Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

marno21

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't normally take much interest in US politics. Biden did an excellent interview on Nick Clegg's podcast a while back. I found it really depressing when the allegations about him came out.

The worst thing I see is that in the absence of a perfect candidate, if it comes down to Trump vs. Biden, anyone who finds Biden's behaviour heinous should be reminded of what the alternative option is.

I don't like using the "lesser of two evils" phrase, but it does bear repeating that disowning Biden in a two horse race leaves the other horse the winner. We saw this in 2016 where evil Hillary Clinton didn't get Democrat voters enthusiastic, but the result was voting in someone who makes imperfect Hillary Clinton a lot more appealing.

Danzy

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I don't normally take much interest in US politics. Biden did an excellent interview on Nick Clegg's podcast a while back. I found it really depressing when the allegations about him came out.

He has a bit of a reputation as a womanizer, stories of him bathing naked in front of women secret service agents being a bit much till they had to reassign lit of them to external.

In many ways though he is solidly likable.

mcmoustache

Has there ever been a president who fails so spectacularly to communicate clearly?

I could understand if this was just some demented loon or a toddler who spoke English as a second language but surely clear English should be a requirement?

Danzy

Midlife wrote: »

Wow, it's actually descended into 'I know you are but what am I'

Awesome work Rigolo. We love you, don't ever change.

I served with Rigolo. I knew Rigolo. Rigolo was a friend of mine. Midlife, you're no Rigolo.

TomOnBoard

Expect a riot of full-strength vitriol to be thrown as red meat to the faithful cult members at tonight's rally in Greenville, North Carolina. This will be his 1st outing since he reached his newly-plumbed depths.

Apropos of nothing much, isn't it a bit ironic that his rally will be in the Minges Coliseum....

is_that_so

marno21 wrote: »

The worst thing I see is that in the absence of a perfect candidate, if it comes down to Trump vs. Biden, anyone who finds Biden's behaviour heinous should be reminded of what the alternative option is.

I don't like using the "lesser of two evils" phrase, but it does bear repeating that disowning Biden in a two horse race leaves the other horse the winner. We saw this in 2016 where evil Hillary Clinton didn't get Democrat voters enthusiastic, but the result was voting in someone who makes imperfect Hillary Clinton a lot more appealing.

Given where the state of US politics lies , the same argument could be made for each of the front runners. Simple question for the Dems is to pick who can best beat him

Chips Lovell

Mod Note

The past few pages of the thread have featured a lot of one-liners, name calling, and digs at other posters. Rather than sanction a bunch of people, I'm going to give everyone one last chance to shape up and fly right.

Read the charter. Serious, constructive posts only please. If you post doesn't consist of at least one paragraph, think seriously before hitting "Submit".

marno21

is_that_so wrote: »

Given where the state of US politics lies , the same argument could be made for each of the front runners. Simple question for the Dems is to pick who can best beat him

100%, but there's a particular element with regards to Biden and his inappropriate behaviour, in contrast with Trump.

Water John

There is no perfect candidate for any position, much less POTUS. Everyone has foibles and failings. It's just some are more major than others.
As I saw the other day in an article about finding a life partner. Find someone whose crap you can live with.

RIGOLO

is_that_so wrote: »

Given where the state of US politics lies , the same argument could be made for each of the front runners. Simple question for the Dems is to pick who can best beat him

There are no simple questions when it comes to a Democrat, just look at Biden, when he was asked in the debate what would be the first thing he would do as President of the United States, he replied

“But the first thing I would do is make sure that we defeat Donald Trump, period.”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/democratic-debate-2019-joe-bidens-faltering-performance-raises-big-doubts-about-his-campaign

Before the Demcorat and anti-Trumpers can even think of defeating Trump they need to first get some cohesion and unity, they need to find a policy and strategy other than calling everyone a racist and they need to come up with NEW IDEAS to get manufacturing jobs and the economy booming, trade deficits sorted and NK to the peace table etc.

I say NEW IDEAS because Trump has already achieved those things , so unless the Democrats want to run with his ideas they will need new ones.

I suspect its too late as the Trump Administration has taken ownership of so many achievements that the Democrats wont get a look in by November 2020

Danzy

The man who said that, paraphrased above, was lloyd bentsen, probably the best President America missed out in the last 50 years.

Ram with Dukakis in the 80s.

A solid IRA man as well, not the army but founded those retirement accounts.

He also came up with the term astroturf.

Danzy

RIGOLO wrote: »

There are no simple questions when it comes to a Democrat, just look at Biden, when he was asked in the debate what would be the first thing he would do as President of the United States, he replied



https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/democratic-debate-2019-joe-bidens-faltering-performance-raises-big-doubts-about-his-campaign

Before the Demcorat and anti-Trumpers can even think of defeating Trump they need to first get some cohesion and unity, they need to find a policy and strategy other than calling everyone a racist and they need to come up with NEW IDEAS to get manufacturing jobs and the economy booming, trade deficits sorted and NK to the peace table etc.

I say NEW IDEAS because Trump has already achieved those things , so unless the Democrats want to run with his ideas they will need new ones.

I suspect its too late as the Trump Administration has taken ownership of so many achievements that the Democrats wont get a look in by November 2020

You may be highly partisan for Trump Rigolo but this is the problem for the Dems.

Challenges that will not be easily dealt with by the party and by no means is it clear which way forward to do so.

peddlelies

peddlelies wrote: »

26000 Elephants wrote: »

You should also be aware of the far, far greater number of women who were *not* paid and who have made serious allegations, including the man's own wife.

I'm know he's a womanizing sleaze who's done bad things, obviously not going to attempt defending that. I'll still have to fall short of calling him a child rapist though as if it's a fact.

But you and many others still row in behind him. He is an absolute scumbag, why waste your time and energy on here defending him. I would genuinely like to know why.

Igotadose

Danzy wrote: »

Well Peddlies blew that out of the water in some style.

Who got the permits for that march?

Who were the fine people on the side of not taking the monuments down? The answers are, the neo-nazi groups applied for the permits and organized the march. Only Trump and his apologists think there were fine people on the 'don't take the Civil War era statues' down side. And they certainly didn't object to the neo-nazi's in their midst. The discussion about Washington and Jefferson is nonsense, as the reporter said, Robert E. Lee (a *traitor the US*) isn't Thomas Jefferson. The myth about him somehow being a good guy, is just that, a myth.

And, did you think that Trump *knew* this when he came out with his original statement? Or did he just knee-jerk, and bring in a bunch of spin later (that clearly someone wrote for him, given the multi-syllabic words in the sentences he used?) At best before his original statement, one of his neo-Nazi WH staffers fed him the line. And why even say what he said? Who besides his neo-Nazi followers need to hear the President praise those protesting the removal of these monuments? Are those types a big part of his demographic? When someone's been *murdered by NeoNazi's at the event*, is it right to praise the side that might have committed a murder?

But it doesn't matter with Cult45. Anything he says is true and righteous and good, its just a shame the rest of us aren't enlightened enough to see it. #SAD

Leroy42

The Dems don't need to find a way to beat Trump, they already had that in 2016 but due to some lack of preparation and a large part of hatred towards HC, they failed. In addition, they were working very much against the history of 2 term presidents in trying to get another Dem into the WH.

Trump, on the other hand, has lost many of his selling points. He can no longer claim that he would MAGA, he will have had 4 years. HE can no longer rely on hatred towards HC, although there will be hatred towards Biden etc it will be nowhere close to the levels of anti-HC feeling. He won't be able to play the change card. He won't be able to play the outsider card. He won't be able to get far with the Wall nonsense.

He does have the significant advantage of being in incumbent, but GBush found that that isn't fool proof.

So in reality, the Dems have to match what they did last time and manage the vote better.

The Dems route is much clearer than Trumps. Where will he get the votes that he has lost? How will he turn around the massive turn-away from the GOP at the mid-terms? It seems very much like he strategy is solely on the economy and the stock market. Not a bad idea but very much out of his hands.

batgoat

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's highly disingenuous. Not all Jews are Israeli and the current Israeli regime in no way speaks for all Jews. It sounds to me like you're trying to poison the well here to be honest regarding Ocasio-Cortez, Omar et al. It's quite transparent and more than a tad pathetic to be honest. By all means, criticize but playing the tired old "Any criticism or Israel whatsoever=antisemitism" card is just tedious at this stage.

Wonder if Peddle thinks Michael D Higgins is an anti Semite since he has actively opposed Israeli foreign policy over the years.

Itssoeasy

Leroy, just to build on your last point. Before the mid terms in November the GOP leadership were hoping trump would stick to the economy and push that selling point, but trump has shown time and again he has message discipline. He ranted and raved about a caravan that was headed towards the southern border. It clearly didn't work.

RIGOLO

Leroy42 wrote: »

The Dems don't need to find a way to beat Trump, they already had that in 2016 but due to some lack of preparation and a large part of hatred towards HC, they failed. In addition, they were working very much against the history of 2 term presidents in trying to get another Dem into the WH.

Trump, on the other hand, has lost many of his selling points. He can no longer claim that he would MAGA, he will have had 4 years. HE can no longer rely on hatred towards HC, although there will be hatred towards Biden etc it will be nowhere close to the levels of anti-HC feeling. He won't be able to play the change card. He won't be able to play the outsider card. He won't be able to get far with the Wall nonsense.

He does have the significant advantage of being in incumbent, but GBush found that that isn't fool proof.

So in reality, the Dems have to match what they did last time and manage the vote better.

The Dems route is much clearer than Trumps. Where will he get the votes that he has lost? How will he turn around the massive turn-away from the GOP at the mid-terms? It seems very much like he strategy is solely on the economy and the stock market. Not a bad idea but very much out of his hands.

among other things
Hilary spent nearly $800 million dollars
Debbie Wasserman Schulz the DNC chairwoman resigns cos emails show the DNC were pushing HRC over Bernie
CNN admit giving HRC the questions before a debate

and the anti-Trumpers think it was a lack of preparation .
Just how much preparation does 800 million , a corrupt national committe and a unfair media bias advantage buy you .

Perhaps they need to spend more, get more corrupt commitee officals and have even more help from the media .. that should do it.

everlast75

https://twitter.com/thegarance/status/1151521510223466496?s=19

Who would have thought that a multiple-bankrupt would tank the economy?

marno21

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/thegarance/status/1151521510223466496?s=19

Who would have thought that a multiple-bankrupt would tank the economy?

Nailed on that the day after #46 takes seat, if in 2020, McConnell will be out the day after crowing about the reckless irresponsibility of Democrats overseeing such excessive deficits and high national debt.

RIGOLO

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/thegarance/status/1151521510223466496?s=19

Who would have thought that a multiple-bankrupt would tank the economy?

Who would have though a Senator from Chicago would add $9 trillion to the US Debt and force his successor to pay off that debt when interest rates are much higher and with reduced Fed contributions to treasury.

Christy42

So are we still at the point were Republicans are supporting or aiding an openly racist president?

There was a lot of talk of AOC for some reason but less so of the completely racist president in the thread about said president.

Igotadose

RIGOLO wrote: »

Who would have though a Senator from Chicago would add $9 trillion to the US Debt and force his successor to pay off that debt when interest rates are much higher and with reduced Fed contributions to treasury.

Debt != Deficit. Hope that helps. They're related, of course. But, the deficit going to $1tn is no big, it's o.k. just print more money. After all, the taxpayer bailed out the GOP economy in 2008, the mis-managed Iraq war that was kept off the books, and the recession caused by GOP policy from 2000 - 2008.

pixelburp

Christy42 wrote: »

So are we still at the point were Republicans are supporting or aiding an openly racist president?

There was a lot of talk of AOC for some reason but less so of the completely racist president in the thread about said president.

Chris Cuomo of all people managed to trip up Kris Kobach last night, making the politician basically admit that if Trump openly called himself racist, Kobach would still support him. Can't stand Cuomo but he managed to make Kobach stumble into a blurted admission.

To be exact, Kobach said he wouldn't defend Trump if the President openly admitted to being racist, but vacillated and dissembled when challenged if he'd continue to support him as President. Lots of waffle about it "depending on who ran against [Trump]". It was a crystallised moment of partisanship at its fullest (though obviously previous instances such as Ron Moore or Ralph Northam, where party came before common sense, were evidence enough of that)

nw5iytvs0lf1uz

StringerBell wrote: »

Because of his cowardly actions.

Can u name of these cowardly actions
I know trump may be many things but cowardly is not one of them

Igotadose

RIGOLO wrote: »

Who would have though a Senator from Chicago would add $9 trillion to the US Debt and force his successor to pay off that debt when interest rates are much higher and with reduced Fed contributions to treasury.

Oh, and it was the duly elected President who signed off on the budgets the Congress created (remember, that *is* how it works). And from 2010 through 2016, this was a GOP Congress. Finally, his 'successor' elected by a minority of the citizens of the country, has only bloated the deficit, both with a tax cut that probably was unnecessary, and an enormous add to a defense department during peacetime. (Not like the defense department were exactly starving for resources, however.)

Oh, another note. Kudlow, the always-wrong ex-addict daytrader, stated in 2016 that the debt number itself doesn't matter, it's the debt to GDP ratio. Well, that's gone up, too. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-national-debt-tops-22-trillion-for-first-time-in-history/

But, I'm sure Trump'll fix all of this by.. .what, exactly? With a big fat tax cut, where's all that ballooning industry that's eating away at the debt and generating more tax revenue (I mean, after a big tax cut, you complained about lack of receipts hurting the ability to lower the debt. What did you expect?Lower taxes == lower tax revenue == slower to repay the debt).

RIGOLO

Igotadose wrote: »

Debt != Deficit. Hope that helps. They're related, of course. But, the deficit going to $1tn is no big, it's o.k. just print more money. After all, the taxpayer bailed out the GOP economy in 2008, the mis-managed Iraq war that was kept off the books, and the recession caused by GOP policy from 2000 - 2008.

Theres lots of debate on the causes of said recession, many theories and still many books and paerps been written on same, its interesting that you feel sure enough to know it all was caused by Bush between 2000 and 2008

The anti-Trumpers favourite 'Lolita Express' frequent flyer Bill Clinton can NO DOUBT take his share.

There is a significant case to be made that alot of the financial deregulation that led to the crash of 2008 was enacted in the GrammLeachBailey act of 1999 which allowed banks to diversify into securities and insurance.
The GLA act of 1999 also repealed many of the Glass Seagall Act of 1933 measures preventing the SEC from regulating this new multi-faceted banking organisations with cross contamination to the larger investment holding companies.
The GLA was signed into law by Billie boy .

Then we also have to consider the appointment of Andrew Cuomo as head of the HUD by Bill Clinton in 97, Cuomo held sway for a number of years and made many Fannie Mae Freddie Mac friendly decisions that led to 2008 recession. The HUD went on to push a massive housing initiative to give housing to lower income families, part of the CRA act , anyone wanna buy some sub-prime mortgages.

Once again the anti-Trumpers have issues with history and can only go so far back .

Igotadose

RIGOLO wrote: »

Theres lots of debate on the causes of said recession, many theories and still many books and paerps been written on same, its interesting that you feel sure enough to know it all was caused by Bush between 2000 and 2008

Much like how you know the deficit was fine in 2008 but terrible after that.

The anti-Trumpers favourite 'Lolita Express' frequent flyer Bill Clinton can NO DOUBT take his share.

There is a significant case to be made that alot of the financial deregulation that led to the crash of 2008 was enacted in the GrammLeachBailey act of 1999 which allowed banks to diversify into securities and insurance.
The GLA act of 1999 also repealed many of the Glass Seagall Act of 1933 measures preventing the SEC from regulating this new multi-faceted banking organisations with cross contamination to the larger investment holding companies.
The GLA was signed into law by Billie boy .

Then we also have to consider the appointment of Andrew Cuomo as head of the HUD by Bill Clinton in 97, Cuomo held sway for a number of years and made many Fannie Mae Freddie Mac friendly decisions that led to 2008 recession. The HUD went on to push a massive housing initiative to give housing to lower income families, part of the CRA act , anyone wanna buy some sub-prime mortgages.

Once again the anti-Trumpers have issues with history and can only go so far back .

And lest we forget, there was the Bush capital gains tax cut, a definite budget deficit bloater.

So, back to the question I've been asking you for some time: It's January 2009, economy teetering with a recent huge infusion of money to keep it from 'freezing up' per the secTreas.

What would you have done differently from 2009 to 2016 to get the GDP from negative and job losses from hundreds of thousands per month, to positive GDP growth, positive Dow/NASDAQ/etc. Austerity? Raise taxes? Let the banks fail? What?

StringerBell

Grant Shaggy Self-confidence wrote: »

Can u name of these cowardly actions
I know trump may be many things but cowardly is not one of them

Really?

Ok, how many would you like? We can start with these two

1. Faking medical condition to dodge the draft is pretty high on a list of cowardice?

2. Refusing to confront Putin and absolutely humiliating himself, his office and his country by not having the courage to confront the leader of the country responsible for interfering in the U.S. general election?

Trump is your stereotypical bully, a complete and total coward on the inside.

That he is also a narcissist just adds to it and means we get such classics as that time the guy who is scared of, wind, eagles, the rain, condoms and also seemingly contradictorily germs, claimed he would have run into the school in Parklands to confront the shooter - even if he didn't have a weapon.

everlast75

StringerBell wrote: »

Really?

Ok, how many would you like? We can start with these two

1. Faking medical condition to dodge the draft is pretty high on a list of cowardice?

2. Refusing to confront Putin and absolutely humiliating himself, his office and his country by not having the courage to confront the leader of the country responsible for interfering in the U.S. general election.

Trump is your stereotypical bully, a complete and total coward on the inside.

That he is also a narcissist just adds to it and means we get such classics as that time the guy who is scared of, wind, eagles, the rain, condoms and also seemingly contradictorily germs, claimed he would have run into the school in Parklands to confront the shooter - even if he didn't have a weapon.

Not being able to fire anybody in person, unless its in a script on a tv show