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

L1011

pixelburp wrote: »

Ah. There's something quite distasteful about a person as aggressively incurious and pridefully ignorant as Trump getting a library. Like naming a coal mine after Margaret Thatcher,

The Clinton, G W Bush ones + Obama's still unbuilt one are called "Presidential Center" not "Presidential Library" which is at least a bit less clanging.

They're often done at or with the presidential alma mater; but I'm not sure UPenn would want to touch it!

Roanmore

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

We don't need to spend too much time on Trump's future electoral prospects tbh. He has power and influence until the day Biden takes over. Then - while he has a right to a staff, and an allowance and security service details - he's just a private citizen. He can maybe setup his own TV station and use the proceeds to run as a Ross Perot type in four year's time so long as he stays solvent and out of jail. But all the power and the influence of the WH drains away very quickly.

The Republican Party are going to disown him.

Additionally, the constituency of a defeated candidate drains away too. Gore and Kerry lost close elections but never had any serious prospects of winning the nomination again four years later. Four years is a long time. And a loser is a loser.

Harsh but in modern American politics true.

Pity Biden wasn't picked 4 years ago. I think he would easily have beaten Trump.

Itssoeasy

aloyisious wrote: »

It's an apparent fact that of the Pennsylvania mail-in ballot papers waiting processing in the count centres, republican voters have approx 550,000, almost 1/4 of the total number of WELL OVER 2 million sent in.

As for the USPS, I don't have any idea of how many ballot papers it has undelivered in its facilities nor what, if any, the breakdown is between those sent out to the voters and those posted back by voters to the count centres but it seems to be a substantial number. The federal court judge handling the refusal of the USPS management to comply with his orders to facilitate the voter seems to have the patience of a very experienced judge.

Isn’t this judge to same judge who’s dealing with the Michael Flynn mess ? I think it is and if it is then we know he’s got tolerance for bull****.

AMKC

pixelburp wrote: »

Ah. There's something quite distasteful about a person as aggressively incurious and pridefully ignorant as Trump getting a library. Like naming a coal mine after Margaret Thatcher,

They should name a coal mine after him that's if there are any left in America as at least then it would not last to long before its eventually closed whiten the next decade or two at the most. So like Trump then.

AMKC

Roanmore wrote: »

Harsh but in modern American politics true.

Pity Biden wasn't picked 4 years ago. I think he would easily have beaten Trump.

He had originally planned to run four years ago but was dealing with the lose of one of his his sons from a brain tumour and unlike Trump Biden has dealt with real loss and is a decent human compared to Trump.

pixelburp

Biden would have lost too in 2016 IMO; Clinton was more the representative of The Swamp incarnate, but Trump's rhetoric was almost bullet proof regardless of opponent. Its narrative was deeply anti establishment, there's no way a centrist, career politician of any stripe could have effectively combatted the present, roiling dissatisfaction seen in the various states who swung to Trump. Only another outsider or maverick could have worked against trump's blunt force strategy, and even then... Trump declared "things are shít, only I can fix it" and that's a heady cocktail to beat.

Leroy42

Yeah, I think the vote trump got in 2020 shows up the fallacy that it was all down to HC losing 2016. No doubt she played her part, but I think anyone, bar maybe 1992 Bill Clinton or 2008 Obama would have struggled.

Clearly what was seen as somewhat of a protest vote, a call for change, is nothing of the sort. Deep down his voters like his message, like his attacks on anyone different, like the abuse he gives out.

Gbear

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yeah, I think the vote trump got in 2020 shows up the fallacy that it was all down to HC losing 2016. No doubt she played her part, but I think anyone, bar maybe 1992 Bill Clinton or 2008 Obama would have struggled.

Clearly what was seen as somewhat of a protest vote, a call for change, is nothing of the sort. Deep down his voters like his message, like his attacks on anyone different, like the abuse he gives out.

I think it's possible that an earnest vehicle for change like Sanders might have won in 2016, but I actually don't think they could've won in 2020.

It requires something extraordinary to unseat an incumbent president. I'm trying to recalibrate my sense of disappointment with how much support Trump got with that in mind - it's basically the default to reelect them. Despite a war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and being generally seen as a nitwit, GW Bush got reelected.

What was needed was setting normalcy against Trump, because I don't think any serious amount of uncertainty in a candidate - one who offerred change, would've worked. The change for change's sake people were already in Trump's camp, and the moderates that appear to have swung it for Biden would've been more likely to have been intimidated. They wouldn't have voted for Trump, but enough might've stayed home. And few coukd've turned out the black vote like Biden did as well.

Tell me how

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yeah, I think the vote trump got in 2020 shows up the fallacy that it was all down to HC losing 2016. No doubt she played her part, but I think anyone, bar maybe 1992 Bill Clinton or 2008 Obama would have struggled.

Clearly what was seen as somewhat of a protest vote, a call for change, is nothing of the sort. Deep down his voters like his message, like his attacks on anyone different, like the abuse he gives out.

Yep. Agree with this.
The urban/rural vote in this seems, to me, pretty astounding.

A posted on Boards said that he likes Trump specifically because he has no time for political correctness, cancel culture, all that sort of stuff and I think that that is likely reflected widely amongst the people who voted for him on Tuesday.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Clinton lost Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania by a combined margin of less than 80,000 votes.
To suggest that Biden, or another candidate with a bit more appeal, wouldn't have beaten Trump in 2016 is a big jump to make.

Trump won in 2016 because he went again Hilary, as much as Biden won this time because of Trump.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: Link dump deleted. Please do not just paste links here.

FionnK86

pixelburp wrote: »

Ah. There's something quite distasteful about a person as aggressively incurious and pridefully ignorant as Trump getting a library. Like naming a coal mine after Margaret Thatcher,

But all the bad stuff that presidents say are kept there too, as its matter of public record. I wonder if it includes tweets?

aloyisious

Big Pussy Bonpensiero wrote: »

Clinton lost Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania by a combined margin of less than 80,000 votes.
To suggest that Biden, or another candidate with a bit more appeal, wouldn't have beaten Trump in 2016 is a big jump to make.

Trump won in 2016 because he went again Hilary, as much as Biden won this time because of Trump.

Almost contrarily, because of his shock-jockey style of management. Trump may have done some service to the U.S by shaking up the electoral system, help to waken up in people the value and power of their vote to effect change and protect it against the abuser. That task will be one for Biden and Harris to follow up with, seeing as how there's an apparent QAnon member - Marjorie Taylor Greene - in the House now [not saying she will stay the duration on that horse]. The GOP will have to watch her activities.

aloyisious

FionnK86 wrote: »

But all the bad stuff that presidents say are kept there too, as its matter of public record. I wonder if it includes tweets?

The Library of Congress prints & photographs division keeps a record of them as part of its presidential statements records.

Rjd2

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yeah, I think the vote trump got in 2020 shows up the fallacy that it was all down to HC losing 2016. No doubt she played her part, but I think anyone, bar maybe 1992 Bill Clinton or 2008 Obama would have struggled.

Clearly what was seen as somewhat of a protest vote, a call for change, is nothing of the sort. Deep down his voters like his message, like his attacks on anyone different, like the abuse he gives out.

Biden would have won in 2016.

I don't like him, but he has always been a much more popular politician than Hilary and would have been much more competitive than HC in the "rust belt " states.

I know their was a "burn it all down" vibe in 2016, but Trump barely won so someone with much less baggage than HC like Biden wins.

Whoever in the Dem party who advised him not to run should be fired into the moon.

Biden also unlike Clinton actually understood the Bernie and to a lesser extent Trump appeal which would have been massive.

Quin_Dub

Rjd2 wrote: »

Biden would have won in 2016.

I don't like him, but he has always been a much more popular politician than Hilary and would have been much more competitive than HC in the "rust belt " states.

I know their was a "burn it all down" vibe in 2016, but Trump barely won so someone with much less baggage than HC like Biden wins.

Whoever in the Dem party who advised him not to run should be fired into the moon.

Biden also unlike Clinton actually understood the Bernie and to a lesser extent Trump appeal which would have been massive.

He decided not to run after his son died - Wanted to focus on his family etc.

Very much a measure of the man.

Rjd2

Quin_Dub wrote: »

He decided not to run after his son died - Wanted to focus on his family etc.

Very much a measure of the man.

their was a politico article the other year said it was much more complicated than that. Obama not keen on him been President and wanted Hilary.

I shall try and find it.

aloyisious

Roy Blunt, a senior GOP Senator, was referred to in connection with his statement on retirement & transfer of power by CNN panel of political journalists, with them reading the statement to refer not only Trump but to senior GOP senate colleagues as well.

aloyisious

Umm, RTE reporting on the election situation quoting what it said was a statement form the Biden Campaign to the effect that the Govt knows how to remove trespassers from the White House. Not exactly a tactful statement to broadcast, no matter from whence it allegedly came from.

Detritus70

aloyisious wrote: »

Umm, RTE reporting on the election situation quoting what it said was a statement form the Biden Campaign to the effect that the Govt knows how to remove trespassers from the White House. Not exactly a tactful statement to broadcast, no matter from whence it allegedly came from.

After four years of a non stop barrage of hateful sh*t from the White House, I have absolutely zero problem with a few subtle (or not so subtle) digs at the incumbent.
The howls of outrage will be music to my ears, not meant as a dig at you, just in general.

paul71

aloyisious wrote: »

Umm, RTE reporting on the election situation quoting what it said was a statement form the Biden Campaign to the effect that the Govt knows how to remove trespassers from the White House. Not exactly a tactful statement to broadcast, no matter from whence it allegedly came from.

"And the United States government is perfectly capable of escorting trespassers out of the White House,” Andrew Bates is a Biden campaign spokesperson.

Why would RTE not report a statement from the Campaign team, and if Trump throws a hissy fit and decides not to leave should he lose the election it is perfectly acceptable that he should be evicted by security as a trespasser.

aloyisious

paul71 wrote: »

"And the United States government is perfectly capable of escorting trespassers out of the White House,” Andrew Bates is a Biden campaign spokesperson.

Why would RTE not report a statement from the Campaign team, and if Trump throws a hissy fit and decides not to leave should he lose the election it is perfectly acceptable that he should be evicted by security as a trespasser.

It's NOT about RTE, it's about the statement from Andy. It's a long time til Jan 3rd and the aftermath of the election. We've been discussing the behaviour of Trump, amongst other things, here. The latest of the debate within the U.S, especially from Joe Biden, was about healing the divide and getting Trump out of office with good grace, not prodding a hornets nest all over the U.S. Andy would know his boss was giving the lead on the issue of a strife-free hand-over and sending a message to Trump at this time in Nov 2020 that the Biden Govt would haul his ass out of the White House can only stir up the stupid in Trump's camp and light an unnecessary fire for his boss to douse.

paul71

aloyisious wrote: »

It's NOT about RTE, it's about the statement from Andy. It's a long time til Jan 3rd and the aftermath of the election. We've been discussing the behaviour of Trump, amongst other things, here. The latest of the debate within the U.S, especially from Joe Biden, was about healing the divide and getting Trump out of office with good grace, not prodding a hornets nest all over the U.S. Andy would know his boss was giving the lead on the issue of a strife-free hand-over and sending a message to Trump at this time in Nov 2020 that the Biden Govt would haul his ass out of the White House can only stir up the stupid in Trump's camp and light an unnecessary fire for his boss to douse.

That is not how your Quote read.

You said "to broadcast no matter whence the source" which made it about RTE.

aloyisious

paul71 wrote: »

That is not how your Quote read.

You said "to broadcast no matter whence the source" which made it about RTE.

What I meant is that RTE news has enough nous to realise the complexity of the U.S situation and the effect a statement such as the one from Andy could have in a world of delicacy, which [IMO] Andy did not have when he made his statement. It's all about his statement and the effect it would have. I'm not shooting the messenger. Edit: RTE was the first source I had for Andy's statement and that is why I mentioned RTE in my post. You asked why RTE would not report on a statement from the Biden campaign, hopefully my reference to RTE's nous would answer your question.

aloyisious

Looking coolly at the vote situation that Trump is continually tweeting about, he could probably make a better case for his electoral chances if he stopped shooting from the keyboard and put a bit of thought into his action before typing his messages. He's doing his chances no end of harm [thankfully] by reacting without thinking. Even his own party have separated from him on that issue, as it sees the damage he's doing to it.

paul71

aloyisious wrote: »

What I meant is that RTE news has enough nous to realise the complexity of the U.S situation and the effect a statement such as the one from Andy could have in a world of delicacy, which [IMO] Andy did not have when he made his statement. It's all about his statement and the effect it would have. I'm not shooting the messenger. Edit: RTE was the first source I had for Andy's statement and that is why I mentioned RTE in my post. You asked why RTE would not report on a statement from the Biden campaign, hopefully my reference to RTE's nous would answer your question.

Nobody in America is watching RTE for election coverage, so it was informing Irish people without risk of provoking an effect in the US, perfectly legitimate for a News network to do.

You didn't know it was Andy until I mentioned it, I did because it was mentioned on another tread but fair enough.

Could he have been more nuanced, yes probably but I dont know the context of the quote, he may have been asked a direct question "What will you do if he does not leave?" and pressed for an answer. In that instance it would seem reasonable, in fact in Comparison to Donald Trumps call to "Total War" it is Gandi"esk".

looksee

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/04/opinions/us-global-image-after-election-night-2020-wierson/index.html

An article on CNN that reflects much of the bewilderment that people outside the US have been feeling for the past four years, and it is indeed something that will continue to have theses written about it for many years to come, possibly about the start of a movement rather than a single, unfortunate interlude.

The author is fairly simplistically listing off the actions and events that Trump caused and wondering how they were considered ok and acceptable by 50%, more or less, of the population. There does seem to be need for analysis and critical thinking to be taught. The vote has not really gone against the Republicans who enabled Trump; the Senate and House have not changed much at all, and the vote to oust Trump is wafer thin. The country got very very close to asking for another four years of Trumpism - and indeed may yet prevail.

Trump's broader 'policies', more accurately unconsidered notions and impulses, may have possibly been workable, if undesirable for a large portion of society, but their presentation in his divisive, hate filled, self absorbed, dishonest style would have done irreparable damage to the country.

check_six

I'd be curious to see how a 2024 run would work for Trump as an independent. It appears that 40%+ of the US electorate would vote for literally anyone as long as they have the Republican letter R beside their name. I'd guess it's much the same on the Democrat side too. (Rock solid blind party affiliation is my only hope for the sanity of the US after this latest election).

Due to the nature of the two party duopoly any third party can only hope to hit 10-20% at the very outside best in any state which will get you exactly zero electoral college votes. Usual rates for third party candidates the last few times around are sub 3%.

Trump's own run in 2000 for the Reform Party went nowhere and their eventual candidate Pat Buchanan got less than 500,000 votes nationally.

I'd say that a massively overperforming Trump 2024 run would see him tilt the balance in 6-8 battleground states in favour of the DNC through splitting the vote. He would not even put a dent in the perennial GOP strongholds.

Of course this theoretical independent run would strongly rely on Trump avoiding jail, and being able to raise any money. I have doubts over his ability to do either.

It's really hard to know tbh. Sometimes cults just die and wither quickly, sometimes they don't. 4 years is a long time away for him to be able to keep momentum. I think if he did run there'd be a fair chance of none of the 3 candidates hitting 270. But at the same time if he can manage to run as a Republican he'll be sorted because I can't see how the impending budget crisis (thought the last few were bad? :P ) along with the effects of Covid won't be laid at the Democrats' door.

aloyisious

Trump's mean version of what constitutes the "American Dream" and how to ensure it still remains achievable, foul and overt, no hiding his method, no matter hos distorted the image, looks like to be his legacy to the U.S. Feed the fanbase what they think was taken from them and they'll come back for more. The "grab them by the pussy" tape said it all, integrity matters for nothing, money conquers all in the Trump rulebook.