Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Options
1…8889919394…335

Comments

  • Options
    #2702
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    They're inherently linked.

    If you offered me a car and said that it was already paid for by someone else, I'd be more than happy to take it.

    If you offered me a car and told me that I needed to cough up 30k, I'd start to wonder if I really needed that car.

    It;s the same thing here. Americans were offered a free wall and now they're being forced to pay for it.


  • Options
    #2703
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Your gut feeling is irrelevant. You can't say "he has a mandate because he ran on building a wall that Mexico would pay for" on one hand and then completely ignore half of the promise. You have no data which supports your view unfortunately and polling data would indicate that the majority of Americans (and growing) blame Trump for the shutdown. Sure - he said it himself!

    From CBS a month ago:

    A large majority of Republicans support the wall -- 79 percent. A majority of independents -- 66 percent -- oppose the wall, and 84 percent of Democrats are also against it.

    The pains (shutdown) of getting to the stage of building it doesn't really negate the 79% of Republicans who want it. Is it not them who gives him his mandate?


  • Options
    #2704
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,984 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Pelvis wrote: »
    Plus this 5b is only for 215 miles of wall. The US/Mex board is 2k miles long. So really you're talking closer to 50b, not including labour, land aquisition, maintenance, and the **** ton of legal costs it's going to take for yeas to come, because you're going to get people disputing having their land taken from them.

    It's a monumentally stupid idea.

    The wall doesn't make any technical sense, but Trump's support base doesn't care if it "works" or not, they just want a wall. It's all just populist political theatre.


  • Options
    #2705
    DrumSteve
    Registered Users Posts: 10,798 ✭✭✭✭DrumSteve


    Deleted User wrote: »
    From CBS a month ago:

    A large majority of Republicans support the wall -- 79 percent. A majority of independents -- 66 percent -- oppose the wall, and 84 percent of Democrats are also against it.

    The pains (shutdown) of getting to the stage of building it doesn't really negate the 79% of Republicans who want it. Is it not them who gives him his mandate?

    I wonder what the percentage is now?


  • Options
    #2706
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    I'm not too worried that you're not a fan of my logical processes, or whether you want a wall or not (which you clearly do)... I'm more concerned about your absolute lack of forethought about what capitulating to Trump would do.

    I did say it's purely political at this stage. If the fear of capitulation is adding to the shutdown, then the cause of it comes from both parties.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2707
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    DrumSteve wrote: »
    I wonder what the percentage is now?

    Probably still high. His voters just blame the Dems. 79% isn't a small number.

    Edit: 82%.. An all-time high.

    https://www.vox.com/2019/1/16/18184442/poll-shutdown-border-wall-trump


  • Options
    #2708
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,702 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Deleted User wrote: »
    From CBS a month ago:

    A large majority of Republicans support the wall -- 79 percent. A majority of independents -- 66 percent -- oppose the wall, and 84 percent of Democrats are also against it.

    The pains (shutdown) of getting to the stage of building it doesn't really negate the 79% of Republicans who want it. Is it not them who gives him his mandate?

    He's President of the USA, not President of 79% of Republicans. If the majority of people in the country don't want the wall, surely that is now his mandate regardless of who voted for him more than 2 years ago.


  • Options
    #2709
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Penn wrote: »
    He's President of the USA, not President of 79% of Republicans. If the majority of people in the country don't want the wall, surely that is now his mandate regardless of who voted for him more than 2 years ago.

    I'm pretty sure that is not how mandates work. If someone gets voted in on a platform, then that is what the President's term seeks to achieve.


  • Options
    #2710
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,498 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Yes. That part not happening does not remove the mandate and desire amongst sections of America to have a border fence.

    Ah come on..

    You are told by the Salesman , buy this car and I'll throw in Leather upholstery and 3 years servicing for free , but then when you go to collect it he says "actually , that leather and the servicing is going to cost you an extra 5k"

    Do you think that the appropriate response here would be to say "Oh well , I suppose I agreed to buy the car so I guess him now charging me for a load of stuff he said was free is ok" ???


  • Options
    #2711
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    Ah come on..

    You are told by the Salesman , buy this car and I'll throw in Leather upholstery and 3 years servicing for free , but then when you go to collect it he says "actually , that leather and the servicing is going to cost you an extra 5k"

    Do you think that the appropriate response here would be to say "Oh well , I suppose I agreed to buy the car so I guess him now charging me for a load of stuff he said was free is ok" ???

    The polling says 82% of Republicans want the wall in the full knowledge that Mexico won't be paying for it. I doubt the figure was at 100% during the vote so not much support for it has been lost.

    I'm not really seeing the point of arguing about this. Hypotheticals are all well and good but the polling is consistent. He hasn't lost his mandate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2712
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,640 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    The mere virtue that Trump or Obama or whoever is occupying the Oval office is proof of a mandate. All else is mere waffle.


  • Options
    #2713
    Christy42
    Registered Users Posts: 7,997 ✭✭✭Christy42


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Penn wrote: »
    He's President of the USA, not President of 79% of Republicans. If the majority of people in the country don't want the wall, surely that is now his mandate regardless of who voted for him more than 2 years ago.

    I'm pretty sure that is not how mandates work. If someone gets voted in on a platform, then that is what the President's term seeks to achieve.
    Pelosi surely has a mandate to oppose the wall. The Dems were largely on a platform to block Don's nonsense. Their's is also more recent.

    Maybe restart the government and we can get some negotiations to get stuff for both sides before starting on a project that will take 50bn + (+ a lot most likely) to finish. Remember both sides got elected here. 2016 was not the only election to take place.


  • Options
    #2714
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Christy42 wrote: »
    Pelosi surely has a mandate to oppose the wall. The Dems were largely on a platform to block Don's nonsense. Their's is also more recent.

    Maybe restart the government and we can get some negotiations to get stuff for both sides before starting on a project that will take 50bn + (+ a lot most likely) to finish. Remember both sides got elected here. 2016 was not the only election to take place.

    I waltzed in here saying both parties are to blame for the shutdown and was met with incredulity. In my opinion, if her mandate comes up against the President's and it results in a shutdown, then both parties have to share blame for it. (I'm not sitting here saying it's all the Dems fault.)

    If one wants to blame Trump for not backing down in this situation instead of her, then one is really arguing that her mandate is more worthy than his, when it's not.


  • Options
    #2715
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,301 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure that is not how mandates work. If someone gets voted in on a platform, then that is what the President's term seeks to achieve.

    What about the mandate Congress just received last November to oppose the wall? Why are you dismissing that so easily?

    There are 3 co equal branches of government. The President doesn't get to Trump congress because he feels strongly about something. Pun intended.

    The majority of Americans voted for the congressional Democrats in the mid terms, by quite a distance. Why aren't you as interested in their mandate?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #2716
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,948 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I waltzed in here saying both parties are to blame for the shutdown and was met with incredulity. In my opinion, if her mandate comes up against the President's and it results in a shutdown, then both parties have to share blame for it. (I'm not sitting here saying it's all the Dems fault.)

    If one wants to blame Trump for not backing down in this situation instead of her, then one is really arguing that her mandate is more worthy than his, when it's not.

    No you pretended you were not for the wall, then say your for the wall. You flip flip back and forth depending on the post you are replying to.

    There is no precedent for this president holding peoples wages to ransom based on a project that he lied to his base about. The existing plan for 'wall'/s does not even remotely match what he ran on nor how it would come into existence.

    You are pretending none of that is true. So based on your own posts i cant take you seriously right now


  • Options
    #2717
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,301 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    markodaly wrote: »
    The mere virtue that Trump or Obama or whoever is occupying the Oval office is proof of a mandate. All else is mere waffle.

    That's nonsense. By this logic every whom of the president is the direcr expression of the majority of Americans. It isn't.

    This is why the checks and balances of the US government were put in place.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #2718
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,363 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure that is not how mandates work. If someone gets voted in on a platform, then that is what the President's term seeks to achieve.

    He was also given the mandate to 'lock her up', how's that going these days?


  • Options
    #2719
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,679 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    markodaly wrote: »
    The mere virtue that Trump or Obama or whoever is occupying the Oval office is proof of a mandate. All else is mere waffle.

    Trump ran in 2016 and cheated. That is a fact.

    There was Russian influence. That is a fact.

    Whether they colluded or not will hopefully be established, but since we are talking about mandates, let's remember those two facts when talking about 2016 and his mandate from that election.

    There were midterms in 2018.

    The midterms were a judgement on Trump. He made it about him. He imposed himself into those elections.

    He/the Reps got whooped.

    They lost the house. That effects his mandate.

    Trump now has to deal with the house, who hold the purse strings.

    "Elections have consequences"
    - Mitch McConnell

    If it is an emergency, let him call it such and try divert funding.

    If it is not, then there is no reason to hold the wages of 800,000 hostage. He should simply re-open the government and deal with the budget the way the arms of government are supposed to.


  • Options
    #2720
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,472 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    There are some amazing circular arguments being promulgated this morning, one might be forgiven for suspecting someone is arguing just for the sake of it.


  • Options
    #2721
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Brian? wrote: »
    What about the mandate Congress just received last November to oppose the wall? Why are you dismissing that so easily?

    There are 3 co equal branches of government. The President doesn't get to Trump congress because he feels strongly about something. Pun intended.

    The majority of Americans voted for the congressional Democrats in the mid terms, by quite a distance. Why aren't you as interested in their mandate?

    Because none of them change Trump's mandate. And none trump it either.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2722
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,702 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure that is not how mandates work. If someone gets voted in on a platform, then that is what the President's term seeks to achieve.

    Draining the Swamp - Failed
    Locking her (Clinton) up - Failed
    Protecting LGBT rights - Failed
    Mexico paying for the wall - Failed
    Pulling out of NATO - Failed
    Improving infrastructure - Failed
    Releasing his tax returns after the election - Failed

    Some of the above, we all know, he was never going to do. But he was voted in on that platform. Should he now proceed with all of the above regardless of anything and everything which has happened since then?

    In fact, here's a list of his campaign pledges he's broken.
    https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/rulings/promise-broken/

    And remember, the GOP had the Presidency, Senate and House for the first two years of his Presidency.

    Mandates are not solid. They never are. Politicians and their mandates must be somewhat malleable, they have to adjust and change as the situations warrant. There's also the fact that Trump is not the only elected politician. All politicians have mandates, and all must represent their voters as best they can. Trump having a mandate for the wall does not negate the House Dems mandates (who were more recently elected than Trump and therefore could be deemed to have a new mandate from the populace of the USA).

    But either way, it's largely irrelevant. The majority of people by the polling numbers you yourself posted, don't want the wall, and regardless of mandates the President represents all US citizens and should represent them equally.

    The shutdown is Trump's fault, and his responsibility. If mandates are so important to adhere to, ignoring Trump's abandonment and failure to deliver on so many of his own, the Dems then justifiably must not agree to funding for the wall, because that's the mandate they were elected to when they won control of the House.


  • Options
    #2723
    Blowfish
    Registered Users Posts: 5,112 ✭✭✭Blowfish


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The polling says 82% of Republicans want the wall in the full knowledge that Mexico won't be paying for it. I doubt the figure was at 100% during the vote so not much support for it has been lost.
    This right here is how to be misleading with statistics. The reason that the percentage of Republicans supporting the wall is higher than it was isn't because more people support it, it's because less and less people identify themselves as Republican. He's losing the moderates and keeping the hardcore.


    This is borne out by surveys that poll all Americans rather than just Republicans. In those polls, support for the wall is most definitely dropping.


  • Options
    #2724
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    listermint wrote: »
    No you pretended you were not for the wall, then say your for the wall. You flip flip back and forth depending on the post you are replying to.

    There is no precedent for this president holding peoples wages to ransom based on a project that he lied to his base about. The existing plan for 'wall'/s does not even remotely match what he ran on nor how it would come into existence.

    You are pretending none of that is true. So based on your own posts i cant take you seriously right now

    Being for the wall to end a shutdown is different to being for the wall to stop Mexicans. So don't accuse me of "pretending to not be for the wall". It suggests you don't know the difference, and that's a bad look.


  • Options
    #2725
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,679 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Blowfish wrote: »
    This right here is how to be misleading with statistics. The reason that the percentage of Republicans supporting the wall is higher than it was isn't because more people support it, it's because less and less people identify themselves as Republican. He's losing the moderates and keeping the hardcore.


    This is borne out by surveys that poll all Americans rather than just Republicans. In those polls, support for the wall is most definitely dropping.

    One could argue that because the majority of people blame Trump for the shutdown, there is a mandate to re-open government.


  • Options
    #2726
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Penn wrote: »
    Draining the Swamp - Failed
    Locking her (Clinton) up - Failed
    Protecting LGBT rights - Failed
    Mexico paying for the wall - Failed
    Pulling out of NATO - Failed
    Improving infrastructure - Failed
    Releasing his tax returns after the election - Failed

    ...

    Why did you waste so much time when the post you quoted said "seeks to achieve"?


  • Options
    #2727
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,301 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Because none of them change Trump's mandate. And none trump it either.

    Agreed. So the answer is both sides need to compromise. Wouldn't you agree?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #2728
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure that is not how mandates work. If someone gets voted in on a platform, then that is what the President's term seeks to achieve.
    That's not how it works in the US.


  • Options
    #2729
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,635 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Ads, nobody is saying that Trump must ditch the mandate for the wall. The Dems have put forward a vote in the Senate on Thursday which would end the shutdown and allow for further negotiations on the wall once the government is running again.

    Trump will not accept that as he knows there is no basis for the wall, no support for it, and thus he is trying to leverage the 800k not being paid to get his way. Where was that as part of the campaign trail, I recall Build the Wall and Mexcio will pay, he even said if they refused to pay he would build it higher, but am struggling to recall when he stated that he would withhold payment on government workers unless he got it.

    So there is an easy way out of this. Accept the Dems bill and go off behind the scenes to negotiate the wall. Either it will stand up to scrutiny of or it won't. Trump already knows the answer to that as he even accepts that concrete "beautiful concrete" is not the way to go. Which funny enough was another part of his wall mandate that you seem more than happy to let him go back on.


  • Options
    #2730
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,640 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Brian? wrote: »
    That's nonsense. By this logic every whom of the president is the direcr expression of the majority of Americans. It isn't.

    This is why the checks and balances of the US government were put in place.

    Did I ever state otherwise?

    Whoever occupies the Oval Office has a mandate, that of the president. That, of course, does not give them carte blanche. Something I never claimed. Congress also has a mandate.

    However, some here think that Trump has no mandate, which of course is just silly.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2731
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,702 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Why did you waste so much time when the post you quoted said "seeks to achieve"?

    Do you think he's seeking the achieve the things I've mentioned? Has he actually tried to achieve any of them?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement