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 VI
Options
Comments
-
Markcheese wrote: »In a one sense he's kind of amazing, he's still managing to be the "opposition", you know the way when every disparit group vote to stick it to the man, we'll show the guberment type of thing, but he is the government
, he's racist, he's sexist, back the mega rich, not very patriotic, he's an adultuoua sleaze and yet the religious love him,he gets a blue collar vote, the patriots thínk he's fantastic, he gets a surprising female and Hispanic vote..
His main job seems to be tweeting fox and friends, pissing off americas friend, finding new staff to replace those that walk out, starting trade wars while giving more money to the rich..
And still years on blaming Obama.
He is the God of trolls and morons.0 -
If the Democrats en mass stopped responding to trump, didn't mention him or his actions, just ran on what they want to do, would it suck the air out of his campaign?
The media would have less to talk about trump,
other than him just being an asshole..Slava ukraini 🇺🇦
0 -
Markcheese wrote: »If the Democrats en mass stopped responding to trump, didn't mention him or his actions, just ran on what they want to do, would it suck the air out of his campaign?
The media would have less to talk about trump,
other than him just being an asshole..
They should certainly do that to KAK. Turn their back, pack up their stuff, walk off. She doesn't deserve better than that.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 34228
Markcheese wrote: »If the Democrats en mass stopped responding to trump, didn't mention him or his actions, just ran on what they want to do, would it suck the air out of his campaign?
The media would have less to talk about trump,
other than him just being an asshole..
Probably: sometimes I think the biggest problem with Democrats is that they're TERRIFIED of Trump. Not in the sense that he's some master strategist, 'cos he clearly isn't; but because he's so goddamn random, so verbally out of control and his base so hooked into the Cult of Personality, it's impossible to use the traditional Political Playbook to out manoeuvre him.
Take the racism angle, and his crowd shouting "Send her [Omar] back". Today? He just claimed he was trying to stop it. Not for the first time either, his tactic often amounts to "naw, didn't happen. Fake News", and nobody has the wherewithal to say or do anything, cos how do you respond to a childish mentality like that? Push back and Hannity or that ilk scream partisanship.
You can't win, with the net effect being that I think Nancy Pelosi is suffering from professional paralysis.0 -
Markcheese wrote: »If the Democrats en mass stopped responding to trump, didn't mention him or his actions, just ran on what they want to do, would it suck the air out of his campaign?
The media would have less to talk about trump,
other than him just being an asshole..
yep, they need to be very careful because basically the only thing that Trump is good at is being a master troll. The folks running for President would be better off ignoring him because responding to all the utter crap that he posts on Twitter is a full time job and also plays right into his hands. His base love the fact that they seem him as a troll against the system. The Dems need to stop feeding this or the same thing will happen as happened in 2016.0 -
Advertisement
-
yep, they need to be very careful because basically the only thing that Trump is good at is being a master troll. The folks running for President would be better off ignoring him because responding to all the utter crap that he posts on Twitter is a full time job and also plays right into his hands. His base love the fact that they seem him as a troll against the system. The Dems need to stop feeding this or the same thing will happen as happened in 2016.
Facts! Be prepared and have the facts.
That journalist who asked whether he had an issue with the chants should have been ready for his "i tried to stop it" or talk over it with a follow up - "Sir, you waited 13 seconds before talking again. You also tweeted after the event that it went really well and the crowd were great".
Facts are the only way0 -
Tbf, Warren is largely avoiding talking about Trumps tweets.
As far as I recall, at the first DNC debate Trump was hardly mentioned.
However, these tweets and the chant, were so disgraceful and racist that it would be a dereliction of duty for sitting politicians not to comment on them.0 -
everlast75 wrote: »Facts! Be prepared and have the facts.
That journalist who asked whether he had an issue with the chants should have been ready for his "i tried to stop it" or talk over it with a follow up - "Sir, you waited 13 seconds before talking again. You also tweeted after the event that it went really well and the crowd were great".
Facts are the only way
I honestly don't get why journalists don't confront him like this. They ask a question, he lies, and the majority of them just sit there and say nothing. Jim Acosta is about the only one that ever questions him.0 -
Because that's how the US media operates, and always has. It's mind numbing at the best of times, and reminds me of George Bush getting "grilled" by an Irish journalist a few years back (which amounts to, asked follow up questions).everlast75 wrote: »Facts! Be prepared and have the facts.
That journalist who asked whether he had an issue with the chants should have been ready for his "i tried to stop it" or talk over it with a follow up - "Sir, you waited 13 seconds before talking again. You also tweeted after the event that it went really well and the crowd were great".
Facts are the only way
I honestly don't get why journalists don't confront him like this. They ask a question, he lies, and the majority of them just sit there and say nothing. Jim Acosta is about the only one that ever questions him.
They're all chasing the soundbite which plays perfectly into his and his sycophants hands. What they should be doing is what the Dutch did to a
Trump ambassador there a few years ago - keep asking the question over and over and over and over, until they answer it with something that is not a direct lie.0 -
Markcheese wrote:If the Democrats en mass stopped responding to trump, didn't mention him or his actions, just ran on what they want to do, would it suck the air out of his campaign? The media would have less to talk about trump, other than him just being an asshole..
Ratings might suffer then.
The media's interest in Trump is largely because he's a celebrity president and is an interesting character.
Irish media seemingly can't have a news bulletin without a reference to Trump. All for ratings.0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 34228
I honestly don't get why journalists don't confront him like this. They ask a question, he lies, and the majority of them just sit there and say nothing. Jim Acosta is about the only one that ever questions him.
Simple. They then get their passes revoked, the outlets trashed by mouthpieces of the adminstration, then pretty soon all media conferences are attended by Breitbart or those attendees seen at Trumps "social media summit" the other (ah, remember "the other day"? Feels so long ago).
Plus, there's a tradition of deference to the position that likely prevents a certain rigour. They could absolutely ask more searching questions, but then remember when that RTÉ journo did just that to Bush, and the small firestorm it caused?0 -
Tbf, Warren is largely avoiding talking about Trumps tweets.
As far as I recall, at the first DNC debate Trump was hardly mentioned.
However, these tweets and the chant, were so disgraceful and racist that it would be a dereliction of duty for sitting politicians not to comment on them.
I think it's best to not comment directly on them as to do so is to have Trump control the narrative and allow him to engage you in a flame war. Respond by presenting deliverable policies that clearly articulate alternative visions of how America could be, if this pathetic creature is replaced by a real leader. Weave the alternative narrative in a professional and engaging manner and show him up for the ignoramus that he is.
It's a bit like this thread really. . If you engage with the trolls, u you get sidetracked into deflections, distractions and challenging deliberate lies. If you debate with intelligence and sound, pithy fact based messages, the trolls will be clearly shown up for what they are.0 -
But during the campaign he didn't have a plan to help these people other than some catchphrases. And what has he done? The tax cut was basically useless for them, only the ultra rich saw any significant help. Nothing on healthcare. At least Warren and Bernie, though flawed, have plans on how to help them. But you know they're socialists and un-American :rolleyes:That's quite disrespectful to about 75 million people.
It's much easier for both sides to see the other as stupid and blind to reality. The truth is that you should walk in their shoes a bit.
This is a pretty interesting old lecture by Elizabeth Warren
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A
Forget party affiliation and current political sides but she statistically lays out how that in the last couple of decades, the traditional middle class have seen the cost of essentials (home, childcare, healthcare) skyrocket while their wages stagnate.
So they have no holidays, disposable income, safety net, helath provisions and are working weekend jobs for the privalege.
I actually dispise Trump. I think he's a really horrific human but if i was living in the constant stress of trying to survivie with my family from paycheck to paycheck and he said, he'd fix it? And it was a binary choice between him a continued policy of globalisation that had utterly failed me and my family?
Michael Moore called it right in that a lot of people voted for Trump as a hand grenade. Roll it into Washington and watch it go off.
You shouldn't assume that they're all stupid and gullible.
He's only good for stirring up shyt.0 -
Tbf, Warren is largely avoiding talking about Trumps tweets.
As far as I recall, at the first DNC debate Trump was hardly mentioned.
However, these tweets and the chant, were so disgraceful and racist that it would be a dereliction of duty for sitting politicians not to comment on them.
I think ignoring him as much as possible until the gen election is their best policy at the moment. Let him fight it out with "The Squad", don't get involved and allow Trump to drag them into his BS.0 -
I agree with you, and I think midlife might too. But they had been f*cked over by both sides, for decades. Rust belters in 2016, I can understand voting for Trump. It's not like the religious right hypocrites (funny enough, a movement that inky really gained traction in the years after the civil rights movement, typically by those on the no-longer-acceptable anti civil rights side).
But during the campaign he didn't have a plan to help these people other than some catchphrases. And what has he done? The tax cut was basically useless for them, only the ultra rich saw any significant help. Nothing on healthcare. At least Warren and Bernie, though flawed, have plans on how to help them. But you know they're socialists and un-American :rolleyes:That's quite disrespectful to about 75 million people.
It's much easier for both sides to see the other as stupid and blind to reality. The truth is that you should walk in their shoes a bit.
This is a pretty interesting old lecture by Elizabeth Warren
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A
Forget party affiliation and current political sides but she statistically lays out how that in the last couple of decades, the traditional middle class have seen the cost of essentials (home, childcare, healthcare) skyrocket while their wages stagnate.
So they have no holidays, disposable income, safety net, helath provisions and are working weekend jobs for the privalege.
I actually dispise Trump. I think he's a really horrific human but if i was living in the constant stress of trying to survivie with my family from paycheck to paycheck and he said, he'd fix it? And it was a binary choice between him a continued policy of globalisation that had utterly failed me and my family?
Michael Moore called it right in that a lot of people voted for Trump as a hand grenade. Roll it into Washington and watch it go off.
You shouldn't assume that they're all stupid and gullible.
He's only good for stirring up shyt.
Though those of them still standing by him as he screws them just as bad if not worse than those before him... They're a lost cause, and every bit as bad.0 -
But during the campaign he didn't have a plan to help these people other than some catchphrases. And what has he done? The tax cut was basically useless for them, only the ultra rich saw any significant help. Nothing on healthcare. At least Warren and Bernie, though flawed, have plans on how to help them. But you know they're socialists and un-American :rolleyes:
He's only good for stirring up shyt.
Yeah, this is Trump's problem now.
Taking on Hillary and Obama with no track record was easy for him. This can be turned around so easily. Anyone who's well propared can link him to so many broken promises in a debate that he's in real trouble.
Check out the following from one of his debates with Clinton and this of someone tackling Trump about cosying up to wall street despite his promises, the national debt despite his promises and things like repeal and replace and the whole infrastructure thing.
Trump: But in all fairness to Secretary Clinton, when she started talking about this, it was really very recently. She's been doing this for 30 years. And why hasn't she made the agreements better? The NAFTA agreement is defective. Just because of the tax and many other reasons, but just because of the fact...
HOLT: Let me interrupt just a moment, but...
TRUMP: Secretary Clinton and others, politicians, should have been doing this for years, not right now, because of the fact that we've created a movement. They should have been doing this for years. What's happened to our jobs and our country and our economy generally is -- look, we owe $20 trillion. We cannot do it any longer, Lester. HOLT: Back to the question, though. How do you bring back -- specifically bring back jobs, American manufacturers? How do you make them bring the jobs back?
TRUMP: Well, the first thing you do is don't let the jobs leave. The companies are leaving. I could name, I mean, there are thousands of them. They're leaving, and they're leaving in bigger numbers than ever.
And what you do is you say, fine, you want to go to Mexico or some other country, good luck. We wish you a lot of luck. But if you think you're going to make your air conditioners or your cars or your cookies or whatever you make and bring them into our country without a tax, you're wrong.
And once you say you're going to have to tax them coming in, and our politicians never do this, because they have special interests and the special interests want those companies to leave, because in many cases, they own the companies. So what I'm saying is, we can stop them from leaving. We have to stop them from leaving. And that's a big, big factor.
HOLT: Let me let Secretary Clinton get in here.
CLINTON: Well, let's stop for a second and remember where we were eight years ago. We had the worst financial crisis, the Great Recession, the worst since the 1930s. That was in large part because of tax policies that slashed taxes on the wealthy, failed to invest in the middle class, took their eyes off of Wall Street, and created a perfect storm.
In fact, Donald was one of the people who rooted for the housing crisis. He said, back in 2006, "Gee, I hope it does collapse, because then I can go in and buy some and make some money." Well, it did collapse.
TRUMP: That's called business, by the way.
CLINTON: Nine million people -- nine million people lost their jobs. Five million people lost their homes. And $13 trillion in family wealth was wiped out.
Now, we have come back from that abyss. And it has not been easy. So we're now on the precipice of having a potentially much better economy, but the last thing we need to do is to go back to the policies that failed us in the first place.
Independent experts have looked at what I've proposed and looked at what Donald's proposed, and basically they've said this, that if his tax plan, which would blow up the debt by over $5 trillion and would in some instances disadvantage middle-class families compared to the wealthy, were to go into effect, we would lose 3.5 million jobs and maybe have another recession.
They've looked at my plans and they've said, OK, if we can do this, and I intend to get it done, we will have 10 million more new jobs, because we will be making investments where we can grow the economy. Take clean energy. Some country is going to be the clean- energy superpower of the 21st century. Donald thinks that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese. I think it's real.
TRUMP: I did not. I did not. I do not say that.
CLINTON: I think science is real.
TRUMP: I do not say that.
CLINTON: And I think it's important that we grip this and deal with it, both at home and abroad. And here's what we can do. We can deploy a half a billion more solar panels. We can have enough clean energy to power every home. We can build a new modern electric grid. That's a lot of jobs; that's a lot of new economic activity.
So I've tried to be very specific about what we can and should do, and I am determined that we're going to get the economy really moving again, building on the progress we've made over the last eight years, but never going back to what got us in trouble in the first place.
HOLT: Mr. Trump?
TRUMP: She talks about solar panels. We invested in a solar company, our country. That was a disaster. They lost plenty of money on that one.
Now, look, I'm a great believer in all forms of energy, but we're putting a lot of people out of work. Our energy policies are a disaster. Our country is losing so much in terms of energy, in terms of paying off our debt. You can't do what you're looking to do with $20 trillion in debt.
The Obama administration, from the time they've come in, is over 230 years' worth of debt, and he's topped it. He's doubled it in a course of almost eight years, seven-and-a-half years, to be semi- exact.
So I will tell you this. We have to do a much better job at keeping our jobs. And we have to do a much better job at giving companies incentives to build new companies or to expand, because they're not doing it.
And all you have to do is look at Michigan and look at Ohio and look at all of these places where so many of their jobs and their companies are just leaving, they're gone.
And, Hillary, I'd just ask you this. You've been doing this for 30 years. Why are you just thinking about these solutions right now? For 30 years, you've been doing it, and now you're just starting to think of solutions.
CLINTON: Well, actually...
TRUMP: I will bring -- excuse me. I will bring back jobs. You can't bring back jobs.
CLINTON: Well, actually, I have thought about this quite a bit.
TRUMP: Yeah, for 30 years.
CLINTON: And I have -- well, not quite that long. I think my husband did a pretty good job in the 1990s. I think a lot about what worked and how we can make it work again...
TRUMP: Well, he approved NAFTA...
(CROSSTALK)
CLINTON: ... million new jobs, a balanced budget...
TRUMP: He approved NAFTA, which is the single worst trade deal ever approved in this country.
CLINTON: Incomes went up for everybody. Manufacturing jobs went up also in the 1990s, if we're actually going to look at the facts.
When I was in the Senate, I had a number of trade deals that came before me, and I held them all to the same test. Will they create jobs in America? Will they raise incomes in America? And are they good for our national security? Some of them I voted for. The biggest one, a multinational one known as CAFTA, I voted against. And because I hold the same standards as I look at all of these trade deals.
But let's not assume that trade is the only challenge we have in the economy. I think it is a part of it, and I've said what I'm going to do. I'm going to have a special prosecutor. We're going to enforce the trade deals we have, and we're going to hold people accountable.
When I was secretary of state, we actually increased American exports globally 30 percent. We increased them to China 50 percent. So I know how to really work to get new jobs and to get exports that helped to create more new jobs.
HOLT: Very quickly...
TRUMP: But you haven't done it in 30 years or 26 years or any number you want to...
CLINTON: Well, I've been a senator, Donald...
TRUMP: You haven't done it. You haven't done it.
CLINTON: And I have been a secretary of state...
TRUMP: Excuse me.
CLINTON: And I have done a lot...
TRUMP: Your husband signed NAFTA, which was one of the worst things that ever happened to the manufacturing industry.
CLINTON: Well, that's your opinion. That is your opinion.
TRUMP: You go to New England, you go to Ohio, Pennsylvania, you go anywhere you want, Secretary Clinton, and you will see devastation where manufacture is down 30, 40, sometimes 50 percent. NAFTA is the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere, but certainly ever signed in this country.
And now you want to approve Trans-Pacific Partnership. You were totally in favor of it. Then you heard what I was saying, how bad it is, and you said, I can't win that debate. But you know that if you did win, you would approve that, and that will be almost as bad as NAFTA. Nothing will ever top NAFTA.
CLINTON: Well, that is just not accurate. I was against it once it was finally negotiated and the terms were laid out. I wrote about that in...
TRUMP: You called it the gold standard.
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: You called it the gold standard of trade deals. You said it's the finest deal you've ever seen.
CLINTON: No.
TRUMP: And then you heard what I said about it, and all of a sudden you were against it.
CLINTON: Well, Donald, I know you live in your own reality, but that is not the facts. The facts are -- I did say I hoped it would be a good deal, but when it was negotiated...
TRUMP: Not.
CLINTON: ... which I was not responsible for, I concluded it wasn't. I wrote about that in my book...
TRUMP: So is it President Obama's fault?
CLINTON: ... before you even announced.
TRUMP: Is it President Obama's fault?
CLINTON: Look, there are differences...
TRUMP: Secretary, is it President Obama's fault?
CLINTON: There are...
TRUMP: Because he's pushing it.
CLINTON: There are different views about what's good for our country, our economy, and our leadership in the world. And I think it's important to look at what we need to do to get the economy going again. That's why I said new jobs with rising incomes, investments, not in more tax cuts that would add $5 trillion to the debt.
TRUMP: But you have no plan.
CLINTON: But in -- oh, but I do.
TRUMP: Secretary, you have no plan.0 -
Very strange, I would almost vote for Trump based on that exchange. Hilary got it very wrong at times and underestimated the level of debate by a fair bit. I would hope that that unknown quantity or level of discourse would be built in to any future debates.0
-
The current Democrats runners have zero chance of beating trump.
There Is 1 person I think who could beat him and I honestly mean this, Nancy Pelosi
She is well known is a tough cookie and is not a socialist
And she seems to rattle trump
She should have took a chance and went for it0 -
Cumming's House Oversight Committee has written to SDNY and asked for all evidence relating to the Cohen/Trump hush money case to be delivered to his committee by 2nd August. The letter also seeks information on whether any efforts were made by anyone to shut down or interfere with SDNY's work, and whether the DoJ advice on non prosecution of a sitting President played any role.
It's interesting that he's bypassed Barr and the DoJ and gone directly to SDNY.0 -
TomOnBoard wrote: »Cumming's House Oversight Committee has written to SDNY and asked for all evidence relating to the Cohen/Trump hush money case to be delivered to his committee by 2nd August. The letter also seeks information on whether any efforts were made by anyone to shut down or interfere with SDNY's work, and whether the DoJ advice on non prosecution of a sitting President played any role.
It's interesting that he's bypassed Barr and the DoJ and gone directly to SDNY.
The judge has released everything
If there had been undue influence the judge would have to been notified
He wasn’t case closed0 -
Advertisement
-
Grant Shaggy Self-confidence wrote: »The current Democrats runners have zero chance of beating trump.
There Is 1 person I think who could beat him and I honestly mean this, Nancy Pelosi
She is well known is a tough cookie and is not a socialist
And she seems to rattle trump
She should have took a chance and went for it
Given the fact he's currently harassing 4 junior senators, all indications are that he is rattled by pretty much anyone...0 -
Grant Shaggy Self-confidence wrote: »The current Democrats runners have zero chance of beating trump.
There Is 1 person I think who could beat him and I honestly mean this, Nancy Pelosi
She is well known is a tough cookie and is not a socialist
And she seems to rattle trump
She should have took a chance and went for it
Thats a damning indictment of the American people. Whatever excuses there are for the 2016 vote been a protest vote.
Anyone who can still vote for Trump in spite of his disgusting behaviour is quite frankly a deplorable.
He may well get in but I will despair for the decent Americans.0 -
Grant Shaggy Self-confidence wrote: »The judge has released everything
If there had been undue influence the judge would have to been notified
He wasn’t case closed
I reckon that the SDNY may have to provide a more helpful response to Rep. Cummings' 12-page letter than your 3-liner!!! It's not unusual that you have formed a cast-iron opinion on how the Committe should be answered without knowing any of the underlying facts...0 -
In other news....
2 tankers (one British flagged) reported to have been seized by Iran earlier today, and follows earlier reports of US warships shooting down an Iranian drone. That will only increase tensions in the Gulf. Things getting very hot there now...0 -
-
Thats a damning indictment of the American people. Whatever excuses there are for the 2016 vote been a protest vote.
Anyone who can still vote for Trump in spite of his disgusting behaviour is quite frankly a deplorable.
He may well get in but I will despair for the decent Americans.
the vote is between trump and the democrat nominee.
all the current democrat runners will go so left to win they will have no chance against trump.
many americans in Wisconsin, ohio, michigan and other near states hate socialism.
can you imagine warren and harris as a ticket trying to win those states.
warren who is an actual racist pretending to be part native american and harris a Californian liberal who goes on about Reparations for slavery.
not a hope0 -
Grant Shaggy Self-confidence wrote: »The current Democrats runners have zero chance of beating trump.
There Is 1 person I think who could beat him and I honestly mean this, Nancy Pelosi
She is well known is a tough cookie and is not a socialist
And she seems to rattle trump
She should have took a chance and went for it
2018 Midterms show a different dynamic than that of 2016. I think a strong candidate like Harris wipes the floor with Trump and leads a long-term takeover of all 3 branches of the USG by tge Democratic party. The bulk of the US electorate is fed up with The Apprentice:WH edition and the economic story isn't enough.0 -
Very strange, I would almost vote for Trump based on that exchange. Hilary got it very wrong at times and underestimated the level of debate by a fair bit. I would hope that that unknown quantity or level of discourse would be built in to any future debates.
What is also interesting in that exchange is how coherent Trump was, compared to now. I think if the same, or similar, format of debate is held for the 2020 election run in, a comparison between the two discourses would be very interesting.0 -
2018 Midterms show a different dynamic than that of 2016. I think a strong candidate like Harris wipes the floor with Trump and leads a long-term takeover of all 3 branches of the USG by tge Democratic party. The bulk of the US electorate is fed up with The Apprentice:WH edition and the economic story isn't enough.
kamala harris would be too controversial
she has put many black americans in jail
And she is not a "black american". she did not come from slavery.
but the biggest issue facing her is her family lineage. if it is true, which is likely, one side of her family were actual slave owners from Jamaica then how would she recover.0 -
Advertisement
-
Grant Shaggy Self-confidence wrote: »kamala harris would be too controversial
she has put many black americans in jail
And she is not a "black american". she did not come from slavery.
but the biggest issue facing her is her family lineage. if it is true, which is likely, one side of her family were actual slave owners from Jamaica then how would she recover.
If its true?
Is that a direct copy and paste from trump's playbook?
Obama's birth cert. A dem marrying her brother. Dem descending from slave owners?
All "if true"?
Are we allowed post stuff like that?
Because there are some fairly disgusting and far more substantiated rumours about Trump which I could mention.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement