Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

dr.fuzzenstein

VonZan wrote: »

Deflection is the worst kind of arguement. It's clearly relevant to the current president. Drawing a comparison in an argument is valid, let's not descend into total madness.

OK, "But! But! Obama!'. What shall we do about Obama? Get rid of him as President!
Mission accomplished, we now have Trump, so we can safely put that one to bed.
Congratulations, you won!

Now, back to the current POTUS. Who was that again? Ah yes, a guy named Donald Trump, you know, the actual guy this sodding thread is about!

edit:
You can be damned sure that once Trump has fcuked everything and everyone, his supporters will say "But! But! Genghis Khan! What about him?" :rolleyes:

Franz Von Peppercorn

prawnsambo wrote: »

Whataboutery is the worst form of argument. It ignores the current issues in favour of revisiting past behaviours that are so much spilled milk. And it automatically assumes that the person you're talking to has some vested interest in such past actions that make it somehow germane. It is pure deflection. The previous president of the USA got plenty of stick on here because of his actions. Let's move on to dicussing the one on whom this thread is the topic. So yes, there's a mockery being made here alright. But not by the person to whom you directed that remark.

Whataboutary as an argument doesn’t work if you are defending an action ie

“There’s nothing wrong with killing Yemeni, what about Obama killing them?”

It’s a perfectly fine argument against bias or hypocrisy though. Obama was (with the exception of Iran) as bad as trump on foreign policy. And we are foreigners. His internal policy is his own issue.

So it’s valid to say that if you are protesting American presidents protest then all.

Protesting against Obama’s war crimes would have been a lonely furrow to hoe, though.

Christy42

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Whataboutary as an argument doesn’t work if you are defending an action ie

“There’s nothing wrong with killing Yemeni, what about Obama killing them?”

It’s a perfectly fine argument against bias or hypocrisy though. Obama was (with the exception of Iran) as bad as trump on foreign policy. And we are foreigners. His internal policy is his own issue.

So it’s valid to say that if you are protesting American presidents protest then all.

Protesting against Obama’s war crimes would have been a lonely furrow to hoe, though.

In that case better late than never then. Obama also never attacked Ireland specifically. Trump has started a trade war.

Second of all Trump has upped the ante with regards to drone attacks significantly and got rid of the ban of selling weapons to Saudi Arabia.

Obama's foreign policy was also never popular here. Finally Iran is a pretty large point to say (with the exception of). it is a big difference. There is also the Palestine/ Israel issue Trump has made significantly worse.

This is just more of the "both sides" argument used to try and give Trump a free pass.

prawnsambo

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Whataboutary as an argument doesn’t work if you are defending an action ie

“There’s nothing wrong with killing Yemeni, what about Obama killing them?”

It’s a perfectly fine argument against bias or hypocrisy though. Obama was (with the exception of Iran) as bad as trump on foreign policy. And we are foreigners. His internal policy is his own issue.

So it’s valid to say that if you are protesting American presidents protest then all.

Protesting against Obama’s war crimes would have been a lonely furrow to hoe, though.

It's never a good argument. Or at least in the way it's most often used. As you say yourself, against bias. But bias is often assumed rather than proven. It's fine to attack an argument where someone uses the "Obama never did that" argument and you can point out that he did. But out of the blue throwing up past examples is never a good argument. The actual answer is "No, that was wrong then too, and I've been consistently saying that".

aloyisious

On the basis of pre-emptive bargaining [making a statement about the terrible deal the US has with whatever/whomever] I'm waiting to see what "bad" partnership deals Don tweets about over the next few months before the Armistice Day event in Europe with the US WW11 allied countries.

Given he's presently attacking Canada and the EU, it'll be interesting to see how he'll ratchet the pressure up even further. I wouldn't be surprised if he tries the NATO angle again, seeing as how that will keep his present-day European ally happy after the sanctions the joint houses have forced on him against his best friend in Europe. I expect his present-day UK ally Nigel Farage to advise him to attack Theresa May on the Brexit issue as it involves the EU.

What I fear is that he will get a response he want's from EU and other leaders there that'll keep up his US home base support high, even though I want them to put him back in his box. I expect him to fill the Agent Provocateur role he likes. I'd like the host countries to tell the US to send Mike Pence instead of Don as a representative, that Don is seen as a disruptive unfriendly influence along anarchist lines and NOT welcome on European soil.

Wildlife Actor

Equating Trump and Obama as a catalyst for protest is just ridiculous.

So Obama failed to rein in the US's long standing foreign policy of war mongering around the world for profit. But there was at least some thought given to the different decisions he made along the way.

Trump does not engage in any decisions with a bona fide policy in mind. He does the wrong thing, knowing it's the wrong thing to do, and because it's the wrong thing to do.

On the environment, pulling out of the Paris accord is the big ticket, but just consider the little decisions: reversing the brown bear hunting ban, removing restrictions on rare animal trophy imports, appointing an opponent in litigation of the EPA as Head of the EPA. All because its the wrong thing to do.

Medicare. Does anyone with a working brain believe Trump cares or ever cared about who gets health care or even has the faintest notion how it works? No, it's because Obama humiliated him at the WH Correspondents dinner a few years back. Yes, GOP want rid of Obamacare for other reasons but Trump's only harnessing that. It's about dismantling the legacy of the man who made a fool of him.

Same with Iran. Nothing to do with any breaches of the deal because the evidence shows none, but because it's Obama's achievement.

Jerusalem embassy. He did it because it was the wrong thing to do.

So while Obama's actions disappointed, they pale into insignificance beside trump's. And whereas Obama was at least trying to achieve something positive for people, Trump's motivation is a combination of hate, spite, ego, greed and fear.

It's perfectly understandable that people would look to the mindset of the US president as well as his actions, and judge him on the whole. There is no comparison between Obama and Trump.

aloyisious

It seem's that Don is preparing to break up the NAFTA agreement totally if Canada does not agree to his terms. That would make sense from Don's deal-making thought process, break the [NAFTA] allies apart so he can do separate deals north and south of the US borders. According to CNN, he's issued a warning to the US Congress NOT to interfere in the matter or he'll unilaterally terminate the agreement. It's my understanding that this weekend is a holiday period in the US so I suppose he reckons it's OK to tell one of the other parts of the US Government system to do as he says.

dr.fuzzenstein

Megan McCain certainly threw some verbal daggers his way in her eulogy.

“We gather here to mourn the passing of American greatness,” she said. “The real thing, not cheap rhetoric from men who will never come near the sacrifice he gave so willingly.”

http://time.com/5384743/meghan-mccain-eulogy-john-mccain-funeral/

amandstu

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Megan McCain certainly threw some verbal daggers his way in her eulogy.




http://time.com/5384743/meghan-mccain-eulogy-john-mccain-funeral/

Yes ,I like the "will never" inclusion.

Christy42

aloyisious wrote: »

It seem's that Don is preparing to break up the NAFTA agreement totally if Canada does not agree to his terms. That would make sense from Don's deal-making thought process, break the [NAFTA] allies apart so he can do separate deals north and south of the US borders. According to CNN, he's issued a warning to the US Congress NOT to interfere in the matter or he'll unilaterally terminate the agreement. It's my understanding that this weekend is a holiday period in the US so I suppose he reckons it's OK to tell one of the other parts of the US Government system to do as he says.

"Checks and balances". They are voted in and should have a Democratic say in this just the same as him. They nerd to stand up for themselves and point out it is not a dictatorship.

rossie1977

Axios are reporting they obtained a spreadsheet going around Republican circles on capitol hill. It highlights the key topics they feel Democrats will investigate if they win House/senate

•President Trump’s tax returns
•Trump family businesses — and whether they comply with the Constitution's emoluments clause, including the Chinese trademark grant to the Trump Organization
•Trump's dealings with Russia, including the president's preparation for his meeting with Vladimir Putin
•The payment to Stephanie Clifford — a.k.a. Stormy Daniels
•James Comey's firing
•Trump's firing of U.S. attorneys
•Trump's proposed transgender ban for the military
•Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin's business dealings
•White House staff's personal email use
•Cabinet secretary travel, office expenses, and other misused perks
•Discussion of classified information at Mar-a-Lago
•Jared Kushner's ethics law compliance
•Dismissal of members of the EPA board of scientific counselors
•The travel ban
•Family separation policy
•Hurricane response in Puerto Rico
•Election security and hacking attempts
•White House security clearances

Begs the question if the Republicans think these are areas of concern why haven't they investigated them themselves?

Igotadose

amandstu wrote: »

Yes ,I like the "will never" inclusion.

The eulogies by Obama, and by George W. Bush, are excellent. And I've never liked any GWB speech, but this one's pretty darn good. It's a welcome breath of fresh air to listen to Presidents that can complete a sentence and not sound like absolute puling morons like Trump.

And, wow do they stick it to Trump in their speeches, without mentioning him by name. Bush's eulogy doesn't sound like any speech I can recall from his Presidency, even the post-9/11 'with us or against us' speech which was probably his best ever.

https://youtu.be/32BbYu2AWY0

dr.fuzzenstein

I always thought Dubya was an exceptionally bad orator.

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."—Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

And that's one of his better ones.
After all, Bush destabilised the Middle East and presided over the biggest economic crash since 1929. He also eroded civil rights in the "interest of national security" with the patriot act and brought the world rendition flights where people were abducted and brought to third world countries so they could be tortured. Trump may be ten thousand times as annoying, but I doubt he's anywhere near as sinister as Bush.
Trump is a stupid schoolyard bully, but the Bushes are a mafia family.

edit: but at least he was a politician instead of a clueless monkey.

Igotadose

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I always thought Dubya was an exceptionally bad orator.



And that's one of his better ones.
After all, Bush destabilised the Middle East and presided over the biggest economic crash since 1929. He also eroded civil rights in the "interest of national security" with the patriot act and brought the world rendition flights where people were abducted and brought to third world countries so they could be tortured. Trump may be ten thousand times as annoying, but I doubt he's anywhere near as sinister as Bush.
Trump is a stupid schoolyard bully, but the Bushes are a mafia family.

Still, his eulogy for McCain is better than any speech to date by Trump. And, as far as mafia families go, we've just scratched the surface with the Trump's.

The only thing that has saved us from Trump is his laziness and incompetence. Given enough time, I think Trump'll far eclipse anything Bush did. But, at this point, it's the devil you know (Bush) vs. the one you don't know as well yet (Trump.)

dr.fuzzenstein

Well, Trump has ways to go yet.
Unless he starts a new world war and destroys the global economy to stone age levels, I can't see it.
And I say this as someone who thinks Trump is an utter turd.

Penn

rossie1977 wrote: »

Axios are reporting they obtained a spreadsheet going around Republican circles on capitol hill. It highlights the key topics they feel Democrats will investigate if they win House/senate



Begs the question if the Republicans think these are areas of concern why haven't they investigated them themselves?

I don't think it's that those items themselves are of concern to the Republicans, but rather the investigation of them are of concern. Once the curtains are pulled back, a lot of Reps could be shown up for being complicit or derelict in their duties that this stuff happened under their watch.

ECO_Mental

Regarding McCain, How many bloody eulogies and remembrance ceremonies does one man need !!!!:eek::eek:

We have had a full week and I dont think we are finished yet, apparently the one in Washington today went on for 3 Hours no wonder Bush was passing out sweets he should have brought some sandwiches.

I have nothing against the man and I think he was an alright kind of guy laid a lot down for his country but this was over the top!

Just Sayin':p

Captain Obvious

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Regarding McCain, How many bloody eulogies and remembrance ceremonies does one man need !!!!:eek::eek:

We have had a full week and I dont think we are finished yet, apparently the one in Washington today went on for 3 Hours no wonder Bush was passing out sweets he should have brought some sandwiches.

I have nothing against the man and I think he was an alright kind of guy laid a lot down for his country but this was over the top!

Just Sayin':p

It's not just the death of McCain. It's the death of any chance of the Republican party coming back from Trump.

borderlinemeath

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I always thought Dubya was an exceptionally bad orator.



And that's one of his better ones.
After all, Bush destabilised the Middle East and presided over the biggest economic crash since 1929. He also eroded civil rights in the "interest of national security" with the patriot act and brought the world rendition flights where people were abducted and brought to third world countries so they could be tortured. Trump may be ten thousand times as annoying, but I doubt he's anywhere near as sinister as Bush.
Trump is a stupid schoolyard bully, but the Bushes are a mafia family.

edit: but at least he was a politician instead of a clueless monkey.

Trump has lowered the bar so, so far down that it makes GWB look positively statesmanlike. And when GWB was in power I totally agree that he was a complete warmonger lining his pockets.



I think the only reason Trump hasn't started a war is because he's actually too much of a coward, like a typical bully who's actually scared of the outcome. He is incapable of decisiveness and would blame everybody else for the ensuing shambles. And it would be a catastrophic shambles with Trump at the helm.

aloyisious

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Regarding McCain, How many bloody eulogies and remembrance ceremonies does one man need !!!!:eek::eek:

We have had a full week and I dont think we are finished yet, apparently the one in Washington today went on for 3 Hours no wonder Bush was passing out sweets he should have brought some sandwiches.

I have nothing against the man and I think he was an alright kind of guy laid a lot down for his country but this was over the top!

Just Sayin':p

Its possible that its a message to Don that there are people out there in positions of power who are prepared to ignore him. The fly-past at the funeral is an example - it had to be authorised by a person in uniform. That should be enough to rattle him ever more after his AG has sent him a "so far and no further" message with reference DOJ independence.

The idea that veterans are starting to unite to make him backtrack on his positions where they feel he's being a threat to the services they served in should be worrying for the GOP, given the number of veterans running for office first time. All the veterans have buddies still in service. The GOP and he won't want people he made enemies sitting as independents with a higher loyalty on the hill giving them grief.

aloyisious

Don is going to Texas in October to rally for Ted Cruz against his re-election opponent. That should be interesting to see how if it will work out as a + or a - for Ted.

Water John

I think I read that Cruz is down to a 4 point lead. His opponent is not running an anti Trump campaign but is basically basing it on compassion, human goodness.
Sending in Trump might not do Cruz any favours.
Its a good way to run a campaign against Cruz, whom Biden called ' the most miserable SOAB he'd ever met'

Pelvis

His opponent was on Bill Maher some time back and came across very well.

interlocked

This was Lindsey Grahams take on his fellow Republican Senator

"If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.”

Or choosing between Cruz or Trump becoming President

"It’s like being shot or poisoned, What does it matter?”

Cruz, apparently is universally despised in the Senate.

aloyisious

I saw in the TV news stories yesterday that the White House has claimed executive privilege on over 100.000 pages of records related to the SC nominee, Judge Kavanaugh. The NYT is running a report on the same tale. I'm curious as to whether this is another fake news issue being created by the W/H or if there is legitimate reason for the W/H itself to think there is anything the Senate and public should NOT be aware of in respect of Judge Kavanaugh all of a sudden.

I'd have thought if there was something amiss in the judge's judicial or personal life history, the DOJ should be handling it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/01/us/politics/kavanaugh-records.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

dr.fuzzenstein

There is a go fund me campaign to put Trump's tweets bashing Cruz up on billboards.
I'll be donating.

https://mashable.com/article/david-hogg-trump-tweets-ted-cruz-billboard-gofundme/

With the help of Parkland survivor and gun control activist David Hogg, a GoFundMe raised $9,760 to put Donald Trump's tweets bashing Ted Cruz up on a billboard in Texas.

The GoFundMe, organized by political group USA Latinx, raised the money in less than 24 hours. The campaign was a response to Trump endorsing Cruz through Twitter. On Friday, the president announced a "major rally" that would take place in "the biggest stadium in Texas we can find."

amandstu

Rjd2 wrote: »

There will be plenty of annoying cliched lefties there, but overall the audience will be decent skins. I don't blame them for protesting Trump whatsoever.

Its unfair to tar groups by its most vocal but ultimately minority element I have been told.

Is there a way of protesting this man's visit that will not appear obviously anti-American ?

Is it possible to oppose their presidency without opposing them as a country?

looksee

I don't think most people would assume you were being anti-American in protesting Trump, possibly the reverse. Just don't bring the US into it in discussions, banners etc, keep it personality based.

Though having said that I find myself with less and less respect for the pro-trump areas of the US so I suppose there is some overlap.

Christy42

amandstu wrote: »

Rjd2 wrote: »

There will be plenty of annoying cliched lefties there, but overall the audience will be decent skins. I don't blame them for protesting Trump whatsoever.

Its unfair to tar groups by its most vocal but ultimately minority element I have been told.

Is there a way of protesting this man's visit that will not appear obviously anti-American ?

Is it possible to oppose their presidency without opposing them as a country?

I think the protests are all obviously anti Trump. The focus of it all has all been on the man himself.

If someone wants to be insulted on behalf of all America over these protests that is on them. Not much you can do to stop them from being offended without simply never giving your opinion.

everlast75

I briefly dipped in to the thread on after hours.

The usual pro-trump nonsense of

"he gets things done" (spoiler - no he doesn't)

"he's a straight talker" (spoiler - no he isn't)

And then the truth...

"To own the libs"