Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

PropJoe10

Putin must be laughing his head off. Because of his interference in their election, the idiot buffoon Trump is now President and his supporter base are far more willing to blame US intelligence agencies than Putin. Spreading chaos and discord is exactly what Putin does and has been doing for years. Couldn't have worked out better for Russia.

Eric Cartman

weisses wrote: »

Its scary to let people like Trump and his ideology become POTUS ....

I think we can all agree that communism would be worse in every respect.

weisses

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think we can all agree that communism would be worse in every respect.

One fear became reality the other is something to worry about ... so communism isn't an issue atm

Water John

Bringing up communism, is just whataboutery.

relax carry on

Leaving everything thing he is and has done aside, will anyone from the Trump side of the house comment on his interview with the Sun which he described as fake news yesterday?

How does this look to you where he has sat down given an interview (regardless of it's contents) to a journalist (regardless of the publication) and then turns around not 24 hours later to call his own interview fake news? His own interview!!! He then threatens to release recordings to prove its fake news but that hasn't materialised yet. The Sun's recording was released however. Doesn't it strike you as odd that the Sun becomes more Trust worthy than the POTUS.

As an aside, since we are overwhelmed with the stream of consciousness which emanates from him every time he opens his mouth, you may have missed this one from the interview; apparently he's more popular than Abraham Lincoln.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-claims-he-beat-honest-abe-lincoln-died-presidential-polling-1022435

Leroy42

Maybe someone here can help explain the whole Strzok issue. Apart from the texts and e-mails, is there actually any evidence that he undertook any illegal actions to thwart then candidate Trumps campaign?

Leroy42

relax carry on wrote: »

Leaving everything thing he is and has done aside, will anyone from the Trump side of the house comment on his interview with the Sun which he described as fake news yesterday?

How does this look to you where he has sat down given an interview (regardless of it's contents) to a journalist (regardless of the publication) and then turns around not 24 hours later to call his own interview fake news? His own interview!!! He then threatens to release recordings to prove its fake news but that hasn't materialised yet. The Sun's recording was released however. Doesn't it strike you as odd that the Sun becomes more Trust worthy than the POTUS.

As an aside, since we are overwhelmed with the stream of consciousness which emanates from him every time he opens his mouth, you may have missed this one from the interview; apparently he's more popular than Abraham Lincoln.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-claims-he-beat-honest-abe-lincoln-died-presidential-polling-1022435

It means that nothing he says can be believed. Which is why I find it so difficult the posters on here that defend him since can cannot possibly know whether he is telling the truth or not.

Why would anybody place any credibility on someone that continually lies and do it so blatantly. Do they accept all the other people they deal with under the same circumstances? I mean, why do they hate HC so much yet give Trump such a free ride?

Its not their opinion I have an issue with, everyone is welcome to their own, but when people display such total inconsistency, based on nothing more than bias, I simply cannot understand how they can suspend their critical faculties for the sake of such a person.

everlast75

relax carry on wrote: »

Leaving everything thing he is and has done aside, will anyone from the Trump side of the house comment on his interview with the Sun which he described as fake news yesterday?

How does this look to you where he has sat down given an interview (regardless of it's contents) to a journalist (regardless of the publication) and then turns around not 24 hours later to call his own interview fake news? His own interview!!! He then threatens to release recordings to prove its fake news but that hasn't materialised yet. The Sun's recording was released however. Doesn't it strike you as odd that the Sun becomes more Trust worthy than the POTUS.

As an aside, since we are overwhelmed with the stream of consciousness which emanates from him every time he opens his mouth, you may have missed this one from the interview; apparently he's more popular than Abraham Lincoln.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-claims-he-beat-honest-abe-lincoln-died-presidential-polling-1022435

He's done it before with Comey. Threatened tapes to prove that he, Trump, was right and then didn't follow through.

His greatest asset, while stepping on people to get where he is, was the threat of financial, legal or physical violence. The vast majority of folks buckled under that threat because of who he was and the money behind him.

The problem for Trump is he is on a bigger stage now. There is more scrutiny and analysis of his threats. People are starting to realise that he does back down. People are starting to realise he is bluster and is a coward when face to face with an equal opppnent. People are starting to realise that he can be sued and he can lose. People are starting to see his incompetence.

The emperor has no clothes and more and more people are getting to see more evidence of it.

Danzy

Eric Cartman wrote: »

If he had have ge would have sank ger argument twice as quick. Its scary that they'll let people who believe in the 'jim corr of political ideologies' onto television to discuss politics

All sides should be allowed talk, it is the only way Society can evolve or deal with its issues.

However it should be pointed out to her that her belief system left the Nazis in the dust when it came to death, and they were horrendous assholes we can all agree.

Leroy42

While of course all the talk yesterday was about how Trump had humiliated May, and he certainly did that, but what a complete and total climbdown by Trump.

MAGA appartantly amounts to mouthing off in a private (as he just him and the interviewer) interview before snivelling back in front of the world press. This POTUS was completely humiliated by May. On the world stage.

So now we have Kim, May, Putin and Xi.

It was cringeworthy stuff. Can you imagine Obama cowtowing to May in such a fashion.

amandstu

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Is America a democracy?

A degenerate democracy. It had democratic ideals when it gained independence and has free elections but these free elections are under attack from vested interests (nothing wrong per se as democracy should not be monolithic) .

Human beings can be seen as a degenerate race and so their degeneracy is bound to be reflected in any political system at some stage (it sure is now) but without a "decency" input even this kind of "dog eat dog" setup will collapse in on itself (and the present holders of political power have lit that fuse)

There needs to be an ongoing balancing act between "practicality/realism" and virtuous idealism /decency and this has pivoted toward the former(amongst his other failings Trump is unbalanced;we knew that surely)

As a democracy ,also America has no place to hide . It has this huge central role (that T would like to get out from under but can't except on his own personal level) and is so subject to exceptional pressures that will destroy it surely down the line.

On top of all that ,it is just too big. A democracy of any size is in my terms a contradiction in terms;it can only be some kind of a compromise.It is so large that there cannot be one identity for all its members to accept (but we are all there).

Still democracy vs authoritarianism is an acceptable rallying cry (following on from WW2) and for the administration to fail to live up to that responsibility speaks volumes.

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

Maybe someone here can help explain the whole Strzok issue. Apart from the texts and e-mails, is there actually any evidence that he undertook any illegal actions to thwart then candidate Trumps campaign?

Nope. His testimony, along with the latest indictments, deal a fatal blow to the whole Deep State/Witch hunt narrative to all but his blind supporters

Midlife

Danzy wrote: »

All sides should be allowed talk, it is the only way Society can evolve or deal with its issues.

I disagree somewhat.

If you have someone, for example, a scientist who denies climate change, I believe it's incorrect to give these people equal airtime when they're in an absolute minority.

It's a big mistake the mainstream media has been making - treating fringe views as equal simply because they're the only opposing viewpoint.

Christy42

relax carry on wrote: »

Leaving everything thing he is and has done aside, will anyone from the Trump side of the house comment on his interview with the Sun which he described as fake news yesterday?

How does this look to you where he has sat down given an interview (regardless of it's contents) to a journalist (regardless of the publication) and then turns around not 24 hours later to call his own interview fake news? His own interview!!! He then threatens to release recordings to prove its fake news but that hasn't materialised yet. The Sun's recording was released however. Doesn't it strike you as odd that the Sun becomes more Trust worthy than the POTUS.

As an aside, since we are overwhelmed with the stream of consciousness which emanates from him every time he opens his mouth, you may have missed this one from the interview; apparently he's more popular than Abraham Lincoln.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-claims-he-beat-honest-abe-lincoln-died-presidential-polling-1022435

Whatever he says that I agree with and do not have direct proof is false is what he means.

Whatever he says that is pointed out to me is a lie or that I don't agree with is him playing out a strategy to get whatever I want or votes or is just being a politician (that last one can now excuse an infinite number of lies given Trump lies more than any politician in a western democracy).

This is why we have had posters praising both his commitment to increasing NATO and its capabilities and his commitment to take it apart.

Igotadose

Oh, on trade war news (haven't heard much about that in the last week.) This'll be something that will tank the US economy fastest - when it hits (and the affects are starting, some small businesses shutting doors due to price hikes on imported steel). Here's what the experts think - it will harm Americans. http://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/steel-and-aluminum-tariffs.

This is a nice piece by Krugman, pretty much ties what's going on with Trump, Trade wars and lays the fault at Corporate America's feet. I particularly like this quote about voodoo economics (which was famously coined by GHW Bush to describe Reagan's economic plan):
"Similarly, organizations like (the) Heritage (foundation) have long promoted supply-side economics, a.k.a., voodoo economics — the claim that tax cuts will produce huge growth and pay for themselves — even though no economic experts agree. So they’ve already accepted the principle that it’s O.K. to talk economic nonsense if it’s politically convenient."

And this later quote: "
The point is that it’s not just world trade that’s at risk, but the rule of law. And it’s at risk in part because big businesses abandoned all principle in the pursuit of tax cuts."


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/05/opinion/trade-war-trump-business-jobs.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

amandstu

Christy42 wrote: »

Whatever he says that I agree with and do not have direct proof is false is what he means.

Whatever he says that is pointed out to me is a lie or that I don't agree with is him playing out a strategy to get whatever I want or votes or is just being a politician (that last one can now excuse an infinite number of lies given Trump lies more than any politician in a western democracy).

This is why we have had posters praising both his commitment to increasing NATO and its capabilities and his commitment to take it apart.

Strange that no one to my knowledge seems to have characterized Trump's behaviour as Orwellian.

"Double speak" leaps off the page.

Are his supporters really so docile or self serving that they cannot see the man's steam of consciousness lying and post dictum justification in that chilling light (only a novel?)

Is he the master of "lying in full sight"

Hande hoche!

mcmoustache wrote: »

I'm looking forward to the Manafort trial. He's some piece of work. If you haven't already, you should check out "Get me Roger Stone" on netflix. Both he and Stone are Grade-A cnuts.


With the Concord case, their legal team seems to be doing little more than trolling at this point. They're pulling a Manafort and challenging Muellers authority instead of defending their actions. I suspect that they'll just wind up and go poof in the night.

That film was good, you're quite right. Might deserve a rewatch too.


With regards Stone, surprised he is still running around free and giving interviews. One of the tin foil suggestions is that Mueller will drag him in as part of an "October surprise".

circadian

Didn't Roger Stone claim that he was the key to this whole house of cards coming down? About a year or so ago.

pixelburp

About the interview with The Sun, the problem is how this narrative is spun back Stateside. Obviously with our close cultural ties to the UK we're quite familiar with the full picture behind what was said, and how Trump basically denied a thing-wot-he-said. There's nothing new here either, there have already been many cases of him simply lying about his own statements, mere days after saying them (or indeed, Tweeting support for bills before denying he ever tweeted this).

Meanwhile, I'm going to go ahead and guess that in Trump-supportive circles, this story will play out much differently: whereupon a slimy English tabloid (let's ignore its general editorial policy, or those Murdoch connections, for fear of a cognitive aneurysm) printed scurrilous lies about our Dear Leader, the President forced to defend himself from these pernicious purveyors of 'fake news', as if he would be so crass as to dump on a nice lady like Mrs. May. Key details - like the audiolog of the interview proving Trumps exact wording - simply won't be included in the narrative. Ditto tertiary indictments towards his obvious mental issues such as that long, rambling waffle about Brexit to the journos.

Midlife

Igotadose wrote: »

Oh, on trade war news (haven't heard much about that in the last week.) This'll be something that will tank the US economy fastest - when it hits (and the affects are starting, some small businesses shutting doors due to price hikes on imported steel). Here's what the experts think - it will harm Americans. http://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/steel-and-aluminum-tariffs.

This is a nice piece by Krugman, pretty much ties what's going on with Trump, Trade wars and lays the fault at Corporate America's feet. I particularly like this quote about voodoo economics (which was famously coined by GHW Bush to describe Reagan's economic plan):
"Similarly, organizations like (the) Heritage (foundation) have long promoted supply-side economics, a.k.a., voodoo economics — the claim that tax cuts will produce huge growth and pay for themselves — even though no economic experts agree. So they’ve already accepted the principle that it’s O.K. to talk economic nonsense if it’s politically convenient."

And this later quote: "
The point is that it’s not just world trade that’s at risk, but the rule of law. And it’s at risk in part because big businesses abandoned all principle in the pursuit of tax cuts."


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/05/opinion/trade-war-trump-business-jobs.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

This is kind of my point. In this post-truth, alternative facts world (which wasn't all the doing of Trump in fairness), you have a consensus among experts which is largely ignored when it suits either side.

There was a good article about it today in the guardian by Michiko Kakutani. It's not an exclusive left or right thing - though perhaps at the moment it's better employed by vested interests and big business who tend to be represented by the right.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jul/14/the-death-of-truth-how-we-gave-up-on-facts-and-ended-up-with-trump

Climate deniers, anti-vaxxers and other groups who don’t have science on their side bandy about phrases that wouldn’t be out of place in a college class on deconstruction – phrases such as “many sides,” “different perspectives”, “uncertainties”, “multiple ways of knowing.” As Naomi Oreskes and Erik M Conway demonstrated in their 2010 book Merchants of Doubt, rightwing thinktanks, the fossil fuel industry, and other corporate interests that are intent on discrediting science have employed a strategy first used by the tobacco industry to try to confuse the public about the dangers of smoking. “Doubt is our product,” read an infamous memo written by a tobacco industry executive in 1969, “since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the minds of the general public.”

The strategy, essentially, was this: dig up a handful of so-called professionals to refute established science or argue that more research is needed; turn these false arguments into talking points and repeat them over and over; and assail the reputations of the genuine scientists on the other side. If this sounds familiar, that’s because it’s a tactic that’s been used by Trump and his Republican allies to defend policies (on matters ranging from gun control to building a border wall) that run counter to both expert evaluation and national polls.

What Oreskes and Conway call the “tobacco strategy” was helped, they argued, by elements in the mainstream media that tended “to give minority views more credence than they deserve”. This false equivalence was the result of journalists confusing balance with truth-telling, wilful neutrality with accuracy; caving in to pressure from rightwing interest groups to present “both sides”; and the format of television news shows that feature debates between opposing viewpoints – even when one side represents an overwhelming consensus and the other is an almost complete outlier in the scientific community.

Midlife

Midlife wrote: »

I disagree somewhat.

If you have someone, for example, a scientist who denies climate change, I believe it's incorrect to give these people equal airtime when they're in an absolute minority.

It's a big mistake the mainstream media has been making - treating fringe views as equal simply because they're the only opposing viewpoint.

Sorry for posting a comedy show but Dara O'Briain did an excellent segment on this equal airtime thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDYba0m6ztE

StringerBell

Everybody should be entitled to put forward a case for their views once they do it honestly. Full debate is very important to progression as a society and pushing certain sections underground and into the shadows because you don't like them is wrong.

Bring everything out into the same spotlight and go from there. Climate change denier should absolutely be allowed make their case and be judged on the merits same as anybody else.

I have some big issues with both the radical left and right. And again, I would venture that even though they are polar opposite in terms of stated ideological goals they are not that much different from each other in many ways.

Different beliefs, similar methods. Shutting down opposing views etc

Rhineshark

Midlife wrote: »

This is kind of my point. In this post-truth, alternative facts world (which wasn't all the doing of Trump in fairness), you have a consensus among experts which is largely ignored when it suits either side.

There was a good article about it today in the guardian by Michiko Kakutani. It's not an exclusive left or right thing - though perhaps at the moment it's better employed by vested interests and big business who tend to be represented by the right.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jul/14/the-death-of-truth-how-we-gave-up-on-facts-and-ended-up-with-trump

I've read Merchants of Doubt for more understanding of this often-used tactic -specifically regarding climate change at the time - but it is a tool with so many uses as long as the intention is to spread nonsense and confusion. It's a good read.

Midlife

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry for posting a comedy show but Dara O'Briain did an excellent segment on this equal airtime thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDYba0m6ztE

excellent, thanks.

Midlife

StringerBell wrote: »

Everybody should be entitled to put forward a case for their views once they do it honestly.

I agree but the honesty part is the big problem. Honesty has been lost and people will suffer for it.

His followers don't see it but when you've a person who is shown to lie or state falsehoods on average five or six times a day, how can you trust this person to develop policy? Surely future policy must be developed on current reality?

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry for posting a comedy show but Dara O'Briain did an excellent segment on this equal airtime thing.

not only does science not know everything, it will probably never know entirely everything

StringerBell

Midlife wrote: »

I agree but the honesty part is the big problem. Honesty has been lost and people will suffer for it.

His followers don't see it but when you've a person who is shown to lie or state falsehoods on average five or six times a day, how can you trust this person to develop policy? Surely future policy must be developed on current reality?

Yep no issue there, this administration has no interest in honest discourse.

BabyCheeses

Eric Cartman wrote: »

If he had have ge would have sank ger argument twice as quick. Its scary that they'll let people who believe in the 'jim corr of political ideologies' onto television to discuss politics

BabyCheeses wrote: »

Maybe you could tell us some of those details for the trade talks.

You really don't want to talk about the progress on those trade talks you were happy about?


It's strange how Trump supporters hate talking about his work. They whinge and whine that people here just hate Trump and how great Trump is but run away as soon as they are asked a question.

Dohnjoe

So the Sun has released audio - no surprises what it confirms

As an aside, just came across this actual quote from him when he was a candidate - mindblowing that this man is the President

Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you're a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.

dr.fuzzenstein

This is a very interesting article that explores the possibility that Trump may exhibit symptoms of dementia:

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/01/trump-cog-decline/548759/

If you read quotes from the man from the 80's till now, there is a stark difference.
He wasn't always a rambling, incoherent mess.
Also interesting is how, on occasion, he has to grip a glass with both hands and drink like a toddler that is just learning.