Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Leroy42

DubInMeath wrote: »

Talked to a few Africa American colleagues who voted for him and their reasoning was that the Democrats just weren't supporting them as workers. Talking to them now they seriously regret voting for him, or so they say, but still doesn't change why the did it in the first place.

GOP supporters for the most case always vote republican and the hardcore element will always do so just so they don't vote democrat, they at least have an alternative in the tea party when some republicans have gone to soft as they see it.
The GOP supporters will vote

They I hope they feel stupid for being so easily led and giving a clear racist such a platform.

They weren't being supported enough by the Democrats so they turned to not only the GOP but a clear racist they had put forward. I hope they can explain that one to their kids.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

They I hope they feel stupid for being so easily led and giving a clear racist such a platform.

They weren't being supported enough by the Democrats so they turned to not only the GOP but a clear racist they had put forward. I hope they can explain that one to their kids.

I'd say they could in that they tried and failed as we all have at one time or another.
It's not like they have an alternative over there, as bad as things are here their worse in the US for working people and those who are unemployed. If the democrats did care about workers they would have run Sanders rather than Clinton.

If in their shoes personally I would have been torn between voting Clinton or not at all. But I feel the same way towards all political parties and independents here, none of them are worth my vote.

Skedaddle

The problem is you've a binary choice between what amounts to the far right and the centre right.

I mean, there are many areas where the democrats would be significantly to the right of Fine Gael and most of the European Centre right parties that we tend to think of as 'right'

There really is no main stream US centre left or even slightly left option.

Also the US centre has shifted a lot. It's far further to the right than it was even a few decades ago. So where the modern Republicans stand is way off to the right somewhere while the Democrats have been trying to occupy the centre, which shifted quite a distance to the right.

Also this notion that the American people are somehow disengaged because they're lazy and stupid is nonsense. They're disengaged because they're presented with a bad choice and an even worse choice in each election and because politics is so toxic and negative that it's actually really off-putting.

Other than Obama, who was largely dragged down, there have been relatively few inspirational leaders in office in the US in recent decades. It's a system that has been torn apart by lobbyists, corporate interests and political parties' own switch to using commercial marketing techniques to get votes.

Trump in many ways was a 'cry for help' and a lot of people trying to press the reset button. It will end in tears, but it's very symptomatic of a broken system.

Talking to some non-fanatical Americans who voted for him, many of them seem to have done so to throw a spanner in the works. It will backfire though and they've elected a egotistical property tycoon who is somehow supposed to be representing the common man and woman of the US ...

Water John

Stormy waves are rolling on. NBC and Washington Post have follow up on the podcast, earlier in the thread. The Cohen donation to Stormy almost certainly broke the law, in terms of a campaign contribution and possibly from campaign funds.
Sorry don't have a link. Isee it on my phone, WP daily update.
This may be why DT is shouting out, all sorts of distractions.

The things that trip you up.

ECO_Mental

Water John wrote: »

Stormy waves are rolling on. NBC and Washington Post have follow up on the podcast, earlier in the thread. The Cohen donation to Stormy almost certainly broke the law, in terms of a campaign contribution and possibly from campaign funds.
Sorry don't have a link. Isee it on my phone, WP daily update.
This may be why DT is shouting out, all sorts of distractions.

The things that trip you up.

Whats the penalty for breaking campaign law? Trump has been breaking all sorts of laws from day 1, even if you exclude all the collusion stuff its just one more thing that will roll off his back.

Kellyanne Conway was have judged to have broken the Hatch act twice! and nothing

Water John

Well, he can claim to be DD as per Contract and NDA and thus try to enforce an agreement governing an illegal activity or he says he is not DD and Stormy is free to tell/sell her story.

Manic Moran

Mental health. Ok, so lets run with that. What is the solution? Who gets to decide? Does the person have to have carried out a crime or is simply thinking about enough? Is it based on the amount of time or the level of medication? What about the mentally impaired?

It is a good question. But whatever the dividing line is for arbitrary decision-making, we very obviously have to have a properly functioning mental health support structure first regardless. Now that we are getting more information about Wong in Yountville, we know that he had just been expelled from the program in which he was getting help. Apparently his issues were more serious if his behaviour was so erratic, disruptive, or non-compliant to result in expulsion. Which bring us to the inevitable question: "What happened to the hand-off? Where was the follow-up action?" If the structure does not include a process to support someone apparently unable to participate in first level treatment, why not? Guns or no guns, this should be happening.

I actually don't hold out much hope that the Republicans will improve our standards of mental health, I'd put my money on the Democrats doing doing it first. That I don't see it happening soon doesn't mean I don't think it a correct course of action, however. In a nutshell, I think they're closer to being right on the guns side, and wrong on the mental health side. I think the Ds are closer to wrong on the guns side, and right on the mental health side.

Talking to some non-fanatical Americans who voted for him, many of them seem to have done so to throw a spanner in the works. It will backfire though and they've elected a egotistical property tycoon who is somehow supposed to be representing the common man and woman of the US ...

Given that the alternative also didn't seem to represent the common man or woman, at least Trump wasn't presented as a fait-accomplit. Americans don't like being presented with those. Trump provides no particular leadership, which is a waste of four years of presidency, but on the other hand, the legislation being presented to him is being created by the same elected body that all presidents get legislation from, so the actions can't backfire too badly. Not much good will come from him, but similarly, not much bad can. It's a spanner, but not a self-destruct device.

If the democrats did care about workers they would have run Sanders rather than Clinton.

It's not just about workers, though. A worker in Los Angeles probably has an entirely different attitude to life to one in Oklahoma simply because of the local culture. I think Sanders would have won not because of the workers, but because of who he is. Yes, his policies were more left, but as a person and culturally, he seemed more relatable. He came across as someone with honest conviction, not someone going through the motions to achieve the next promotion. I voted for him because of it, I suspect I'm not alone. It is something the Democrats are going to have to tackle when presenting their next candidate, because the runners tipped to date seem to be as far culturally removed from most of the States as it's possible to be. Look at their current leadership or folks tipped to run. Pelosi, Warren, Feinstein, Schumer, Cuomo, Harris, Gillibrand, Hooker. All from big city, coastal states. Are there no acceptable democrats from Ohio, Colorado, Montana, Missouri, Tennessee any more? Of course there are. But they don't come with major financial backing, because the money is in the big city coastal States. The raw population numbers of the Democrat voters are... the big city coastal states. But the election is decided by all fifty states, and people are not going to easily vote for someone with whom they cannot relate.

listermint

That would make alot of sense but these folks related to a silver spoon multi millionaire who was not self made and skipped out on the draft.

So go figure.

They only believe what they want to believe.

Truth be damned.

aloyisious

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Whats the penalty for breaking campaign law? Trump has been breaking all sorts of laws from day 1, even if you exclude all the collusion stuff its just one more thing that will roll off his back.

Kellyanne Conway was have judged to have broken the Hatch act twice! and nothing

The possible use of dollar bills for a purpose other than legally allowed. If you put money into campaign fund accounts and then use them for another purpose, say, shush money.... that might amount to FRAUDULENT USE, especially if the main aim of the campaign is completed and any cash remaining is supposed to clear up any remaining genuine election costs and bills, posters, utilities and the like.

Water John

Yes, one of the purposes of paying the money, was 'to effect the outcome of the election'. That is election fraud.

Christy42

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/11/politics/trump-speech-pennsylvania/index.html

A collection of quotes from the Pennsylvania speech.

The man really only cares about his ego. How anyone can't believed that this man, who frequently seems to forget what he is saying part way through a sentence, is not an idiot is beyond me. I mean seriously, he acts like a child who needs constant praise and constant affirmation that every thing they so is perfect.

Not really sure what CNN mean from the first quote though. Was it not in Pittsburgh or something?

Still though there is this belief that he will get it all done. That him and Kim will be friends and Kim will be a good guy afterwards or that if we just go really harsh then this time,this time the war on drugs won't be a complete and utter defeat (side not being harsher is always the US response to crime it seems and ends up with the world's biggest criminal population per capita- played for by tax payers, go figure).

Wanderer78

Christy42 wrote:

The man really only cares about his ego. How anyone can't believed that this man, who frequently seems to forget what he is saying part way through a sentence, is not an idiot is beyond me. I mean seriously, he acts like a child who needs constant praise and constant affirmation that every thing they so is perfect.

He's a narcissist, his behaviour is common with such traits, it is also common for many to believe in such behaviour, leading me to believe, he ll get a second term.

aloyisious

Christy42 wrote: »

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/11/politics/trump-speech-pennsylvania/index.html

A collection of quotes from the Pennsylvania speech.

The man really only cares about his ego. How anyone can't believed that this man, who frequently seems to forget what he is saying part way through a sentence, is not an idiot is beyond me. I mean seriously, he acts like a child who needs constant praise and constant affirmation that every thing they so is perfect.

Not really sure what CNN mean from the first quote though. Was it not in Pittsburgh or something?

Still though there is this belief that he will get it all done. That him and Kim will be friends and Kim will be a good guy afterwards or that if we just go really harsh then this time,this time the war on drugs won't be a complete and utter defeat (side not being harsher is always the US response to crime it seems and ends up with the world's biggest criminal population per capita- played for by tax payers, go figure).

The rally was at Pittsburgh City Airport, probably in a hangar there. No idea what the Cleveland mention is about, unless Don was on a whistle-stop trip and travelling directly on to Clevelnd, Ohio.

spacecoyote

Its just amazing that he gets away with the overt racism. Could you imagine, Obama, Bush, Clinton coming out with the Pocahantas stuff, or similar equivalents & there not being complete outrage?

Could Obama have turned up to a rally & called Romney a cracker & not have gone down in flames?

Leroy42

On NK, didn't we hear the exact same stuff about being best friends, striking the best deals etc with regard to China and Russia. And what has happened there? For China, as he was getting nowhere in terms of trade, he instigated tariffs to the whole world (but now rowing back on Mexico, Canada and Australia). You can bet his calling out of the EU is nothing more than a cover up that this is purely due to his total lack of movement on China.

Tillerson was apparently close to getting into talks last October, before Trump blasted them on Twitter as a waste of time. Now all of a sudden he is in favour of them. Since the announcement, the WH has tried to row back on the meeting actually being agreed and has sought to say that the only thing agreed is that talks could be held if denuclearisation occured. (so no change at all).

That has been tweeked a bit over the weekend to say that NK must not carry out any further missile tests or nuclear tests. Since they seem to have achieved their aim, and not carried out any since November (despite constant demands and warnings from Trump prior to it), that seems a fairly safe bet.

So we are faced we two scenarios. Either Trump has A) agreed to meet Kim after dropping the condition that NK must start to denuke (a major step down) or he has simply announced the position is exactly the same as it was for every other POTUS and he hasn't actually done anything.

A) means he is possibly the weakest POTUS in history and has lost every international confrontation he has been involved in so far (Mexico wall, China currency manipulator, China Trade, Russia election interference). He has also allowed Australia, Canada & Mexico to avoid tariffs, therefore greatly reducing the impact on the national industry. He also gave in to Israel to move the embassy for apparently nothing in return.

b) means that he simply announced this to try to distract from the other news (successfully it has to be said) but that he is playing at being POTUS and hasn't got any long term plan on how to deal with NK.

pixelburp

I remember the right-wing media going absolutely NUTS over Obama wearing a tan suit to a press conference - sidebar: remember when Presidents did press conferences, and it wasn't just Huckerbee-Sanders doing her best Comical Ali impression? - not to mention other controversies like Obama... preferring Dijon mustard in his hot-dogs. A tan suit and mustard choices had Sean Hannity positively apoplectic.

It's plainly obvious how partisan the media in the 'news' media has become in US, but the levels of sheer relative hypocrisy on the part of Fox & Friends (chortle) is beyond obscene. Trump behaves like a demonstrably arrested-development adult, utterly out of control, yet they cheer, clap and have the gall to call his approach 'unorthodox - or as Stebe Mnunchin spoke about Trumps verbal abuse, "... he's using these vulgarities in the context of a campaign rally, and, obviously there were a lot of funny moments on that rally". So it's just Trump being funny and we should lighten up.

one armed dwarf

Christy42 wrote: »

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/03/11/politics/trump-speech-pennsylvania/index.html

A collection of quotes from the Pennsylvania speech.

The man really only cares about his ego. How anyone can't believed that this man, who frequently seems to forget what he is saying part way through a sentence, is not an idiot is beyond me. I mean seriously, he acts like a child who needs constant praise and constant affirmation that every thing they so is perfect.

Not really sure what CNN mean from the first quote though. Was it not in Pittsburgh or something?

Still though there is this belief that he will get it all done. That him and Kim will be friends and Kim will be a good guy afterwards or that if we just go really harsh then this time,this time the war on drugs won't be a complete and utter defeat (side not being harsher is always the US response to crime it seems and ends up with the world's biggest criminal population per capita- played for by tax payers, go figure).

No. 61 is a good one

61. "One of the greatest nights in the history of television in terms of people watching."
This is Trump talking about election night 2016. And the way he describe it as a great night of television. Which tells you a lot. Hell, it tells you everything.

We are living a real life Don DeLillo novel

Itssoeasy

I know that some people think Betsy devos wasn't a good choice for secretary of education but it seems she gave an utter disaster of an interview on cbs 60 minutes. The transcript I've seen make it sound like a train wreck.

Professor Moriarty

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I know that some people think Betsy devos wasn't a good choice for secretary of education but it seems she gave an utter disaster of an interview on cbs 60 minutes. The transcript I've seen make it sound like a train wreck.

Might pale in comparison if the CBS 60 Minutes interview with Stormy Daniels gets to air.

Leroy42

The bit I saw, it appeared that the policy was that they reduce money to schools, on the basis that so many pupils will leave as to mean that those left will get a better education.

When asked why she thought this since it hadn't worked in her home state of Michigan, she stated that she had made the decision not to go to any underperforming schools.

It is utterly bonkers. If she thinks that way about education, why not simply reduce the military budget, give them less bullets and tell them to have better aim!

Leroy42

Oh look, Trump has rolled back on his plan to increase the age to sell weapons.

is this the weakest POTUS in history? He has no credibility left, within 14 months of taking office and not even his own party take what he says seriously (hence the lack of any outcry when he mentioned it).

All it took was one dinner with the NRA (which if course he isn't scared of or even needs).

Itssoeasy

Leroy42 wrote: »

Oh look, Trump has rolled back on his plan to increase the age to sell weapons.

is this the weakest POTUS in history? He has no credibility left, within 14 months of taking office and not even his own party take what he says seriously (hence the lack of any outcry when he mentioned it).

All it took was one dinner with the NRA (which if course he isn't scared of or even needs).

Yes it's not even close in my mind. He will announce a desire to do something which on the face of it looks and sounds a good policy, and then someone in his administration(Stephan miller etc) or the NRA in this case tell him how this won't play well with his base. He then decides to pull back. How can his press secretary or anyone else speak for the president when he changes like the wind ?

Christy42

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Yes it's not even close in my mind. He will announce a desire to do something which on the face of it looks and sounds a good policy, and then someone in his administration(Stephan miller etc) or the NRA in this case tell him how this won't play well with his base. He then decides to pull back. How can his press secretary or anyone else speak for the president when he changes like the wind ?

I am starting to see why some think the UK can get a favourable trade deal from the states. He has capitulated to everyone else so why not them?

Seriously though I like politicians who are willing to change their mind on issues if presented with new facts. However those facts should not be about the size of campaign donations and while it can be good to listen to new views your opinions should not end up looking like a revolving door.

Was he not insulting senators for capitulating to the NRA when he mentioned these measures first? What happened there? I even praised him for these views at the time. Having said that I am unsurprised that I have to retract it.

Itssoeasy

The special election tomorrow in Pennsylvania's 18th district will interesting. It's a heavy leaning GOP district and trump won it easily in 2016 but we the democrat is way closer in polling than was expected. If this goes democrats then the mid term elections in November may take on a different feel for republicans. Trump claimed he is 5-0 in special elections. Has any candidate he's endorsed won at all yet ?

aloyisious

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The special election tomorrow in Pennsylvania's 18th district will interesting. It's a heavy leaning GOP district and trump won it easily in 2016 but we the democrat is way closer in polling than was expected. If this goes democrats then the mid term elections in November may take on a different feel for republicans. Trump claimed he is 5-0 in special elections. Has any candidate he's endorsed won at all yet ?

If Rick get's in, Don will claim his spart in his election. If Rick fails, Don will probably do what he did in the past, comment about the candidate not wanting his help. Rick is a replacement candidate for the sittng Rep kicked out over his behaviour. The tar may stick to Rick.

2 Scoops

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence said Monday it found “no evidence of collusion, coordination or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians,” as its Russia investigation starts to come to a close.

Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, who has led the committee’s bipartisan investigation into Russian meddling and potential collusion with Trump campaign associates during the 2016 presidential election, announced Monday that the panel had completed a more than 150-page draft report, with its initial findings and recommendations.

“We have found no evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians,” the committee said in a statement Monday.

www reuters com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-congress/house-republicans-say-probe-found-no-evidence-of-collusion-between-trump-russia-idUSKCN1GO2S1

aloyisious

2 Scoops wrote: »

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence said Monday it found “no evidence of collusion, coordination or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians,” as its Russia investigation starts to come to a close.

Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, who has led the committee’s bipartisan investigation into Russian meddling and potential collusion with Trump campaign associates during the 2016 presidential election, announced Monday that the panel had completed a more than 150-page draft report, with its initial findings and recommendations.

“We have found no evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians,” the committee said in a statement Monday.

www reuters com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-congress/house-republicans-say-probe-found-no-evidence-of-collusion-between-trump-russia-idUSKCN1GO2S1

Excepting that the letter R precedes the part of the committee issuing said report and the D side of the Bipartisan Committee were apparently unaware of the committee being shut down by the R side nor of the R side's report. The D side of the committee apparently doesn't think the report is a bipartisan committee report. So the meeting of minds to help keep the US together as a union is still as wide as recently ever.

2 Scoops

aloyisious wrote: »

Excepting that the letter R precedes the part of the committee issuing said report and the D side of the Bipartisan Committee were apparently unaware of the committee being shut down by the R side nor of the R side's report. The D side of the committee apparently doesn't think the report is a bipartisan committee report. So the meeting of minds to help keep the US together as a union is still as wide as recently ever.

Or the obvious takeaway that Schiff and whoever else in the house intel committee after 14 months still have no evidence despite appearing on media outlets over 250 times since election day and insinuating it. If he and others had their way the investigation would never end and that's exactly what they want.

They had their chance and produced nothing, you can't blame the Republicans. Elections, or majoritys in this case, have consequences.

spacecoyote

spacecoyote wrote: »

Its just amazing that he gets away with the overt racism. Could you imagine, Obama, Bush, Clinton coming out with the Pocahantas stuff, or similar equivalents & there not being complete outrage?

Could Obama have turned up to a rally & called Romney a cracker & not have gone down in flames?

"Let's spend years calling 65 million people disgusting and then expect them to give a shlt about our outrage."

jooksavage

2 Scoops wrote: »

Or the obvious takeaway that Schiff and whoever else in the house intel committee after 14 months still have no evidence despite appearing on media outlets over 250 times since election day and insinuating it. If he and others had their way the investigation would never end and that's exactly what they want.

They had their chance and produced nothing, you can't blame the Republicans. Elections, or majoritys in this case, have consequences.

The most compelling evidence is in plain sight. Trump is flat out refusing to respond to Russian hacking in spite of public pleas from his own intelligence departments. Even more damning, he is blocking sanctions, in spite of congress voting on them. If any other President acted like this, they'd be impeached for failing to execute their duties.