Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

hotmail.com

Eric Cartman wrote: »

That would be a nightmare ticket, biden can e quite rational financially and understands that you just cant hand out free college or tax the hilt out of millionaires. His headline of being a fiscally responsible moderate would either mean stopping bernie acheiving any promise he has or going completely back on his own promises.

What a depressing choice that would be for Americans.. a contest between two fiscal conservatives claiming to be from different parties. No wonder 50 % of the electorate don't vote.

FrostyJack

JRant wrote: »

Has anyone argued it's all Obama's fault?
The fact remains that it happened on his watch not that he is solely responsible, well IMO anyway.

I think we'll see an investigation of the surveillance that was carried out on the Trump campaign and the Steele Dossier and being honest I believe there is a need for one.

On the media's possible response to Obama acting, that should have been the last concern he had. The same is true for anything McConnell but he wasn't he POTUS the time. And let's be honest, if McConnell is the bar then it's an extremely low bar IMO.

People on here still think the Mueller report is an nothing burger even though it is written in plain English what Trump did and how the Russian's helped him. Why would they believe what Satin himself, Obama said? Maybe some of the swing voters might have swung to Clinton but others would have swung the other way thinking it was a White House ruse to vote for Clinton. He might have felt it was in the bag so it Clinton won, Alex Jones, Hannity and co. would have been harping on about how evil Obama stole the election. In hindsight he probably should have but that is history now. As for him not taking action when he found out about the hacking, several ideas were pushed including releasing damaging information on Putin, knocking out the power grids etc but he went against his staff because he thought that Putin my see it as a preemptive attack on his power and launch nukes or something. He went the sanction route in the end and expelled a few Russians and retook their compound, which I think Trump has given back to them if I remember correctly.

People seem to forget the GOP was hacked too, we don't know what damaging information they got off there. This could be another reason McConnell and co. are soft on Russia, that is even without the recent aluminium plant, UC Rusal, going into his home state, which should be setting off alarm bells. With NAFTA in the bin, thanks to the Whitehouse, Canadian aluminium prices have soared making the Russian's one if not the largest producers World wide.

Eric Cartman

Leroy42 wrote: »

But his recent FOx News Town hall meeting would suggest, albeit in very small sample, that he touches on quite a few things people do agree with.

For example, Trump has made massive traction out of the VA and getting them the help they need. How is that any different that medicare? Of course one can argue that they fought for their country, but surely that can be extended to 1st responders, and teachers and, and and.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Occasionally paul murphy / bernie etc.. have said things people resonate with . Similar with trump. Obviously to even be in the sphere they have to have some supporters. But as europeans I think to most debating here , trump seems hard right and bernie seems quite moderate, biden would come accross as the space FG would occupy just right of centre.

In the US Trump is somewhere moderate right to just right and bernie is hard left. Its the reality of the shift of expectations people have in politicians by geography and it has to be debated on those merits, not have a European standard applies.

hotmail.com

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Yeah. Sanders in 2016 was the only one I ever saw advocate serious change in US healthcare. The mainstream Democrats seem happy to just implement incremental changes. Offhand, I've no idea what Clinton's stance on it was.

Democrats aren't against the private health insurance model.

So it's a depressing similarity between Republicans and Democrats.

KyussB

mcmoustache wrote: »

Obama tried to go public, privately told Putin to knock it off, kicked out diplomats and seized their compound.

Trump denied that it was happening, denied any connections to Russia, slow-walked sanctions, publicly encouraged the hacking, publicly took the word of Russians over that of his intelligence agencies, still downplays Russian influence in the election, got Deripaska off the sanctions list.


There's no comparison here. Just a lazy attempt at both-sidesing.

Obama 'tried' to go public...so he has critical information in the public interest, that everyone here is claiming had a negative outcome on the election results, and Obama's response was so weak that he merely 'tried' to go public...

This is the president that let Putin walk into Crimea. There certainly is no comparison.

KyussB

Leroy42 wrote: »

...
So by all means make the point that Obama could and should have done more, but realise that the very point is even harder for Trump. If Obama was negligent then Trump is openly avoiding protecting the US.

That in of itself should be enough to remove him from office.

I mean this highlights the double standard perfectly:
Obama, with the same information: Well, he could have done more...

Trump, with the same information: He should be removed from office.

FrostyJack

KyussB wrote: »

This is the president that let Putin walk into Crimea. There certainly is no comparison.

What should he have done? What would Trump have done?

KyussB

Leroy42 wrote: »

When you say he shouldn't be concerned, you have failed to answer any of the questions I posed. If McConnell wasn't bothered, the GOP were not bothered, and we know that his supporters were not going to be bothered, what possible gain would Obama get from releasing the intel?

Gain? Opposing the Russians. Protecting the integrity of democratic elections. That seems to be what everyone in the thread has a problem with, regarding Trump.

If we're talking solely in terms of political gain, then you can't blame Trump for neglecting action, for his own interests, either - can you? Not without it being blatantly partisan, anyway.

It neatly sums up that peoples views about this aren't based on any kind of principle - it's largely fake outrage used for partisan purposes, combined with a witch hunt - and that's highlighted by the lack of consistency in the criticisms of both parties.

Leroy42 wrote: »

So again, whilst you may see there being an issue with Obama, by that position surely you must be totally disgusted that Trump not only ignored the intel (which is the blame you are laying at Obama) but actively sided with Putin despite knowing that Putin was lying and at the same time dumping on his own countries security forces.

Actively sided? The collusion conspiracy theory was debunked by Mueller...

FrostyJack

KyussB wrote: »

I mean this highlights the double standard perfectly:
Obama, with the same information: Well, he could have done more...

Trump, with the same information: He should be removed from office.

No one is saying Trump should be removed for doing nothing, it is just one of the list of things to show he liked the fact that they helped him or is in denial.
Obama didn't do nothing, he just didn't escalate things as much as he should. On the other hand, Trump has actively played down that anything was done to help him and done zero to stop it happening in the future. As I said above he has actually rolled back on what Obama did do. If that doesn't add to the long list of damning actions I don't know what is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-moves-to-return-russian-compounds-in-maryland-and-new-york/2017/05/31/3c4778d2-4616-11e7-98cd-af64b4fe2dfc_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0412fb7c93e2

KyussB

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I think thats where a lot of people get caught, to most here bernie seems reasonable, but when looking at the dynamic of the US , we have to consider bernies appeal similar to somebody between paul murphy and stalin here.

Bernie's policies are literally illegal under EU treaty rules. Europe has shifted very far to the right, economically - due to all of the fiscal/monetary restricting treaties - but the political narrative hasn't caught up with the reality, yet.

The US is more capable of true left-leaning economics, than Europe, now.

FrostyJack

KyussB wrote: »

Actively sided? The collusion conspiracy theory was debunked by Mueller...

The Mueller report shows Trump campaign actively tried to enlist Russia's help, several Trump appointees met with Russian officials and lied about it. They just couldn't prove they got any valuable information out of them.

Eric Cartman

KyussB wrote: »

Bernie's policies are literally illegal under EU treaty rules. Europe has shifted very far to the right, economically - due to all of the fiscal/monetary restricting treaties - but the political narrative hasn't caught up with the reality, yet.

The US is more capable of true left-leaning economics, than Europe, now.

It really hasn't though, the EU as a whole is a bunch of centerist / centre left countries and the people elected to brussels relfect the same.

hotmail.com

Eric Cartman wrote: »

It really hasn't though, the EU as a whole is a bunch of centerist / centre left countries and the people elected to brussels relfect the same.

The EU is a centre right project based on free trade, open competition and allowing the market to dictate matters.

All EU countries accept this now as normal. Therefore the EU has become predominantly right wing.

KyussB

Eric Cartman wrote: »

It really hasn't though, the EU as a whole is a bunch of centerist / centre left countries and the people elected to brussels relfect the same.

Ya but the treaties dictate the range of possible economic policies, through the restrictions they impose - that range has shifted extremely far to the right.

Most of Europe can't do the Job Guarantee of Green New Deal type stuff advocated by Bernie and other allies - not without sidestepping treaty restrictions (technically possible, but potentially fraught).

Better suited to the Dems thread though, so will leave that there.

JRant

Leroy42 wrote: »

When you say he shouldn't be concerned, you have failed to answer any of the questions I posed. If McConnell wasn't bothered, the GOP were not bothered, and we know that his supporters were not going to be bothered, what possible gain would Obama get from releasing the intel?

He would have been pilloried for trying to rig the election for HC. Trump would have demanded an investigation, just as you are now doing, into why Obama was acting the way he was.

Because at the core of it, it isn't really that there is anything that Obama could have done (he tried to impose sanctions which Flynn illegally worked on getting rid off before Obama had left office!) that would have made any difference to the supporters that simply do not care. They don't care that Trump Jr actively worked with Russians to gain intel. They don't care that Manafort gave polling data to Russians. They don't care that Trump decided to dump on the security services despite having the same access to the intel that Obama had.

If Obama had come out, and say he released details of the Trump Tower meeting, do you think Trump would have simply stood aside? Do you think his supporters would have accepted it and voted for HC? What difference so you think it would have made?

You now know for certain that the Russians did interfere and in doing so helped Trump so get elected. Does that not colour your view on Trump being POTUS?

So again, whilst you may see there being an issue with Obama, by that position surely you must be totally disgusted that Trump not only ignored the intel (which is the blame you are laying at Obama) but actively sided with Putin despite knowing that Putin was lying and at the same time dumping on his own countries security forces.

I did answer your question, if McConnell is the standard to be applied then it is a low bar to set.

On what Obama had to gain? He had nothing to gain or lose, he was leaving office regardless. He should have been much stronger on the issue not only with Russia but with the social media outlets that allowed it. Since he left office they have come under more pressure to up their game but not nearly enough IMO.

For me it's not an either/or question on whether this colours Trump's presidency. I can see him for the spoofer he is. The Meuller report shows that he has very little in the way of morals but did just enough to stay inside of the law. It required a near 3 year investigation into it but I believe Meuller did a fantastic job.

For me there are questions to be asked on the other side as well.
Why were the DNC working with foreign governments and agents to dig up dirt on an opponent?
How was the Steele dossier used by the intelligence agencies and for what purposes?

I would rather be consistent on the matter for both sides. If it's not okay for Trump to do it (which it wasn't) then it most certainly isn't okay for the other side to either.

FrostyJack

hotmail.com wrote: »

The EU is a centre right project based on free trade, open competition and allowing the market to dictate matters.

All EU countries accept this now as normal. Therefore the EU has become predominantly right wing.

I don't think you understand what right wing means. None of your list a considered right wing. If you mean there is a rise in populism, fascism and nationalism, then you might have a point. These are still a minority in most of Europe currently but they are trending higher.

kilns

a Biden/Abrams ticket would be the best one as it would hover up the support they will need to win the election, the mid west/women/and the black vote

The Dems wont make the same mistake again and let Trump take Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio

Eric Cartman

kilns wrote: »

a Biden/Abrams ticket would be the best one as it would hover up the support they will need to win the election, the mid west/women/and the black vote

The Dems wont make the same mistake again and let Trump take Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio

The problem is, I think they will.
Florida is going to be an even bigger struggle this time , Places like Boca Raton and the other 'retirement cities' are full of old people who really like the guy and love voting, plus the jewish vote above 35 year olds is sealed.

Leroy42

KyussB wrote: »

I mean this highlights the double standard perfectly:
Obama, with the same information: Well, he could have done more...

Trump, with the same information: He should be removed from office.

Not at all. Obama did not have the same information. How could he? It was happening at the time. Trump, even at the time, did know as Trump Jr had been approached yet did nothing.

As I have already, repeatedly, pointed out, Obama tried to raise the issue but the GOP controlled Senate wanted nothing to do with it. Should he have simply released it regardless?

What do you, honestly, think would have happened? Fake News, Obma wants HC to win, HC is the only one colluding with Russia. We laready know this as this is exactly what Trump has been doing the last two years.

Whilst some of the stuff in Mueller report is news to us, it is not to Trump. He was made very aware of this by the security services as far back as 2016, yet he continued to claim fake news. And then sided with Putin over his own services.

And since the election we know far more. We know of Manafort, we know about Stone, we know about Trump Jr. Are you claiming that Obama knew all of this? Because Trump had direct contact with these people yet apparently didn't.

He should be removed from office because this is no longer an allegation, it is beyond doubt. He has ignored it for purely selfish political reasons, which whatever you say about Obama cannot have been the case.

Should Obama have let the public know, yes I think he should. Would it have made any difference to his supporters? No. Not a chance. They would blame HC, or Obama himself or call it all a smear campaign. Even if they believed it they would say Trump is simply using Russia or that it isn't a big deal.

So you came on looking for people to comment on your position that Obama failed on this, and many posters have agreed. But what you still fail to admit is that by stating that position surely you must acknowledge that Trump not only failed but actively sought to limit the investigation knowing full well what the security services knew.

So are you going to call out Trump on this?

MadYaker

Trump hasn't just failed to do anything about the russian interference, he has actively tried to shut down efforts to prevent it or even investigate the extent of it! When he heard that Obama had levied sanctions on Russia and expelled diplomats shortly before he took office he was supposedly livid as he saw it as an attempt to delegitamize his election.

Obama expelled a bunch of diplomats and brought more sanctions. What has Trump done?

vetinari

Can we drop any discussion related to being a "fiscal moderate" in terms of presidential candidates?
Trump has surely shown that the phrase is meaningless. No one votes for you to be a fiscal moderate. It's a useless phrase.

Regards the Muller report, it's pretty clear from it that Trump has little interest in combating the Russian threat.
It's a sad state for the Republican party that they're now okay with that.
Staying in power is the be all and end all.
Honestly, it wouldn't matter to them if Trump was controlled by Russians as long as he was a republican.

MadYaker

The entire GOP slated Obama in 2016 for not doing enough to stop Russia interfering, now the problem is even bigger than they knew at that time and what do we get from them on this issue? Crickets.

I think the only thing that will bring Trump down before the election is if the GOP abandon him but that doesn't seem likely considering what they've been happy to let him away with so far.

Itssoeasy

I see trump said last night/yesterday that he’s just going to block any attempt by the House of Representatives in regards to ex members of staff at the White House on anything. That’s a stupid move by trump(I can tell ye will be shocked by that) as president nixon tried that and failed when he tried to bring it to the Supreme Court. So, if like any other president would know there is precedent against what trump is trying to do.

Also, I think don McGahn May become the 2019 version of John Dean( without the prison term obviously) and I don’t see how trump can claim executive privilege on McGahn now when he didn’t during the mueller investigation.

jobbridge4life

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I see trump said last night/yesterday that he’s just going to block any attempt by the House of Representatives in regards to ex members of staff at the White House on anything. That’s a stupid move by trump(I can tell ye will be shocked by that) as president nixon tried that and failed when he tried to bring it to the Supreme Court. So, if like any other president would know there is precedent against what trump is trying to do.

Also, I think don McGahn May become the 2019 version of John Dean( without the prison term obviously) and I don’t see how trump can claim executive privilege on McGahn now when he didn’t during the mueller investigation.

Trump has an utterly stacked SC though and one that operates in the era of the shameless republican. I've no hope left for America.

hotmail.com

FrostyJack wrote:

I don't think you understand what right wing means. None of your list a considered right wing. If you mean there is a rise in populism, fascism and nationalism, then you might have a point. These are still a minority in most of Europe currently but they are trending higher.

Free trade and the free market is a right wing project. No government intervention and generally smaller governments with lower taxes. This is right wing.

Left wing supports protecting industries, government ownership of vital utilities, higher taxes and more government involvement in our daily lives.

jobbridge4life

hotmail.com wrote: »

Free trade and the free market is a right wing project. No government intervention and generally smaller governments with lower taxes. This is right wing.

Left wing supports protecting industries, government ownership of vital utilities, higher taxes and more government involvement in our daily lives.

So who would support the following in your view Hotmail?

Prohibitions on who may or may not marry, Governmental control over what constitutes a marriage, who is and what relationships are deemed fit? Controls on reproductive health are an essential function of a small government. Liberty only exists outside of a woman's vagina? Liberty only extends to life, it certainly never meant that someone within the privacy of their own homes has any right to make determinations regarding their own death for instance?

Would it be right or left wing parties that supported bans on exercising your free market right to choose not to purchase products that are produced in occupied lands?

Itssoeasy

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Trump has an utterly stacked SC though and one that operates in the era of the shameless republican. I've no hope left for America.

So ? That's may be a worry in regards to many other issues that may come before the court but the Supreme Court have been clear on their role in the impeachment process and lawfully isssued subpoenas which Nixon would have been charged with had he not resigned.

hotmail.com

jobbridge4life wrote:

Prohibitions on who may or may not marry, Governmental control over what constitutes a marriage, who is and what relationships are deemed fit? Controls on reproductive health are an essential function of a small government. Liberty only exists outside of a woman's vagina? Liberty only extends to life, it certainly never meant that someone within the privacy of their own homes has any right to make determinations regarding their own death for instance?

jobbridge4life wrote:

Would it be right or left wing parties that supported bans on exercising your free market right to choose not to purchase products that are produced in occupied lands?

I'm really not sure what you're getting at.

But regarding social issues, the majority couldn't give a toss about them.

The minority that do care about who gets married need to get a life and focus on what really matters.

The daily issues of income, education, healthcare, employment, mental health.. these are what define Left and Right and are the actual main issues of our time.

jobbridge4life

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So ? That's may be a worry in regards to many other issues that may come before the court but the Supreme Court have been clear on their role in the impeachment process and lawfully isssued subpoenas which Nixon would have been charged with had he not resigned.

Precedent wasn't precedent until it was, and it stops being so the second it isn't. And I am not trying to be trite, I'm just genuinely worried.

In normal, functioning constitutional democracies with reasonable seperation of powers I would be content with that. In the USA of today I have very serious doubts. Remember virtually all of the current majority were selected precisely because they expressed at the very least an opinion that Roe was decided incorrectly and that it could be 'refined'. Several are openly hoping for its reversal.

jobbridge4life

hotmail.com wrote: »

I'm really not sure what you're getting at.

But regarding social issues, the majority couldn't give a toss about them.

The minority that do care about who gets married need to get a life and focus on what really matters.

The daily issues of income, education, healthcare, employment, mental health.. these are what define Left and Right and are the actual main issues of our time.

Income, education, healthcare, employment, mental health... these are all social issues.

Equal access to marriage also happened to touch off on every one of those matters you just highlighted as what 'really matters'.

:rolleyes: