Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

everlast75

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Which investigation , The House one or the Special Counsel?

House Intelligence

jochenstacker

pixelburp wrote: »

Honestly, these comments are the only exposure I've had to the speech; it's pure puffery at the best of times and not even that grand a tradition (apparently we can blame Woodrow Wilson for that decision)

I pleaded 'why bother' when it came to Twitter and to be fair a good argument was given about holding him to account over the vast array of lies - but the State of the Nation Address is merely an excuse for each President to indulge in some bloviating anyway. IMO it should be ignored and discussions get back to the immediate.

Name-checking socialism as an evil was interesting: how often has that happened and one wonders if Trumps eventual legacy is to legitimise and normalise some basic tenets of 'socialism'.

After many discussions with various alleged Americans across several platforms, I am always amazed how vehemently opposed and downright hostile they are towards what they perceive as "socialism".
That a nation has been brainwashed into believing that the greatest threats they face is education, healthcare and social welfare.
And that a president would get thunderous applause and roars of adulation for suggesting exactly that.
Of course they are absolutely fine that billions and trillions get blown on a wall and the military.
But they would have a meltdown if they thought that one cent of their tax dollars goes to poor people.
I really despair at that mindset.

Itssoeasy

So for those who saw the speech or have seen what was said after the fact, and I probably know the answer already but will still ask it. Is the any reason for me to rewatch it or try and read a transcript of it or was it normal Trump ramblings ?

circadian

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So for those who saw the speech or have seen what was said after the fact, and I probably know the answer already but will still ask it. Is the any reason for me to rewatch it or try and read a transcript of it or was it normal Trump ramblings ?

Not worth watching. Trump doing Trump and trying to take credit for all good things, including things that are completely untrue. The only highlight was Pelosi giving him a massive sarcastic clap at his bull**** work together moment.

Itssoeasy

circadian wrote: »

Not worth watching. Trump doing Trump and trying to take credit for all good things, including things that are completely untrue. The only highlight was Pelosi giving him a massive sarcastic clap at his bull**** work together moment.

Right well it's something. I mean the state of the union has been taken the piss of by both parties to varying degrees over the years I've been able to find them to watch online. It's like if the Tory party conference (and vice versa)in the U.K had a delegation of labour members forced to sit and listen to the leader ramble on and take pot shots at them.

James Brown

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So for those who saw the speech or have seen what was said after the fact, and I probably know the answer already but will still ask it. Is the any reason for me to rewatch it or try and read a transcript of it or was it normal Trump ramblings ?

The first three quarters are right on script. He talks about how great the US is gets a few USA chants from the lackeys. Then he starts outright lying to applause, throws in some positives, some have absolutely nothing to do with him, more over were to spite/despite him. He essentially says the wall will solve all the problems relating to illegal and drug traffic which mostly comes through the ports of entry. Maybe worth watching the tail end as Pelosi's expressions become more entertaining. Pence looks like a serial killing robot throughout.

Itssoeasy

Is the acting AG testimony to congress this week in public ? Is it tomorrow or Friday. Unlike Trumps SOTU last night I'll be searching out the video of this testimony if it's public because it may be a bit of fun.

mcmoustache

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Is the acting AG testimony to congress this week in public ? Is it tomorrow or Friday. Unlike Trumps SOTU last night I'll be searching out the video of this testimony if it's public because it may be a bit of fun.

According to the horse's mouth, it will be streamed live.

Witness: Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker, U.S. Department of Justice

Date: February 8, 2019

Time: 9:30 a.m.

Location: 2141 Rayburn House Office Building

Washington D.C.

Livestream: The hearing will stream live here.

Media Guidance:

On the day of the hearing, media will be allowed access to the committee hearing room at 9 a.m. Congressionally-credentialed members of the media MUST RSVP to their respective Press Gallery no later than 6:00 p.m. on February 7, 2019. Attendance will be limited to one media representative from each outlet. We will try to accommodate additional representatives if space is available. Gallery contact information is below:

Itssoeasy

So Friday coming at 3:30pm Irish time. I won't be able to watch the start or any of it live actually(unless it goes for hours) but I will be watching for clips or the full replay on YouTube.

mcmoustache

It should be somewhat entertaining. Like many of the people in the Trump administration at this point in time, Whitaker has the job because of loyalty instead of talent. Unlike someone like Barr, Whitaker might have difficulty handling the pressure from some of the difficult questions that he will likely be asked. This also won't be like the Republican lead hearings where the party in charge act like his lawyer or otherwise cover for him.

Itssoeasy

And I say it will be a bit of fun because from his only public comments about the mueller investigation, stating that the investigation is finishing up he barely got that statement out.

Billy Mays

jochenstacker wrote: »

After many discussions with various alleged Americans across several platforms, I am always amazed how vehemently opposed and downright hostile they are towards what they perceive as "socialism".
That a nation has been brainwashed into believing that the greatest threats they face is education, healthcare and social welfare.
And that a president would get thunderous applause and roars of adulation for suggesting exactly that.
Of course they are absolutely fine that billions and trillions get blown on a wall and the military.
But they would have a meltdown if they thought that one cent of their tax dollars goes to poor people.
I really despair at that mindset.

Only yesterday someone on Fox claimed the reason AOC's tax proposals were polling so well was due to "the idea of fairness" being taught in schools.

Stupid damn fairness

Manic Moran

everlast75 wrote: »

No family members of any victims of mass shootings then?

Two folks from the PA synagogue shooting. One a cop who was shot multiple times, the other one of the members of the congregation who survived the shooting after surviving the holocaust.

Singing "Happy birthday" to the latter is probably the best thing Congress has ever done.

SimonTemplar

Trump gave his SOTU but the main story on social media is Nancy Pelosi's clap. I'm sure he's delighted with that!!

Ultros

Yougov poll was good for Trump after his speech last night. According to CBS, 76% of viewers agreed with his speech but numbers obviously numbers are skewed because of viewership. 30% of Democrats approved, 97% of Republicans and 82% of independents. Donald needs to spend less time tweeting and more time on policy and he'll probably have a decent shot in 2020 if he's still around.

Another scandal in Virginia. What's up with all these Virginian Democrats wearing blackface in the 1980's? Bad optics for the party of diversity.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/virginia-ag-mark-herring-admits-wearing-blackface-at-1980-college-party

"Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring admitted to wearing blackface during a college party in 1980, the latest stunning, political bombshell to rock Richmond as the state’s embattled governor and lieutenant governor also find themselves embroiled in scandal."

L1011

Ultros wrote: »

Donald needs to spend less time tweeting and more time on policy and he'll probably have a decent shot in 2020 if he's still around.

The percentage chance of that being, of course, 0%.

Manic Moran

82% of independents

That's surprisingly high. That said, other than the self-serving silliness bit, it actually wasn't that bad a speech and did have some pretty supportable ideas in it. (If he can get them passed).

Still that percentage of independents ought to make people take note.

Quin_Dub

Ultros wrote: »

Yougov poll was good for Trump after his speech last night. According to CBS, 76% of viewers agreed with his speech but numbers obviously numbers are skewed because of viewership. 30% of Democrats approved, 97% of Republicans and 82% of independents. Donald needs to spend less time tweeting and more time on policy and he'll probably have a decent shot in 2020 if he's still around.

Manic Moran wrote: »

That's surprisingly high. That said, other than the self-serving silliness bit, it actually wasn't that bad a speech and did have some pretty supportable ideas in it. (If he can get them passed).

Still that percentage of independents ought to make people take note.

As a matter of Interest , what kind of viewing numbers would the SOTU have..

Obviously those that responded to the poll had to have watched it , but just wondering what % of voters that would typically be?

Ultros

Quin_Dub wrote: »

As a matter of Interest , what kind of viewing numbers would the SOTU have..

Obviously those that responded to the poll had to have watched it , but just wondering what % of voters that would typically be?

Viewership is fairly substantial, 43 million viewers across the TV networks, obviously it's very unlikely all 43 million are US voters but there's no real data out there to know the true numbers and affiliations. Different networks are broken down here.

https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/for-the-second-consecutive-year-fox-news-is-most-watched-for-pres-trumps-state-of-the-union/393266

Oryx

A 'normal' president would be rated and assessed differently to this I think. Trump managed to read some coherent sentences that were written for him, and not go wildly off script, and theres a sense of mild surprise and some praise. No car crash, just a competent performance that would be minimum for anyone else, is impressive.

Christy42

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Ultros wrote: »

Yougov poll was good for Trump after his speech last night. According to CBS, 76% of viewers agreed with his speech but numbers obviously numbers are skewed because of viewership. 30% of Democrats approved, 97% of Republicans and 82% of independents. Donald needs to spend less time tweeting and more time on policy and he'll probably have a decent shot in 2020 if he's still around.

Manic Moran wrote: »

That's surprisingly high. That said, other than the self-serving silliness bit, it actually wasn't that bad a speech and did have some pretty supportable ideas in it. (If he can get them passed).

Still that percentage of independents ought to make people take note.

As a matter of Interest , what kind of viewing numbers would the SOTU have..

Obviously those that responded to the poll had to have watched it , but just wondering what % of voters that would typically be?

Not sure on viewing but I think they generally poll positive and make little difference to the standing of a politician.

Of course Trump lost about 5-6% over the shutdown which is unlikely to last long term so he may well get a boost around now.

As for how it helped him. Probably a decent bit. He should focus on optics, not policy. People can see effects with actual policy but if I say it would have been better had you listened to me then you would be hard pressed to prove me wrong. His goals seem to be 2020 and a legacy. Doing either via policy is hard (Obamacare is Obama's largely due to Republicans trying to use it against him and having it backfire), rhetoric and a shiny monument on the southern border are a bit easier.

Water John

Looks like Klobuchar may run for the Dems nomination. I would fancy a bet on her.

TomOnBoard

Looks like the Dems have learned from the Reps in the last election... Dems limited themselves to a couple of real options during the 2016 caucases/primaries while Trump battled against a slew of alternatives... The sheer number of Rep numbers actually served to energise folks out of their sofas into the game... As possibilities dropped out, then ppl who had already been energised found it easier to shift allegiance to Trump rather than having to start from scratch...(i.e. get up from the couch) Energised un-decideds who subscribe to your main views are waaay better/more useful than folks who are fast asleep in their daily ruts..

This time, Reps are closing down alternatives to Trump... Dems are coming out as possible candidates like a multitude... Solong as they keep it real and don't trash their opponents, it could be a hugely winning strategy... Dems really do need to get folks off their couches and into the game....

Penn

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Looks like the Dems have learned from the Reps in the last election... Dems limited themselves to a couple of real options during the 2016 caucases/primaries while Trump battled against a slew of alternatives... The sheer number of Rep numbers actually served to energise folks out of their sofas into the game... As possibilities dropped out, then ppl who had already been energised found it easier to shift allegiance to Trump rather than having to start from scratch...(i.e. get up from the couch) Energised un-decideds who subscribe to your main views are waaay better/more useful than folks who are fast asleep in their daily ruts..

This time, Reps are closing down alternatives to Trump... Dems are coming out as possible candidates like a multitude... Solong as they keep it real and don't trash their opponents, it could be a hugely winning strategy... Dems really do need to get folks off their couches and into the game....

Completely agree. Whoever the Dem nominee ends up being, it's important that there's not a huge amount of sh*t-slinging during the primaries, and that everyone gets behind whoever is chosen to be the nominee. I think what happened between Sanders and Clinton last time caused enough of a fracture to make some people less inclined to vote.

DrumSteve

Penn wrote: »

Completely agree. Whoever the Dem nominee ends up being, it's important that there's not a huge amount of sh*t-slinging during the primaries, and that everyone gets behind whoever is chosen to be the nominee. I think what happened between Sanders and Clinton last time caused enough of a fracture to make some people less inclined to vote.

Also, I think Clinton not running this time will be a massive boon for the Dem's.

Kloubouchar is a good shout, though if Biden throws his hat in the ring I don't see any one on there who can go up against him.

MadYaker

Biden be 78 getting sworn in, not happening

DrumSteve

MadYaker wrote: »

Biden be 78 getting sworn in, not happening

I dunno about that; I could see him as a 1 termer.

ECO_Mental

Don't want to derail the Trump thread, but I think there is appetite and momentum for a woman and even better a minority so my bet is Kamala Harris. She is also tough enough to take on Trump.


Next up after that will be Beto O'Rourke, he stands a VERY good chance also. A lot of twits and turns yet. More than likely anyway it will be against Pence, and the conservatives will Turn out in droves for him.

DrumSteve

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Don't want to derail the Trump thread, but I think there is appetite and momentum for a woman and even better a minority so my bet is Kamala Harris. She is also tough enough to take on Trump.


Next up after that will be Beto O'Rourke, he stands a VERY good chance also. A lot of twits and turns yet. More than likely anyway it will be against Pence, and the conservatives will Turn out in droves for him.

Pence is a bit of a charisma vacuum though; If the Dem's get the vote out they should handily beat him.

ECO_Mental

DrumSteve wrote: »

Pence is a bit of a charisma vacuum though; If the Dem's get the vote out they should handily beat him.

Dont forget that if it is Pence, Trump will have been impeached and the GOP will be very angry and motivated. Also dont underestimate him, Tim Kaine though he would wipe the floor with him in the TV debate and he didn't!! and won that debate by most peoples reckoning.



He's as slippery as an eel