a red knob), how about Trump's tarrif Bill acronym being called "The US FART Act" ffs.

And you still haven't answered my question regarding the incompetency in dealing with NK.

The US has ostracised themselves with the other G8 members and imposed tariffs on their allies.

If that is your definition of good relations, I would hate to see how you treat your friends.

What incompetancy ? 
The Trump Administration has been the most competent adminstration in dealing with NK and getting them to the table and moving the situation forward. 
I dont see any incompetancy. Long term, think Rekjavik summit, think glasnost and peristroika, think the irish peace process, think how history has thought us how things work in the real world and evolve over months and years and even decades.   
Just cos a person has different opinions to you does not warrant them being called a wind up merchant, your displaying a baser self.