Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

banie01

duploelabs wrote: »

Remember when presidents used to grieve when their citizens died???

He is a Narcissistic monster.
Remember when the US had an aversion to mass casualties in War?
When Presidents and administrations would do all they could to ensure the body count at least on their side, was low?

Compare that to the "War-time" performance by Don!
The US deaths total from Covid-19 will today exceed 33k !

Putting it at number 6 in the US "War" death tolls to date, and that number hit inside 3 months.

Maybe if a body bag for every American lost was lain on Pennsylvania avenue, Don might stop with the advertising call outs?
And the "committees" of smart people?

Leroy42

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I believe that this week will be seen as the week that finally destroyed Trump's 2020 chances. And, as always, it will have resulted from an entirely self-inflicted injury. Riding on the hubris from his perceived high ratings for his shambolic White House propaganda sessions, he finally got eviscerated and, horror of horrors, by a woman.

Paula Reid from CBS simply destroyed his BS and propaganda by asking simple questions about what he did in the month of February. And he couldn't answer any of those simple questions, and his obvious waffle and BS failed him completely. His only answer was an outright attack on Paula, like he regularly does to female reporters. In Paula, he was totally outclassed, and her questioning was exemplary.

Now, THAT'S the manner in which the White House Press Corps need to handle Trump! And I can see that exchange running and running over the next few months.

You would think that would be the case, but Trump recognised that and changed the narrative. Instead of everyone talking about his lack of action in February yesterday was spent talking about WHO and now it going to be about economy reopening.

The change to Rose Garden is part of it. It is such an obvious, and oft repeated, trick that it is depressing how easily it continues to work.

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

You would think that would be the case, but Trump recognised that and changed the narrative. Instead of everyone talking about his lack of action in February yesterday was spent talking about WHO and now it going to be about economy reopening.

The change to Rose Garden is part of it. It is such an obvious, and oft repeated, trick that it is depressing how easily it continues to work.

It is up to the reporters, journalists and news stations therefore to stay on target.

Consistent and proper questioning is the key, and at long last, I think the reporters are getting there.

I've noticed with Trump that when he attacks a reporter, that approach worked for a while. Now, they expect it and it doesn't phase them.

Tuesday, he threatened to walk off if a reporter stopped asking him a question. That worked - the reporter shut up. Next time, it shouldn't work - the reporter should say "okay, walk off. That's your decision" and continue. If Trump storms off it would look terrible.

What I am saying is, there is a novelty to what Trump does and that wears off, and is wearing off now.

Penn

Leroy42 wrote: »

You would think that would be the case, but Trump recognised that and changed the narrative. Instead of everyone talking about his lack of action in February yesterday was spent talking about WHO and now it going to be about economy reopening.

The change to Rose Garden is part of it. It is such an obvious, and oft repeated, trick that it is depressing how easily it continues to work.

I think his threat to adjourn the House is just another empty threat, and a tactic to distract. He knows he can't and it'd be political suicide (and unlikely that Mitch McConnell would help facilitate it). But it's the threat that matters. He threatens to do it, says he doesn't want to but will if he has to, then says he won't because he wants to be fair and work with the Dems.

It takes the headlines for a few days, then it doesn't matter. Distract & Deflect.

From what I've read elsewhere, the section of the Constitution states:

...he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper...

However, there is no Case of Disagreement between them with respect to the Time of Adjournment, because that date has already been agreed; 3rd January 2021. So it's very unlikely he can do it at all in this cycle.

aloyisious

Penn wrote: »

I think his threat to adjourn the House is just another empty threat, and a tactic to distract. He knows he can't and it'd be political suicide (and unlikely that Mitch McConnell would help facilitate it). But it's the threat that matters. He threatens to do it, says he doesn't want to but will if he has to, then says he won't because he wants to be fair and work with the Dems.

It takes the headlines for a few days, then it doesn't matter. Distract & Deflect.

From what I've read elsewhere, the section of the Constitution states:


However, there is no Case of Disagreement between them with respect to the Time of Adjournment, because that date has already been agreed; 3rd January 2021. So it's very unlikely he can do it at all in this cycle.

According to NYT [in a firewalled article] Mitch McConnell shot down Don's suggestion. One thing it'll do is force the Senate to set up a procedure where by it can sit by means of teleconference in order to vote, if not debate, on matters of vital importance or peril to the U.S and itself.

As much as I hope the final straw comes along soon I fear many are viewing all this rubbish he spouts and his awful behaviour through the wrong prism.
I posted this quote somewhere on boards a good while back and it still holds:

Because you need me, Springfield. Your guilty conscience may move you to vote Democratic, but deep down you long for a cold-hearted Republican to lower taxes, brutalize criminals, and rule you like a king. That's why I did this, to save you from yourselves. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a city to run.

The election is about 7 months away. Trump's base will not desert him. After that he only needs a small proportion of "independents" and/or the Democrat turnout not to increase. If the economy is rebounding by the time of the election, which is certainly possible, that could easily give him the few dozen thousand votes in a handful of states which would carry him over the line. If Biden gaffes a bit more or his health fails or bots hit on a message that resonates it could carry him over the line. He's still favorite at the bookies to win. No matter what happens with this pandemic he's in with a good shout.

Midlife

Deleted User wrote: »

As much as I hope the final straw comes along soon I fear many are viewing all this rubbish he spouts and his awful behaviour through the wrong prism.
I posted this quote somewhere on boards a good while back and it still holds:


The election is about 7 months away. Trump's base will not desert him. After that he only needs a small proportion of "independents" and/or the Democrat turnout not to increase. If the economy is rebounding by the time of the election, which is certainly possible, that could easily give him the few dozen thousand votes in a handful of states which would carry him over the line. If Biden gaffes a bit more or his health fails or bots hit on a message that resonates it could carry him over the line. He's still favorite at the bookies to win. No matter what happens with this pandemic he's in with a good shout.

Economies aren't that quick. The impending poverty will only be hitting home with a lot of people in autumn.

Penn

Midlife wrote: »

Economies aren't that quick. The impending poverty will only be hitting home with a lot of people in autumn.

And unfortunately it's still likely there'll be a second wave of the virus later in the year, particularly if people start getting complacent, going on summer holidays etc. Not to mention the likelihood of political rallies starting up again as the election gets closer.

pixelburp

If Biden takes the Presidency, it's entirely possible likely his tenure will be marked by colossal poverty and a crippled economy on a par with the Great Depression. So the cynic in me already sees the writing on the wall here: the GOP immediately falling back into the "tax and spend" attack pattern on a Democrat administration, any negative economic impact or policies put in the lap of Biden, rather than the President / party at the helm during the creation of the crisis. McConnell & co. will adopt the "Trump who?" defence; while there's no way in hell they'll change their tune re. Medicare - or even a modern New Deal - and so it'll be the ACA all over again.

I honestly don't believe a single thing will be learned from this crisis - not over there anyway.

StringerBell

Mental Mickey wrote: »

He's single-handedly taking the country down the toilet with him.

Unfortunately it's not single handed which speaks to deeper problems than just him.

Leroy42

StringerBell wrote: »

Unfortunately it's not single handed which speaks to deeper problems than just him.

100%. He is being very actively supported by the GOP, with particular mentions to Pence and McConnell, and also by a very large portion of the media, led by Fox News.

The likes of KAC, Sarah Sanders are also leading lights in the drive to make Trump acceptable.

There are of course lots more.

Midlife

Midlife wrote: »

Economies aren't that quick. The impending poverty will only be hitting home with a lot of people in autumn.

But it's about perception. The crash has come hard. Progress (5% reduction in unemployment e.g.) will be pointed at. It only takes a small proportion of people to think things are turning around to get Trump over the line again.

StringerBell

I think people genuinely underestimate how perfect a storm 2016 was. It is going to take a lot more for Trump to win in 2020, yes he is in a stronger position as the incumbent and he has no morals but it was razor thin last time against Clinton, he has not grown his support one little but and yes it will still be a close one but he has a lot of work to do imo to save his bid for a second term.

Quin_Dub

StringerBell wrote: »

I think people genuinely underestimate how perfect a storm 2016 was. It is going to take a lot more for Trump to win in 2020, yes he is in a stronger position as the incumbent and he has no morals but it was razor thin last time against Clinton, he has not grown his support one little but and yes it will still be a close one but he has a lot of work to do imo to save his bid for a second term.

This is the critical part - There is absolutely no one that did not Vote for Trump in 2016 that will vote for him this time around (cue someone producing some interview with a "I voted for Hilary but I'll vote for Trump now" person)

His total percentage of the vote will be at the absolute best the same as it was in 2016 and realistically it will be lower given everything that has happened and will happen over the next 6 months in terms of the economy etc.

I fully expect Biden to greatly exceed the popular vote margin from 2016

He's underwater in all of the swing states that got him over the line the last time and some by a fair margin.

If Trump wins , it will have far more to do with Voter suppression and gerrymandering than popularity. Hence the absolute terror amongst the GOP about mail in voting.

PropJoe10

StringerBell wrote: »

I think people genuinely underestimate how perfect a storm 2016 was. It is going to take a lot more for Trump to win in 2020, yes he is in a stronger position as the incumbent and he has no morals but it was razor thin last time against Clinton, he has not grown his support one little but and yes it will still be a close one but he has a lot of work to do imo to save his bid for a second term.

I sincerely hope you are right, but there's also the element of the US population that will prefer to "stick with the devil you know" than vote for another potentially weak candidate. I do not view Biden as being a strong candidate at all.

On the flip side, I think that Hillary Clinton could never attract the casual voters that Biden may attract. The Clinton's are generally distrusted in certain parts of the States. Plus, Sanders has swung in behind Biden very early this time. If he can persuade the majority of his voters to vote for Biden, it may be enough. Clinton didn't attract the Bernie voter at all really. It could make a crucial difference.

Either way, Trump must be defeated. He is incredibly damaging.

StringerBell

The entire party is united behind Biden, he got all the endorsements pretty quickly and I take my hat off to Bernie for that this time around. With his endorsement, Warren's and all the other major candidates as well as the funding from the likes of Bloomberg I think Biden as a candidate is in good shape. Is he the guy I'd have run? Nope, but he is certainly a better candidate than Hilary who Trump only squeaked past.

Trump inflicts his own wounds time and time again and though his base don't care and it won't affect his support from them, **** them pretty much, they are not the ones who matter in any election. Neither parties core vote do, its that middle ground that decide elections (dirty handed tricks not withstanding) and there is no way in hell I can imagine a possibility where Trump appeals to more of them than Biden. Even if you think Biden is a poor choice you surely figure he will listen to people around him, actually put people around him who are not family members or just woefully unqualified for the positions they hold and that he will be a run of the mill Democrat. I think that is probably going to appeal to a lot of middle America this election.

Its a black or white choice, the protest vote will be left in 2016 I am pretty confident. The stain needs to be removed, equally as important but not as easily attainable is removing Moscow Mitch from power in the Senate.

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

If Biden takes the Presidency, it's entirely possible likely his tenure will be marked by colossal poverty and a crippled economy on a par with the Great Depression. So the cynic in me already sees the writing on the wall here: the GOP immediately falling back into the "tax and spend" attack pattern on a Democrat administration, any negative economic impact or policies put in the lap of Biden, rather than the President / party at the helm during the creation of the crisis. McConnell & co. will adopt the "Trump who?" defence; while there's no way in hell they'll change their tune re. Medicare - or even a modern New Deal - and so it'll be the ACA all over again.

I honestly don't believe a single thing will be learned from this crisis - not over there anyway.

Yup. And we can expect the "But the debt, the debt" nonsense to start all over again.

Penn

Like Quin_Dub says, it's voter suppression and gerrymandering and other such tactics that will be key in this election. Biden will likely win the popular vote, and maybe more so than Hilary, who was a deeply unlikeable candidate, and worse accusations about sexual assault were being thrown at Bill during the last election than are being put up against Biden.

But it's the swing states, and voter suppression there that could end up making all the difference. The Dems need to start working right now to ensure people can vote, not just from within the political system to try and stop voter suppression, but helping to ensure voters are able to get voter ID, or valid IDs, or access to polling stations on the day etc. Prevent whatever tactics the GOP can come up with from having enough of an effect.

StringerBell

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yup. And we can expect the "But the debt, the debt" nonsense to start all over again.

It's the traditional cycle.

aloyisious

I see Wisconsin is one of the swing states. Given how Don and the state GOP people acted in ensuring the locals were denied access to voting through the post earlier this month, that has indicated how they intend to run their campaign this year. The attacks on Michigans [another swing state] Governor are presently just based on what Don has alleged is her mishandling of the response to Covid-19. I wouldn't be surprised if the local GOP faithful start a recall petition against her to hurt the Dems in that state.

The voters I/D cards are a here and now issue for the Dems to get sorted before officials start blocking applications nearer the date. They should be going over the local voting regulations regularly to keep an eye out for alterations helpful to the GOP.

At present, there is a bipartisan approach by two Governors groups to ensure the virus causes as little harm to their state citizens. I cant see Don and GOP central being too happy with the group-work but won't risk doing more harm to themselves by attacking the groups now, they'll wait till there's a definite slump in the virus before overtly attacking the group bipartisanship, trying to split the groups up into the GOP-preferred politics as usual way.

Is there any chance that Governor Cuomo can be invited to throw his hat into the ring for the V/P role nearer the date or will he stick to governing, and wait til another year for the bigger job in the US? It's obvious he'll be very good for rousing the Dems in the NY area states come Nov.

https://www.marieclaire.com/politics/a31142244/swing-states-2020-election/ This link [Hearst] has a an accept the cookies requirement to access it

Quin_Dub

Deleted User wrote: »

Yup. And we can expect the "But the debt, the debt" nonsense to start all over again.

StringerBell wrote: »

It's the traditional cycle.

It's called "The Two Santa Claus theory"

PyreOfHellfire

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It's called "The Two Santa Claus theory"

Written by Thom Hartmann. One of America's best and most underrated journalists.

StringerBell

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It's called "The Two Santa Claus theory"

Oh I'm a big believer of it and would mention it frequently I'm sure. That's what I mean by its the traditional cycle, it's just the way things have happened since I can remember anyway

StringerBell

Oh without a shadow of a doubt trump has laid out a blueprint now and has already weakened certain pillars of democracy.

It was commented on years ago at this stage, it's not so much him. It's what someone with a brain and some political savvy could do by copying some of his work.

Quin_Dub

StringerBell wrote: »

Oh without a shadow of a doubt trump has laid out a blueprint now and has already weakened certain pillars of democracy.

It was commented on years ago at this stage, it's not so much him. It's what someone with a brain and some political savvy could do by copying some of his work.

No doubt - Trump has shown that the fabled "checks and balances" don't actually work in the face of someone who just says No and refuses to act honourably.

They were created in a time when honour and personal responsibilities were very different things. Another reason why the Conservative refusal to treat the Constitution as a living document is fundamentally flawed.

Now that Trump has proved that they are essentially worthless , who knows what some future President or Senate/House leader will brazen their way through.

PropJoe10

Sonics2k wrote: »

No, that's enough.

You flip flop back and forth with a disgusting consistency. The main has quite literally claimed it was a hoax, "would disappear like a miracle", "Just a flu" and a crap tonne more.

You are a liar. An absolute liar and it's disgusting to see.

Thank you, on behalf of every sane person that's contributed to this thread.

aloyisious

Quin_Dub wrote: »

No doubt - Trump has shown that the fabled "checks and balances" don't actually work in the face of someone who just says No and refuses to act honourably.

They were created in a time when honour and personal responsibilities were very different things. Another reason why the Conservative refusal to treat the Constitution as a living document is fundamentally flawed.

Now that Trump has proved that they are essentially worthless , who knows what some future President or Senate/House leader will brazen their way through.

That's the fear, that some-one like Trump could come from the Dem ranks, now that he's exploded the myth of how the constitution rules controlled how the game is played. I'd hope that both parties have learned the lesson Don has taught them but that'll have to wait until the new year after the election and swearing-in of POTUS. If they have learned it, they may see it's necessary to change the game back to when decency was the norm and Trump-ism didn't control it, that bipartisanship is the key to excluding some-one like him from public office. Maybe there'd be a need for psychological checking to be done on future candidates, same way it's needed for lesser sections of Govt service.

Water John

Remember bipartisan was largely stopped by the GOP even when Bill Clinton was POTUS. Has only gone one way, worse since.
It's sad as we see some of the Gop Governers are excellent in this emergency.

eire4

Penn wrote: »

Like Quin_Dub says, it's voter suppression and gerrymandering and other such tactics that will be key in this election. Biden will likely win the popular vote, and maybe more so than Hilary, who was a deeply unlikeable candidate, and worse accusations about sexual assault were being thrown at Bill during the last election than are being put up against Biden.

But it's the swing states, and voter suppression there that could end up making all the difference. The Dems need to start working right now to ensure people can vote, not just from within the political system to try and stop voter suppression, but helping to ensure voters are able to get voter ID, or valid IDs, or access to polling stations on the day etc. Prevent whatever tactics the GOP can come up with from having enough of an effect.

I think your hitting the nail on the head there. I would be very surprised if Biden does not win the vote next November and I think by more then Clinton last time out but that does not guarantee he will be president due to the way the Americans let the electoral college decide the outcome and in that manner Republican efforts to suppress voting, purge voters off voter roles cut the number of polling stations etc will all be in play and at a level likely never seen before.

Itssoeasy

Water John wrote: »

Remember bipartisan was largely stopped by the GOP even when Bill Clinton was POTUS. Has only gone one way, worse since.
It's sad as we see some of the Gop Governers are excellent in this emergency.

Some have yes. But there is a portion of people in the USA don't tryst or believe science and protested Michigan and Kentucky. I hope we get back to something resembling normal around the world at some point but if these people want to not believe it's real well then evolution has got a bit of power lifting to do in America.