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

The US seems a like a great place to live if you have money. The plot of Breaking Bad would have been terrible in any other country. Walt would have got the healthcare he needed in episode one.

cilantro54

pixelburp wrote: »

America's too big to find a one-size-fits-all generalisation so don't presume anyone here's that kneejerk, but based on experiences across the nation, the frayed edges are visible enough. And its flaws in terms of what it might offer those choosing to move don't make it worth the risk. Again, speaking personally.

That's what I'm reacting against. There's evidence that some posters are that knee jerk. Ireland has its own issues we should be looking at instead of wasting time preening about how much better Irish society is. (Or indeed, defending the U.S. against idiotic viwpoints as I have been doing )

Agreed on the frayed edges. I know them well, but I wont tolerate generalizations about Americans, or Irish, or any other people. It's moronic.

Midlife

cilantro54 wrote: »

Christy42, I think a lot of people imagine they are doing politics when in fact they are merely doing aesthetics and following the herd. Obama got less stick for superficial reasons and because of widespread media support, despite the his drone wars and his fondness for interring people at the border.

Also, if you think the President represents the lives of ordinary Americans most of whom are not obsessed with politics and the point scoring that goes with it, then your view will be based on ignorance.. brought to you 2nd or 3rd hand by whatever cable news rubbish you (not you personally) fill your head with.

A perfect example of this is the headlines Trump got for stopping immigration yesterday. Shocking, appalling etc.

Macron stopped all international flights and transport to France from non-shengen areas.

It's kind of the same thing.

Leroy42

The very platform that Trump ran on, MAGA, seems to suggest that a huge amount of people in the US agree that the US has lost something that it previously had.

Remember Trump inauguration speech,

"Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities. Rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation. An education system flush with cash, but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of all knowledge. And the crime and the gangs and the drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential. This American carnage stops right here and stops right now."

So half of the voters think it is no longer great, the POTUS and the WH don't think it was great. And, as far as I know, the vast majority of them live there so I guess on those terms we need to take on board what they say.

Midlife

Midlife wrote: »

A perfect example of this is the headlines Trump got for stopping immigration yesterday. Shocking, appalling etc.

Macron stopped all international flights and transport to France from non-shengen areas.

It's kind of the same thing.

What were the headlines? From what I'm reading, it's all posturing from trump since nobody is emigrating to the US right now.

pixelburp

cilantro54 wrote: »

That's what I'm reacting against. There's evidence that some posters are that knee jerk. Ireland has its own issues we should be looking at instead of wasting time preening about how much better Irish society is. (Or indeed, defending the U.S. against idiotic viwpoints as I have been doing )

Agreed on the frayed edges. I know them well, but I wont tolerate generalizations about Americans, or Irish, or any other people. It's moronic.

You're putting words in people's mouths. There's no "preening" except to point out relativity in situations like healthcare where Ireland's socialised medicine or government drug schemes makes healthcare more affordable, with fewer people left behind. I won't throw out it being a "fact", but from a personal POV there's no doubt that we couldn't afford to live in America due to my partner's pre-existing condition. I know the cost of the drugs minus government intervention and we'd be ruined. That much is a fact anyway. You'd be doing well to find anyone on boards unaware of the flaws within the HSE too, so it's not a question of ours being better. Maybe only fairer. The HSE itself though is a mess and you'd want to be spectacularly naive to think otherwise.

This isn't about "Americans", only "America". If there's question marks of its people, it's in terms of demographics & there's plenty of stats and indicators about where MAGA or Trump support came from, and the likelihood of social or economic pressures influencing intellectual directions. 70 years of demonising socialism has meant there's a gap in terms of alternative directions. It's not without reason we're seeing these post Berlin Walll demographics making the most noise about socialism (Sanders notwithstanding)

Carfacemandog

cilantro54 wrote: »

Obama got less stick for superficial reasons and because of widespread media support, despite the his drone wars and his fondness for interring people at the border.

That's just not true though. Obama, amongst other things, got criticism for wearing a tan coloured suit, fist bumping (sorry, terrorist fist bumping) his wife after a speech, and killing a fly, eating rocket lettuce (called arugula in the US), and eating Dijon mustard.

Quin_Dub

Midlife wrote: »

A perfect example of this is the headlines Trump got for stopping immigration yesterday. Shocking, appalling etc.

Macron stopped all international flights and transport to France from non-shengen areas.

It's kind of the same thing.

But it's not the same thing at all.

One is a block on all travel by anyone for a short period of time to reduce the spread of a disease , the other is a block on Immigration , not Travel, to "Protect American Jobs" , people can still come and go to America as they please , they just can't emigrate there. Not sure what Trump latest "ban" has to do with reducing the spread of a virus.

They are very different actions taken for very different reasons..

The Nal

Also not clear how and even if Trump can do this. Hes just winging it on a daily basis. Thank God they have Biden to save them!

everlast75

The general consensus by the informed people is that the US should increase testing and maintain social distancing.

Trump is not advocating that.

There are Republican Governors following his lead who are intent on easing up restrictions pretty much immediately.

There needs to be a common approach. Having one state with eased restrictions and one that doesn't is like having a "peeing here only" section in the swimming pool.

cilantro54

Leroy42 wrote: »

So half of the voters think

Leaving aside the binary vortex in U.S. politics that forces people into camps they might not wish to be in, which weakens your presentation, the bit in bold is key.

CNN, 2016:

Voter turnout this year dipped to nearly its lowest point in two decades. While election officials are still tabulating ballots, the 126 million votes already counted means about 55% of voting age citizens cast ballots this year.

Just over over half of the electorate voted. How many of them were passionate about policy either way? How many engage in months of soul-searching? How many are just like Irish voters, voting on the basis of aesthetics, instinct and habit? Don't let the loudmouths on either side colour your view.

Most importantly, what about the rest of the population?

You may not see their views embodied in the figure of a single human being; i.e. the POTUS, but they have views and they live within the U.S. and are just as much a part of U.S. life as the politically passionate shills that dominate the airwaves.

(Disclaimer: probably not the right forum to express this view, but IMO, politics attracts people with pre-existing prejudices. A portion of the electorate in any nation may vote this way or that way, but how many people are actually members of political parties? And of those that are active in a party, what are they like, like? )

hetuzozaho

Apologies for the "have you been" question Meant in a light hearted way I swear!

It seems it's upset many! I won't reply to everyone and agree with lots of the opinions of people who have replied.

I was just responding to the "Who in their right mind would want to emigrate to the US these days?" as I just thought it was a bit extreme is all!

Anyway I imagine plenty of people do want to, and are also of sound mind

Leroy42

Hence why I said half the voters, not half the country!

I can only take it from their vote what they think. They voted from Trump. Maybe whilst holding their nose, maybe because of a lack of an alternative, but that is their responsibility. They ticked the Trump box. No one forced them to. If 100k in a few states had not done so it would be HC in office.

Carfacemandog

It also would appear that the astroturf efforts for the lockdown protests may run even deeper again.

For anyone who missed it, here is a post from reddit outlining the copy/paste nature of these supposedly 'organic' groups and how they were mysteriously registered st the same time, from the same place, outside of many of the states where these protests are happening - https://www.reddit.com/r/maryland/comments/g3niq3/comment/fnstpyl

Here is a lengthy twitter thread where someone went one deeper and decided to follow the money on it, with very interesting findings - https://mobile.twitter.com/File411/status/1251890463130497029

And here is anitber finding about the astroturfing efforts I stumbled upon today - https://www.reddit.com/r/MassMove/comments/g3toiz/comment/fnv8j69?context=3&depth=9

I have copied and pasted below but would recommend clicking on the post as it is filled with links to prove their points.

This isn't any conspiracy, it's just good old fashioned American business. There are indeed two campaigns:

One using OneClickPolitics:
PA, WI, OH, MN, IA - OCP's branding is displayed proudly all over these sites, just look at the source and the stunningly obvious "contact your legislator" custom site widget. Seems to use uniform CMS. Ohio is not an outlier - they just altered their CMS presentation.

EDIT: One Click Politics has scrubbed all their branding from the sites they were hired for and has started mixing up their CMS. Turns out there is such a thing as bad publicity.

One using UJOIN:
MD, NC, NJ - these were harder to ferret out, but they all use similar formats & different CMS They try to link directly to CHANGE.ORG, and up their "blog" when data can't be autofilled. These "blogs" cross link with one-another. These sites seem to have a hard time dealing with privacy extensions, unlike OneClickPolitics.

Unknown data collection/provenance:
OK (OCOPA is a real but intensely partisan think tank, the reopenok site is, however, very new and looks to be aping the other sites instead of relying any CMS), WA (this is a true enigma - if someone really wanted their sites to be "grassroots" looking they would all look like they were designed by script kiddies that time-traveled from 1998). Hilariously, whatever software they are using in WA links directly to this reddit post as part of their "truth news feed" - so it's not hand-curated.

I encourage you to read and examine the sites, mission statements, and services offered by One Click Politics, and UJOIN. They go out of their way to expound that they are masters at pretending to be grass-roots movements that can conjure up seemingly organic support at the drop of a check.

To quote OCP:

Are you launching a new coalition or association and need more members now? Want 10,000 signatures for your petition from residents of a certain state? Are you battling a legislative issue in a location where you don't have enough advocates, who are constituents of the legislators you are attempting to influence? Or would you like to impress your boss by reporting a 15% growth in membership in less than 90 days? If your answer is yes, keep reading!

OneClick Acquisition is your solution for generating immediate legislative actions from new supporters within mere days. We deliver “on demand, organic supporters” through our proprietary digital ad placement technology.

So again, not a conspiracy - but definitely astroturfing. The real question though, isn't who is doing this. It's can they be definitively financially linked to these two professional astroturfing firms?

(probably not)

Both firms tout their ability to cycle news stories, facebook posts, twitter rampages, and texting so as to appear "grassroots" and not seem as if they are disseminating copy-pasted material.

And yes, there are many, many more professional astroturfing firms out there, willing to take whatever check comes across their desk in order to influence public opinion and legislation.

I suggest that if any of you want to stick it to OCP and UJOIN, take screenshots of their bogus sites, so that they'll have to diversify their tactics in the future.

In conclusion, this isn't something necessarily coming from ESLEWHERE. It's a critical flaw in our political system. Private corporations can legally masquerade as normal citizens who are concerned about their "constitutional rights" being infringed upon by <fill in the blank> and you don't know who wrote the check

Here's the thing: people on both sides of the aisle are going to be screwed by these so-called protests. People are going to die if this takes hold. This isn't a right vs left thing. This is a normal people vs big-data-government-lobbyist thing. Even your racist uncle who may have gone to one of these protests may be hurt by this. It's not you (if you disagree with him) vs him, or you vs his political views. It's normal people vs THEM.

THEM isn't your governor, or your representative or senator. THEM is whoever hired these ghouls. Also these ghouls themselves.

Wash your hands, wear a facemask, and P.S.:

https://i.imgur.com/BBb1ngJ.jpg

EDIT: I would be remiss if I did not take the time before logging out to mention that the states targeted by OCP - pennsylvania, wisconson, iowa, minnesota, and ohio are presidential election swing states. Make of that what you will.

I also saw a different post that I can't find which pointed to a few sites pretending to be organic, grassroots types pushing these protests, that are absolutely identical to each other. Here are two of said sites that I found in my browser history, for what it's worth.

Have a click around the sub pages in here, you might notice a "few" similarities:

https://michiganconservativecoalition.com/
http://michigantrumprepublicans.com/

cilantro54

Leroy42 wrote: »

If 100k in a few states had not done so it would be HC in office.

And if the pseudo-leftists and liberals in the Democratic Party hadn't shafted Bernie, he would have won in 2016 because he would have picked up those votes, overall and electoral college, that Trump picked up.

Clinton was as vile as Trump... pure establishment, cackling over the brutal murder of gadaffi, destablising libya and central american countries... and don't forget that much of Trump's vote was a protest vote.

And don't underestimate the anti-war vote from 'left' and 'right' in the U.S. Sadly, every time an election comes around the candidates promise to stop being the global po-po and gain votes because of it. (It usually turns out to be a lie, of course, but that's another matter.)

But that's all ifs and maybes...

I'm no good at politics or political chatter and I've work to do, so I'll bow out of this thread for a bit. Not directed at you Leroy... just avoid generalizations about Americans lest youse end up sounding like provincial rednecks.

aloyisious

everlast75 wrote: »

The general consensus by the informed people is that the US should increase testing and maintain social distancing.

Trump is not advocating that.

There are Republican Governors following his lead who are intent on easing up restrictions pretty much immediately.

There needs to be a common approach. Having one state with eased restrictions and one that doesn't is like having a "peeing here only" section in the swimming pool.

It seems that the Official GOP line, as promoted by Don & his crew, is that the herd [ride it out] mentality is the best way to kill off the virus. If you're medically weakened due to "underlying factors" then you're expendable and collateral damage. It's like their mindset is: [without shouting it out] why waste time giving people part 1 of the testing regime [taking samples] when part 2 the reagent needed to certify the person is a carrier is not available? And they are sick anyway, without their own medical insurance cover to fund their own healthcare, into the bargain.

That's what Don's attitude reads to me; give the public the optics that he's helping them out of the crisis they are in while in reality, He's obstructing the necessary flow of expertise and cash needed to kill off the virus, choosing instead the herd mentality "if you don't cut the mustard, you're out" route where the U.S population is concerned. He's OK, he [and his extended family] has two medical insurance options that most U.S citizens don't have, Govt and Private Health cover.

hetuzozaho

The President of the United States is up early this Tuesday morning, a great leader to his people with wise words to start the day during these troubling times:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1252552057170649088

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1252547765332324352

It's got a little "I am so smart, S.M.R.T." vibe off it all.

Leroy42

cilantro54 wrote: »

And if the pseudo-leftists and liberals in the Democratic Party hadn't shafted Bernie, he would have won in 2016 because he would have picked up those votes, overall and electoral college, that Trump picked up.

Clinton was as vile as Trump... pure establishment, cackling over the brutal murder of gadaffi, destablising libya and central american countries... and don't forget that much of Trump's vote was a protest vote.

And don't underestimate the anti-war vote from 'left' and 'right' in the U.S. Sadly, every time an election comes around the candidates promise to stop being the global po-po and gain votes because of it. (It usually turns out to be a lie, of course, but that's another matter.)

But that's all ifs and maybes...

I'm no good at politics or political chatter and I've work to do, so I'll bow out of this thread for a bit. Not directed at you Leroy... just avoid generalizations about Americans lest youse end up sounding like provincial rednecks.

Bernie wasn't shafted, he didn't win enough votes. He isn't even a member of their party yet was surprised when that party wanted a life long member to represent them.

Bernie had another chance this year, and failed to gain the support again. Sometimes one just has to accept that people do accept your message.

HC was no where near as vile as Trump. All the things you point to as America policy, followed by POTUS on both sides.

You want to avoid generlisations yet you mention pseudo-leftists and liberals as if they are all one block!

Christy42

cilantro54 wrote: »

And if the pseudo-leftists and liberals in the Democratic Party hadn't shafted Bernie, he would have won in 2016 because he would have picked up those votes, overall and electoral college, that Trump picked up.

Clinton was as vile as Trump... pure establishment, cackling over the brutal murder of gadaffi, destablising libya and central american countries... and don't forget that much of Trump's vote was a protest vote.

And don't underestimate the anti-war vote from 'left' and 'right' in the U.S. Sadly, every time an election comes around the candidates promise to stop being the global po-po and gain votes because of it. (It usually turns out to be a lie, of course, but that's another matter.)

But that's all ifs and maybes...

I'm no good at politics or political chatter and I've work to do, so I'll bow out of this thread for a bit. Not directed at you Leroy... just avoid generalizations about Americans lest youse end up sounding like provincial rednecks.

It's all ifs and buts. Bernie was unlikely to win the nomination even if he didn't get shafted. Hilary was no where near as bad as Trump. The worst they had on her was a private email server, a rule the Trump administration has broken repeatedly.

Trump was favourable to Bernie because he was Hilary 's opponent. Had Trump actually attacked Bernie than his base would have followed on full attack dog. He would have been labeled as the next Stalin and people would have believed it. Not everyone but certainly anyone that went on about the "emails". You see the character assignation every time Trump insults anyone. Mueller Pelosi etc. We haven't seen that sort of thing targeted at Bernie yet.

Trump doesn't even have a childish nickname for him yet which are stupid but surprisingly effective at getting people to think a certain way about people. You even see people parroting them on here. Generally I see them as a reason to stop reading a post, if you have to use nicknames you can't have much of a point, but they are obviously working with enough voters

Disclaimer. I really like Bernie and outside of Warren I wanted him to get the nomination on the basis of policy. However I don't think nominating him would have opened the US' eyes to Trumps excesses. He might have won but he might not. It would not have been a slam dunk on 2016 or 2020.

Christy42

hetuzozaho wrote: »

The President of the United States is up early this Tuesday morning, a great leader to his people with wise words to start the day during these troubling times:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1252552057170649088

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1252547765332324352

It's got a little "I am so smart, S.M.R.T." vibe off it all.

I don't care about ratings but mine are great. I really don't care but have you seen how great they are. Dead people, who cares about them, they don't have my ratings.

Quin_Dub

Christy42 wrote: »

It's all ifs and buts. Bernie was unlikely to win the nomination even if he didn't get shafted. Hilary was no where near as bad as Trump. The worst they had on her was a private email server, a rule the Trump administration has broken repeatedly.

Trump was favourable to Bernie because he was Hilary 's opponent. Had Trump actually attacked Bernie than his base would have followed on full attack dog. He would have been labeled as the next Stalin and people would have believed it. Not everyone but certainly anyone that went on about the "emails". You see the character assignation every time Trump insults anyone. Mueller Pelosi etc. We haven't seen that sort of thing targeted at Bernie yet.

Trump doesn't even have a childish nickname for him yet which are stupid but surprisingly effective at getting people to think a certain way about people. You even see people parroting them on here. Generally I see them as a reason to stop reading a post, if you have to use nicknames you can't have much of a point, but they are obviously working with enough voters

Disclaimer. I really like Bernie and outside of Warren I wanted him to get the nomination on the basis of policy. However I don't think nominating him would have opened the US' eyes to Trumps excesses. He might have won but he might not. It would not have been a slam dunk on 2016 or 2020.

The reason that Trump , the GOP and their Media surrogates never went after Bernie was because they have never seen him as a threat , not once. They know that Bernie would not win an Election in a million years in the US even though most of his policies would be fairly middle of the road in Europe and elsewhere. He was also never going to win the Democratic nomination for most of the same reasons.

Bernie was a useful tool for them to divide the Democratic vote, hence them amplifying the "The Crooked Dems stole the nomination from Bernie" story line repeatedly , they knew 2016 was going to be super tight so if they could get a few thousand Bernie supporters pissed off enough to stay home or vote 3rd Party it might be enough to swing it.

This time around though , the "Bernie was robbed" angle has been infinitely less effective than before , perhaps because the alleged "thief" isn't Hilary Clinton. You also have Bernie coming out very quickly and very loudly in support of Biden and telling his supporters that they would be crazy not to vote for Biden to get Trump out.

Trump and the GOP can't use Bernie as "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" stalking horse that they did with some success in 2016 anymore.

Penn

Christy42 wrote: »

I don't care about ratings but mine are great. I really don't care but have you seen how great they are. Dead people, who cares about them, they don't have my ratings.

Also talking as if the ratings are just for him, and not people tuning in to see what the f*ck they're supposed to do and what's happening during a global pandemic and national emergency

Caegan

Almost 43k dead and he's on about ratings again. It's shocking how much he's debased the office of POTUS.

pixelburp

Trump's inability to pivot to boilerplate compassion in his Twitter feed will make for its own sub-genre of biographies for years to come. AFAIK many world leaders have seen a bump in their ratings, mostly for being upfront, honest while showing communal compassion. The basic "look, this sucks and we hear ye, but let's stay positive, pragmatic and we'll get through it" approach. It speaks so much to the inherent flaws of Trumps character that he cannot perceive a scenario where this language enters his radius. Instead it's about ratings, pure visibility of himself in the public scene. I honestly don't think he cares, or knows to care, about those suffering.

everlast75

hetuzozaho wrote: »

The President of the United States is up early this Tuesday morning, a great leader to his people with wise words to start the day during these troubling times:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1252552057170649088

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1252547765332324352

It's got a little "I am so smart, S.M.R.T." vibe off it all.

Trump's *own task force* says that re-opening can only happen when there are 14 days of decreasing positive tests and these Rep Governors aren't meeting that standard, yet are pressing ahead.

Maybe the idea is to not test folk so it gives a false reading?

duploelabs

pixelburp wrote: »

Trump's inability to pivot to boilerplate compassion in his Twitter feed will make for its own sub-genre of biographies for years to come. AFAIK many world leaders have seen a bump in their ratings, mostly for being upfront, honest while showing communal compassion. The basic "look, this sucks and we hear ye, but let's stay positive, pragmatic and we'll get through it" approach. It speaks so much to the inherent flaws of Trumps character that he cannot perceive a scenario where this language enters his radius. Instead it's about ratings, pure visibility of himself in the public scene. I honestly don't think he cares, or knows to care, about those suffering.

A stark example of this was a week or so ago at his daily briefing, Trump was asked something along the lines of what kind of message do you have for the American people who are going through hardship and suffering to which He replied 'you know that's a nasty question' and didn't answer it at all

serfboard

aloyisious wrote: »

If you're medically weakened due to "underlying factors"

Like being in your seventies and obese?

Quin_Dub

pixelburp wrote: »

Trump's inability to pivot to boilerplate compassion in his Twitter feed will make for its own sub-genre of biographies for years to come. AFAIK many world leaders have seen a bump in their ratings, mostly for being upfront, honest while showing communal compassion. The basic "look, this sucks and we hear ye, but let's stay positive, pragmatic and we'll get through it" approach. It speaks so much to the inherent flaws of Trumps character that he cannot perceive a scenario where this language enters his radius. Instead it's about ratings, pure visibility of himself in the public scene. I honestly don't think he cares, or knows to care, about those suffering.

Indeed - As have most Governors/Mayors etc. around the US, Trump got an initial bump which is now completely gone, based on a "rally round the flag" lift rather than anything he himself did. His latest numbers are back to exactly his default level - ~43% Support with 52/53% negative.

Anyone that initially thought about putting aside their differences and supporting the President at a difficult time have seen that he has not changed one iota so their opinion has reverted to where it was before.

ECO_Mental

Caegan wrote: »

Almost 43k dead and he's on about ratings again. It's shocking how much he's debased the office of POTUS.

He's a disgusting human being plane and simple....there is not one redeeming quality he has? Anybody?

that's all I got say on that!

aloyisious

pixelburp wrote: »

Trump's inability to pivot to boilerplate compassion in his Twitter feed will make for its own sub-genre of biographies for years to come. AFAIK many world leaders have seen a bump in their ratings, mostly for being upfront, honest while showing communal compassion. The basic "look, this sucks and we hear ye, but let's stay positive, pragmatic and we'll get through it" approach. It speaks so much to the inherent flaws of Trumps character that he cannot perceive a scenario where this language enters his radius. Instead it's about ratings, pure visibility of himself in the public scene. I honestly don't think he cares, or knows to care, about those suffering.

He's like a WW1 general, treating the U.S people as cannon fodder in his MAGA re-election battle.