Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Wanderer78

Pepefrogok wrote:

Yip, other presidents were weak and allowed NK to become a nuclear power on their watch, now trump the deal maker has to step in. I always knew he would be great with things like the economy, infrastructure, building up the military and sorting immigration etc but it blows my mind that it could well be under his watch that things like DACA, affordable health care and peace in Korea are sorted! What Next? Sort out Palestine? The entire middle East? Of course with the establishment and majority of media being against him some of the easily influenced will always hate him but trump 2020 is a done deal at this rate!

Trade wars always end well! Win win for everyone! I will agree though, the delusion of 'success' of this administration will carry through, resulting in a re-election in 2020.

The Backwards Man

'Only Trump could go to North Korea'

Was Nixon really viewed as a champion of world Peace at the time he went to China?

Water John

Delighted to see the possibility of talks. However, DT said, it was a waste of time talking to them Re: Rex Tillerson and nuclear disarmament was a red line, before talks. He has walked back already on both of those. Thus, is he a weak negotiator? I would say so.

pixelburp

Pepefrogok wrote: »

Yip, other presidents were weak and allowed NK to become a nuclear power on their watch, now trump the deal maker has to step in. I always knew he would be great with things like the economy, infrastructure, building up the military and sorting immigration etc but it blows my mind that it could well be under his watch that things like DACA, affordable health care and peace in Korea are sorted! What Next? Sort out Palestine? The entire middle East? Of course with the establishment and majority of media being against him some of the easily influenced will always hate him but trump 2020 is a done deal at this rate!

Is this the same Trump that thought selling frozen steaks in an electronics store was a genius move? Or who dredges up the old 'video games are evil' moral panic in absence of any adult conversation about gun control? You'll forgive me if I don't share your enthusiasm of Trump as being some paragon of negotiation and savviness.

What exactly do you think Trump can DO, that other Presidents haven't done? Especially now that the weapons are now (apparently) built? And please do so without mentioning the words 'sanctions, 'cos short of boots on the ground that's about the only thing open at this moment. You're talking about a country that literally exists within its own bubble and doesn't give a f*ck what the rest of the world thinks. China's the leverage here, not flying over to meet another tinpot strongman (though given his love for Duterte, Trump clearly loves his leaders to be swaggering bullies, so hey, misery loves company.)

Hurrache

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Now Trump agrees without preconditions - the NK leadership are laughing, a 20 year effort to get the Americans to the table has succeeded.

After North Korea build their weapons too.

Quin_Dub

There is virtually ZERO chance of Kim Jong Un giving up his Nuclear weapons..

It's the only thing they've got , he'll bring Trump over give him a big flashy parade to appeal to his ego and then refuse to do anything.

The short term risk is that he agrees to a schedule of "de-nuclearisation" in return for immediate sanction removals. Which Trump would give them..They string everyone along for 18 months or 2 years to get the cash in and then give the world the 2 fingers and shut up shop again and keep the nukes.

The risk here bring that people actually think that Trump has achieved something and re-elect him..

pixelburp

Speaking of flashy parades, the most likely outcome is that Trump will return to the US, declare 'Rocket Man' to be not that bad after all & a good skin in many ways, then double-down on this demand to have a military parade in Washington. He's so easily swayed by traditional trappings of power (just look at his own choices of decor for signposts there from his personal life), he'll be putty in the hands of the cannier NK operators.

On the subject too of sanctions: correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe NK frequently gets around these by basically shuttering whatever (state controlled) company is the subject of said sanctions, only to open a new corporation, just slightly different to the last one. I can't recall where I read this or how true it is, only that it was claimed that this was now North Korea functionally avoids the affects of these sanctions.

everlast75

Deleted User wrote: »

You guys are right. He should have just said no to the meeting. That would have made you happy, I'm sure. You definitely wouldn't be complaining about it.

That is, with respect, a flippant attitude to have.

You need to understand that it is DT who is talking of going. If it was someone else, ANYONE else with a screed of sense, guile, diplomatic ability or any redeeming quality, then perhaps the meeting would be a good thing.

I, for one, am not opposed to a meeting happening. I am opposed to sending that clown over because no doubt he will make a bad situation worse.

Zubeneschamali

pixelburp wrote: »

double-down on this demand to have a military parade in Washington.

I think he already got his way on that one for next veteran's Day, Nov 11th. Why not? let him play with his army toys - safer than having him make economic policy decisions.

Skedaddle

I don't like Trump and I think he's support a lot of very unpleasant policies at home, but I do think he's prepared to be very unorthodox and there are aspects of the US orthodoxy in certain aspects of international affairs that have dug them into a lot of very deep holes over the years.

He waded into the Middle East with both feet and managed to cause a huge problem over his decision on the embassy.

It will be interesting to see what happens. I wouldn't hold my breath though thinking this will be a good outcome. He could just as easily rock into a meeting, insult everyone and cause WWIII.

I would however strongly suggest that he doesn't meet in Pyongyang and that he bring this own Happy Meal.

He's a lose cannon and rarely in a positive way. Hopefully we won't be needing those iodine tablets.

aloyisious

I'm hoping that Rex Tillerson does a repeat of Dr Kissinger [with S/Dept staff] get the deal and Don does a repeat of RM Nixon, visit's to put his name to/and sign the deal at the public photo session. They'll all be happy and ego will be satisfied. In a peculiar way, it'd be another liking between both presidents. The only snag with my thought is that Henry got the award, not RMN.

Sonics2k

Manic Moran wrote: »

Congress has already been considering legislation to overrule the tariff action. I would not be surprised if they came up with a veto-proof supermajority on this.

I'm not sure there isn't -something- to the video games thing, though. Yes, I know, there is no indication that folks who play video games are in any way more inclined to violence, that's not where I'm going. I'm thinking more along the lines as to how the games shape culture. For example, if a game includes rape, or demeaning of women, etc, there is a significant outlash. Not because folks will suddenly switch off their console and go rape someone, I don't think any of the opponents make such an argument, but because of what it does to the overall attitudes towards women. I mean, why did the "No Russians" level in MW2 cause so much controversy? Not because of the amount of killing, but because of its context.

Given that the US is suffering a distinct lack of respect for life, is it possible that some of the overall 'culture' is being affected by popular games, music, etc? I mean, I think we all agree that there is a cultural problem in the US, and mass media entertainment is a significant part of it.

If the video game thing were true, we'd see the same issues in the rest of the world where we play the exact same games.

We don't. It's a solely American issue, and rather than face up to that, they want to blame anything they can.

robinph

Skedaddle wrote: »

I don't like Trump and I think he's support a lot of very unpleasant policies at home, but I do think he's prepared to be very unorthodox and there are aspects of the US orthodoxy in certain aspects of international affairs that have dug them into a lot of very deep holes over the years.

He waded into the Middle East with both feet and managed to cause a huge problem over his decision on the embassy.

It will be interesting to see what happens. I wouldn't hold my breath though thinking this will be a good outcome. He could just as easily rock into a meeting, insult everyone and cause WWIII.

I would however strongly suggest that he doesn't meet in Pyongyang and that he bring this own Happy Meal.

He's a lose cannon and rarely in a positive way. Hopefully we won't be needing those iodine tablets.

He's not prepared to be unorthodox, he just has no idea what he's doing or why and just stumbles from one idiotic move to another. There is no preparedness or planning in it.

I don't really see much to even suggest that he's doing anything that would improve his wealth/ status in any intelligent way. It's all just whatever is on his mind that day and not a care about what happens tomorrow. Not a good businessman, he just shouts and screams a lot and people go "Yes, Donald". If anything actually happens as a result then it is other people doing it and hoping that he doesn't screw it up.

cobham

"Fire and Fury" now on special in Reads c 10 euro.

4068ac1elhodqr

cobham wrote: »

"Fire and Fury" now on special in Reads c 10 euro.

Good value for balancing a wobbly table. This other book has actually gone up in price, that's unusual.

Professor Moriarty

Simone Rich Barbershop wrote: »

Good value for balancing a wobbly table. This other book has actually gone up in price, that's unusual.

Does it detail all of the deals that his daddy went guarantor for? Does it mention the various 'loans' he gave The Donald to set up and maintain his businesses. Does it mention the time that he bought millions of casino chips to prevent The Donald going bankrupt? Does it mention The Donald's tax affairs? Just wondering.

Really Interested

Pepefrogok wrote: »

Do you think trump will keep his Nobel peace prize in the white house or will he display it at one of his many successful businesses?

He will have copies made for each property.

4068ac1elhodqr

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Does it detail all of the deals that his daddy went guarantor for? Does it mention the various 'loans' he gave The Donald to set up and maintain his businesses. Does it mention the time that he bought millions of casino chips to prevent The Donald going bankrupt? Does it mention The Donald's tax affairs? Just wondering.

Probably will be covered in 2024 after retirement, along with

- How to deal with big Kim
- How to deal with steel dumping
- How to re-deal trade deals in one's favour

Was browsing through HC's book, there's nothing mentioned about 'how to hide an email server', very strange.

Skedaddle

Well his understanding of economics seems to be mercantilism.

Professor Moriarty

Simone Rich Barbershop wrote: »

Probably will be covered in 2024 after retirement, along with

- How to deal with big Kim
- How to deal with steel dumping
- How to re-deal trade deals in one's favour

Was browsing through HC's book, there's nothing mentioned about 'how to hide an email server', very strange.

Or:

- How to create a crisis in order to 'solve' it
- How to start a lose-lose trade war with your friends
- How to alienate your next door neighbours

Christy42

Really Interested wrote: »

He will have copies made for each property.

He probably already has copies made.

I have no issue with him talking to Kim. Never agreed with Obama's stance there. My main issue is with Donald being an idiot.

No idea where these are going to go. Kim wants power and security (I.e. to victimise his people in peace and have no one bump him off). Aside from trade issues I am not sure what Donald can offer him. Especially as that has been on the table for years for the same deals that Trump can offer (denuclearization).

Reducing his military power would leave Kim far more open. He is better off keeping his weapons if he wants to continue the evil dictator stick.

Zubeneschamali

Really Interested wrote: »

He will have copies made for each property.

Whether he wins or not.

Really Interested

Christy42 wrote: »

He probably already has copies made.

I have no issue with him talking to Kim. Never agreed with Obama's stance there. My main issue is with Donald being an idiot.

No idea where these are going to go. Kim wants power and security (I.e. to victimise his people in peace and have no one bump him off). Aside from trade issues I am not sure what Donald can offer him. Especially as that has been on the table for years for the same deals that Trump can offer (denuclearization).

Reducing his military power would leave Kim far more open. He is better off keeping his weapons if he wants to continue the evil dictator stick.

Well we will see soon enough if the decades long US policy of not having US president go to NK was a good idea or not.

everlast75

Any news on what Mr. Nunberg is doing today?

Hurrache

Don't know if anyone saw the press conference yesterday on the tariffs, but Trump put his foot right in it when talking about some guys father,

https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/971858222553423872

everlast75

In a discussion about Nunberg's "meltdown", Demfad mentioned earlier the proposition that it might all be a ruse.

While reading elsewhere about the whole debacle, someone mentioned "orchestra politics", an idea credited to Roger Ailes. I looked into it, and for those that don't know, this is what it means.

Ailes once remarked “If you have two guys on a stage and one guy says, ‘I have a solution to the Middle East problem,’ and the other guy falls in the orchestra pit, who do you think is going to be on the evening news?"

demfad

everlast75 wrote: »

In a discussion about Nunberg's "meltdown", Demfad mentioned earlier the proposition that it might all be a ruse.

While reading elsewhere about the whole debacle, someone mentioned "orchestra politics", an idea credited to Roger Ailes. I looked into it, and for those that don't know, this is what it means.

Ailes once remarked “If you have two guys on a stage and one guy says, ‘I have a solution to the Middle East problem,’ and the other guy falls in the orchestra pit, who do you think is going to be on the evening news?"

IMO it was to distract from the news that another Steele memo existed outlining that Trump had been told by the Kremlin NOT to hire Mitt Romney as secretary of State.

You have two guys on a stage one: is saying he has an unanswerable (WH couldn't answer) Trump-Russia story then the other guy needs to set his hair on fire stick a trumpet up his ass and run around the stage screaming (or do what Nunberg did). And it worked, the media looked at the other guy (all day because he ran onto every stage available except Fox).

Much of the original dossier has been corroborated none has been refuted. In spite of this the Trump/GOP Trump Loyalist/Mercer propaganda machine/Wikileaks/Kremlin have successfully intimidated the media to fear mentioning the dossier. The NewYorker and Steele knows this so we must assume their high confidence in that particular information.

WH silence and release the clown response speaks volumes about WH guilt and media weakness.

mattser

cobham wrote: »

"Fire and Fury" now on special in Reads c 10 euro.

If you put the c after the 10 I still wouldn't buy it.

demfad

I bet a few people wondered about this possibility?...

POISONED RUSSIAN SPY LINKED TO TRUMP-RUSSIA DOSSIER AUTHOR CHRISTOPHER STEELE THROUGH SECURITY CONSULTANT

pitifulgod

mattser wrote: »

If you put the c after the 10 I still wouldn't buy it.

I've still not seen anything in the book turning out to remotely untrue even though Trump supporters tend to be outraged by it.