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

Quin_Dub

salmocab wrote: »

I know he’s terrible at constructing sentences but when talking about the mortality rates he said something along the lines of I heard we were the best or had the best figures. It really struck me as an odd way to say something that your putting out as a good thing. The ‘I heard’ bit is a bizarre way for a leader to refute a claim.

It's classic Trump ass covering.

"I heard" means that he can blame someone else when he's called out on it.

Same as his "A lot of people are saying..." thing

PropJoe10

jamule wrote: »

Trump does not have the balls nor the ability to pull something like that off. As soon as it starts to look like a lost cause he will be out of the game, and it will be fun.

Wouldnt be at all surprised if he bailed out with some phoney medical excuse if his polling continues like this closer to the election. His fragile ego could get the better of him.

Water John

Probably his worst interview. Chris Wallace destroyed him, on Fox News.
Who thought this would be a good idea? Wallace had his research and figures, and Trump couldn't shut him down like at the WH Press room.

Quin_Dub

Water John wrote: »

Probably his worst interview. Chris Wallace destroyed him, on Fox News.
Who thought this would be a good idea? Wallace had his research and figures, and Trump couldn't shut him down like at the WH Press room.

All Wallace did was actually interview him though.

Instead of acting like a compere at a party political broadcast, he asked him questions and challenged him on facts, like the actual journalist that he is.

The fact that everyone is so surprised by it just shows how utterly sycophantic his previous interviewers were.

It also showed just how simple it is to completely throw Trump.

His utter lack of actual knowledge beyond Fox News talking points was telling. He is no more informed them the annoying guy propping up the end of bars (usually) the length and breadth of the country.

He has access to more detailed information than any other human on the planet pretty much, and he knows none of it.

The only potentially useful thing about this interview is that it's on Fox. Will his base see it and finally see the Naked Emperor or will they just think Wallace is a deep state plant

Headshot

Any Link of this interview please?

Itssoeasy

Headshot wrote: »

Any Link of this interview please?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nof1LyQudAM

This isn't the full interview which Fox News put up on YouTube which is over forty minutes long so I won't link directly to that as that's not fair. In the clip above though he says that the Supreme Court Daca decision gave him authority to sort out healthcare which makes no sense.

Water John

'Anthony Scaramucci, Trump’s former director of communications, tweeted: “The Chris Wallace interview is Biden’s campaign ad.”
Guardian

duploelabs

Headshot wrote: »

Any Link of this interview please?

ExMachina1000

For the sake of the United states as a nation battling a virus Trump has to go. Saying that even with a different president in place many people will still do their own thing.

A hated president by the media and a global pandemic and race riots at the same time.

Trump has zero chance of reelection. Biden is a crap other option too

awec

That interview is extraordinary.

You can tell he's uncomfortable being directly questioned by looking at his face, and the fact that he looks like someone threw a glass of water on him.

Harry Palmr

What;s the situation with Trump and Fox News? Is Chris Wallace licensed to go against the grain or has the station started to become Trumpsceptic*




*that word is not underlined in red in my browser as I type this. Checks dictionary definition

Quin_Dub

Harry Palmr wrote: »

What;s the situation with Trump and Fox News? Is Chris Wallace licensed to go against the grain or has the station started to become Trumpsceptic*




*that word is not underlined in red in my browser as I type this. Checks dictionary definition

There has always been two versions of Fox News.

Actual Journalists like Wallace, Baier and a few others and then the 'Opinion' propaganda team of Hannity, Carlson,Ingraham, Pirro et al.

It's just rare that Trump sits down with any of Journalists instead of one of his Cheerleaders.

TomOnBoard

Water John wrote: »

Probably his worst interview. Chris Wallace destroyed him, on Fox News.
Who thought this would be a good idea? Wallace had his research and figures, and Trump couldn't shut him down like at the WH Press room.

Dreadful performance. Reminded me of the TV debate between Kennedy and Nixon back in the day when Tricky Dicky melted into a pool of sweat before the cool Kennedy performance.

Jeez... makeup to soak up the sweat Donald.

As for the rest? Pure and utter BS trotted out as Presidential utterance..

aloyisious

Harry Palmr wrote: »

What;s the situation with Trump and Fox News? Is Chris Wallace licensed to go against the grain or has the station started to become Trumpsceptic*




*that word is not underlined in red in my browser as I type this. Checks dictionary definition

It just might mean that, with one person on holiday, the journalists with a nose for facts are now in charge of Fox News channel.

Tell me how

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

I have family in the United states. Two of my relations have sons in the military.
Before the coronavirus started my dad was over in the states in holiday.
The topic of Trump inevitably came up and my relations(Trump supporters) said if he loses the election he feels that Trump will have the support of the military to take over control of the government permanently.

They said they would support this type of coup and think its possible that certain sections have already started training for it.

Trump supporters are apparently stock piling weapons and in border states such as Texax people are buying military grade firearms from cartels

This is absolutely, categorically, untrue.

I'm living in the states and anyone I speak to who is a Trump fan still thinks his handling of Covid-19 has been way below what it should have been (I am aware there are people who exist who think he has done fine and its a Chinese/Democrat Hoax but lets stick with reality).

But on the topic of the army supporting him to take over? The much discussed 2nd amendment is specifically argued for so as to prevent a dictatorial government taking over. Most of the supporters of the Republican party are also staunch advocates of the 2A for this reason as they also have a natural inclination towards limiting government involvement in their lives as much as possible and the idea that it might be made easier for the government to interfere is anathema to them.

The idea that they would support what would in effect be a coup (nonetheless one led by the President) is an idea that has no basis in the real world.

Tell me how

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It's classic Trump ass covering.

"I heard" means that he can blame someone else when he's called out on it.

Same as his "A lot of people are saying..." thing

In his interview with Chris Wallace, he was talking about Covid and said something along the lines of 'They said it would go in the summer when the heat increased', I was waiting for Chris to say, 'Yes, YOU said it!'.

Rjd2

Quin_Dub wrote: »

There has always been two versions of Fox News.

Actual Journalists like Wallace, Baier and a few others and then the 'Opinion' propaganda team of Hannity, Carlson,Ingraham, Pirro et al.

It's just rare that Trump sits down with any of Journalists instead of one of his Cheerleaders.

Yeah you can criticise their politics, but always find those who ramble how Fox is supposedly a blind cult when it comes to Trump very naive.

You will find plenty of criticism of the GOP from Fox from all factions such as Wallace, Tucker,,,you won't get the big names on CNN and MSNBC daring to criticise the DNC bar Jake Tapper.

Tell me how

Rjd2 wrote: »

Yeah you can criticise their politics, but always find those who ramble how Fox is supposedly a blind cult when it comes to Trump very naive.

You will find plenty of criticism of the GOP from Fox from all factions such as Wallace, Tucker,,,you won't get the big names on CNN and MSNBC daring to criticise the DNC bar Jake Tapper.

Rjd2

Tell me how wrote: »

He likes Trump , but is a huge critic of a lot of the establishment Republicans and especially of their love of the "free" markets and overseas foreign policies.

Has called for a few Republican senators to be thrown out of the party recently and all would be matey with Trump.

Not saying Tucker is a good dude as he obviously isn't, but his show is not a safe space for the GOP whatsoever.

PropJoe10

Water John wrote: »

'Anthony Scaramucci, Trump’s former director of communications, tweeted: “The Chris Wallace interview is Biden’s campaign ad.”
Guardian

It was incredibly embarrassing. Difficult to look at. You can see that all he's thinking is "How dare anyone challenge ME". Blundering blustering rubbish coming out of his mouth. If I was Biden's campaign manager I'd be working on an ad right now that's based on that interview.

rossie1977

Rjd2 wrote: »

Yeah you can criticise their politics, but always find those who ramble how Fox is supposedly a blind cult when it comes to Trump very naive.

You will find plenty of criticism of the GOP from Fox from all factions such as Wallace, Tucker,,,you won't get the big names on CNN and MSNBC daring to criticise the DNC bar Jake Tapper.

CNN and msnbc barely talk about the democrats...

But seriously if any democrat acted like Trump or had his past history what do you think the reaction would be from the media ?

CNN heavily critised Obama and Hillary over the most trivial stuff. Anderson Cooper time and time again would ask AOC or Bernie how they expect to pay for universal health care.. never once have I seen him or anyone on CNN ask a Republican how they expect to pay for massive corporate tax cuts or increase in military spending.

Stallingrad

Tell me how wrote: »

This is absolutely, categorically, untrue.

The idea that they would support what would in effect be a coup (nonetheless one led by the President) is an idea that has no basis in the real world.

I'm old enough to remember a time when armed Government paramilitaries, unrecognized at State level, devoid of any markings or identification, apprehending peaceful protestors and driving off with them in unmarked cars would seem unthinkable in modern America.

Yet here we are.

America is hanging on by a thread, anything can and may happen.

pixelburp

I'm too much of a coward to darken the door of his Twitter account, but has Trump reacted to that Wallace interview? Seems like an easy bet he'll be ranting about Fox now being against him. Trump looked to storm off of the set and his continued demand for the numbers off-camera really shone a light on his utter lack of composure when faced with even the smallest of resistance. How on earth had he ever cultivated this myth of being a deal-making genius of business when he's this easily rattled by some soft questioning? The ability to wave off details or statistics is Politican Media Interview 101; someone like Kim Jong Un or Putin must have played him like a fiddle.

Actually, another sidebar might be: were those figures he was given even correct? The sheets with big font CoVid numbers, I have my doubts that he is even being given the real statistics, if just to placate this obviously impatient, petulant septuagenarian.

Quin_Dub

pixelburp wrote: »

I'm too much of a coward to darken the door of his Twitter account, but has Trump reacted to that Wallace interview? Seems like an easy bet he'll be ranting about Fox now being against him. Trump looked to storm off of the set and his continued demand for the numbers off-camera really shone a light on his utter lack of composure when faced with even the smallest of resistance. How on earth had he ever cultivated this myth of being a deal-making genius of business when he's this easily rattled by some soft questioning? The ability to wave off details or statistics is Politican Media Interview 101; someone like Kim Jong Un or Putin must have played him like a fiddle.

Actually, another sidebar might be: were those figures he was given even correct? The sheets with big font CoVid numbers, I have my doubts that he is even being given the real statistics, if just to placate this obviously impatient, petulant septuagenarian.

They were "sort of" real numbers , the charts were missing several countries that have better performance than the US.

So the numbers were accurate , but they conveniently left off the ones that would make the US look as bad as they actually are.

sid waddell

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

I have family in the United states. Two of my relations have sons in the military.
Before the coronavirus started my dad was over in the states in holiday.
The topic of Trump inevitably came up and my relations(Trump supporters) said if he loses the election he feels that Trump will have the support of the military to take over control of the government permanently.

They said they would support this type of coup and think its possible that certain sections have already started training for it.

Trump supporters are apparently stock piling weapons and in border states such as Texax people are buying military grade firearms from cartels

I have to disagree with the responses to this post. I don't think a scenario something like the above, or containing elements of it, is that far fetched at all.

We've already had armed militias taking over the Michigan state capitol building and we have Putin-style little green men being used by Trump in Washington and Portland. We've had police brutality all over the place in the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests.

Most people already accept that Trump probably won't accept the result if he loses. What he wants to do in my view is to fix the election, ie. falsify votes via hacking to make sure he "wins", but failing that, to create doubt over the result, drag things through the courts and incite mass "protest" - and those "protestors", ie. militias will be armed, if such a scenario occurs.

Ultimately, I expect that the decision makers in the US military would side with Biden should he be deemed to have reached 270 electoral college votes, but nobody should kid themselves that there isn't a significant body of opinion in the US Army and police that is loyal to Trump and buys fully into his hateful rhetoric. There is real potential for total chaos caused by Trump in the 11 weeks between November 3rd and January 20th should Biden actually win. Nobody should dismiss the notion that Trump could attempt to go full dictator should he lose.

Neither should anybody be fooled into thinking that many people who preach so called "small government" rhetoric aren't open to the idea of a right-wing dictatorship. They are. Vladimir Putin is highly popular with the US right precisely because they admire that he is an authoritarian acting in the name of "Christianity" and so called "traditional values". The US right has long form in this regard, it helped install such puppets across Latin America including Pinochet. So called "small government" ideology goes out the window when it comes to so called "law and order" - they are very much pro-state authoritarianism when it suits them. None of it has to make sense - it's a cult - and cults are very dangerous.

spacecoyote

Right, if you go by Worldometers numbers, they are 10th in the Deaths per Million stats.

But realistically, you should probably exclude 2 countries on their list from that as they have San Marino as 1 who had 42 deaths in total, and have 1 active open case currently. Their population is so small (34k) that it skews their numbers.

3rd on their list is Andorra who again have only had 52 deaths in total, but relative to a tiny population (77k), the "deaths per" numbers look bad.

So, realistically, for countries with reasonable populations, the US have the 8th worst deaths per million numbers.

THey also score 23rd in terms of tests per million, but again, there are a number of small countries above them on the list who make that look less realistic. If you take out any country with a population of less than 1m then they move up to 12th on the list for testing numbers.

sid waddell

Harry Palmr wrote: »

What;s the situation with Trump and Fox News? Is Chris Wallace licensed to go against the grain or has the station started to become Trumpsceptic*




*that word is not underlined in red in my browser as I type this. Checks dictionary definition

Wallace is a mere veneer of "journalistic integrity" that allows Fox free rein to propagate their vicious propaganda the rest of the time.

They use him for their own ends. "But hey, we have Chris Wallace, that shows we're a serious journalistic enterprise."

Having Wallace there lends a fake credibility to Carlson, Hannity, Ingraham, Lou Dobbs and the rest of the swivel eyed loons.

Wallace would quit Fox if he had any real integrity but he has such a cushy number there, which he wouldn't get anywhere else, that it's far easier for him to stay put.

duploelabs

spacecoyote wrote: »

Right, if you go by Worldometers numbers, they are 10th in the Deaths per Million stats.

But realistically, you should probably exclude 2 countries on their list from that as they have San Marino as 1 who had 42 deaths in total, and have 1 active open case currently. Their population is so small (34k) that it skews their numbers.

3rd on their list is Andorra who again have only had 52 deaths in total, but relative to a tiny population (77k), the "deaths per" numbers look bad.

So, realistically, for countries with reasonable populations, the US have the 8th worst deaths per million numbers.

THey also score 23rd in terms of tests per million, but again, there are a number of small countries above them on the list who make that look less realistic. If you take out any country with a population of less than 1m then they move up to 12th on the list for testing numbers.

How the death numbers are counted by each individual state need to be taken in to account. For example, theres one state there that will only count a covid death if the autopsy finds no other illness in the deceased's body

partyguinness

I am always very skeptical of the media slant over this side of the Atlantic. We do get a very one sided 'liberal' slant.

I was living and working in the US during 1999 and the run up to the 2000 primaries. The picture of Bush was very very different in the US than when I came back to Ireland. Bush was portrayed as some sort of dumb hillybilly type and Gore was the media darling in Europe.

The of course Bush won and the shock of it- newsflash- it was no newsflash to me. We get a very East/West coast Democratic media slant and tend to gloss over the middle or at worst dismiss it.

I wrote the exact same post in 2016 when everyone here was laughing off Trump's chances. I said: "As outlandish as it sounds. Don't be so quick to write him off." I remember the contrast between Bush in the US and Bush as portrayed in Europe.

Now I get worred about the incessant "poll" results out over the past few weeks saying how Trump is well behind. This is just a red rag to a bull and his support will mobilise. As everyone knows- he only needs to win a handful of swing states. Liberal/Democratic hotspots like New York & California are of no relevance.

listermint

The we will take a chance on the unknown.. type of support which got him into office the first time is gone. Absolutely gone.

He's not pulling the wool this time.

He ain't winning polls last time versus now are inconsequential