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

partyguinness

listermint wrote: »

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

I hope so but at the same time I would not be so sure. There is a long way to go.

duploelabs

partyguinness wrote: »

I hope so but at the same time I would not be so sure. There is a long way to go.

What do you think Trump can do to arrest his swan dive in approval ratings and polls? And what precedent has lead Trump to make that decision

pixelburp

Quin_Dub wrote: »

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.

Which just invites further speculation about the internal workings of the WH: that this environment necessitates the intentional dissembling of basic statistics - unlikely to be a request from Trump himself, but one can imagine this came off the back of ranting and attacks from the aides' boss at being given "bad" news. We know from fadó that he doesn't read intelligence briefings and what he does read needs to be boiled down to 1 page - which is now confirmed thanks to that Fox interview and Trump's desperate waving of that page on camera.

Trump's lack of basic intellectual curiousity would be astounding if it hadn't been so thoroughly confirmed at this stage. Such a disregard for any semblance of important, unvarnished data is a desperate, pathetic flaw. And dangerous, in light of events happening at this minute.

kilns

partyguinness wrote: »

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.

Or perhaps people and media here can look from afar and give a fairer assessment.

Media in the US is terribly partisan, just look at all the ridiculous stuff Trump has done and has been defended by FOX, OANN, Breitbart etc

The media in Europe is much more balanced and will criticize when necessary

rossie1977

partyguinness wrote: »

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.

Writing off anyone running on Republican ticket would be insane. Republicans will vote for their guy in huge numbers regardless. We saw that in 2008 where 60 million thought an ailing McCain with Sarah Palin as VP was a better option than Obama despite the fact a Republican president had oversaw the biggest economic downturn in 80 years with country losing 800,000 jobs a month. Any other Western nation and party in government would have been slaughtered at the election but not the US.

In saying that Trumps been underwater sometimes heavily in the places which won him election in 2016 for most of last 3 years. Double digits in Michigan, Wisconsin where clearly he hasn't delivered what he promised.

partyguinness

kilns wrote: »

Or perhaps people and media here can look from afar and give a fairer assessment.

Media in the US is terribly partisan, just look at all the ridiculous stuff Trump has done and has been defended by FOX, OANN, Breitbart etc

The media in Europe is much more balanced and will criticize when necessary

It may well be deemed a fairer assessment but ultimately it is the citizens of the US that will vote.


My point is that the media over this side have got it wrong several times and misread the mood on the ground. Then they are left there scratching their heads in wonderment.

partyguinness

Worth noting that the traditional red states are consistently the poorest in the US. But yet they consistently vote for a party that consistently pushes them further and further into poverty. Go figure.

StringerBell

partyguinness wrote: »

It may well be deemed a fairer assessment but ultimately it is the citizens of the US that will vote.


My point is that the media over this side have got it wrong several times and misread the mood on the ground. Then they are left there scratching their heads in wonderment.

Bush stealing (literally) the election from Gore was unexpected but not a massive shock. Republican, pretends to be a cowboy, daddy was old school republican and a former president. All his daddy's friends pulling for him and working toward the end result and of course, the media. You also just had 8 years of democrat presidency, so a change is the most common outcome rather than a continuation.

Media heads get things wrong a lot for a variety of factors, but they are quite happy for the most part at whatever outcome generates more clicks these days and causes more controversy.

Trump owes a massive debt to the media for getting him elected in the first place, matter of fact without the absolute dregs of media who are so focused on the "society" and "celebrity" stories and all that nonsense we would even know who Trump is.

StringerBell

partyguinness wrote: »

Worth noting that the traditional red states are consistently the poorest in the US. But yet they consistently vote for a party that consistently pushes them further and further into poverty. Go figure.

It's conditioning that has been going on for decades at this point. It is truly one of the sadder aspects of the American experiment.

Billy Mays

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

Are your relations aware, or have you told them that they're basically traitors to their country?

Quin_Dub

Because of the some of the other crazy things that happened during the Wallace Interview , this one seems to have slipped under the radar

Trump Says He’ll Sign Health, Immigration Plans in Coming Weeks

“We’re signing a health-care plan within two weeks, a full and complete health care-plan,” Trump said. “We’re going to sign an immigration plan, a health-care plan, and various other plans.”
Trump on Thursday suggested that the administration would soon be “going into the world of health-care - very complete health-care, and we have a lot of very exciting things to discuss.”

A lot of things that the GOP & Trump announce are coming in two weeks, but never do...

In Trump’s White House, Everything’s Coming in ‘Two Weeks’

President Donald Trump has a plan. It’ll be ready in two weeks. From overhauling the tax code to releasing an infrastructure package to making decisions on Nafta and the Paris climate agreement, Trump has a common refrain: A big announcement is coming in just “two weeks.” It rarely does. On Feb. 9, Trump boasted that his administration was “way ahead of schedule” on a tax overhaul. ““We’re going to be announcing something I would say over the next two or three weeks that will be phenomenal in terms of tax and developing our aviation infrastructure,” Trump said while meeting with airline executives. Eleven weeks elapsed before the White House released a one-page outline of the tax plan. In an April 29 interview on “CBS This Morning” Trump said of his promised $1 trillion infrastructure construction program: “We’ve got the plan largely completed and we’ll be filing over the next two or three weeks -- maybe sooner,” Trump said. No legislation has been filed. The White House has yet to outline the plan, beyond broad principles described in Trump’s proposed budget.

However , when he said this to Wallace he also said that "The Supreme Court DACA decision lets me do things"

He could mean this

The White House thinking is being heavily influenced by John Yoo, the lawyer who wrote the Bush administration's justification for waterboarding after 9/11.

Yoo detailed the theory in a National Review article, spotted atop Trump’s desk in the Oval Office, which argues that the Supreme Court's 5-4 DACA ruling last month "makes it easy for presidents to violate the law."

......

Yoo told Axios that Chief Justice John Roberts' opinion "sets out a roadmap about how a president can use his prosecutorial discretion to under-enforce the law."

• The recourse would be if the next president tries to reverse what's set in motion.
• "Suppose President Donald Trump decided to create a nationwide right to carry guns openly," Yoo writes in his National Review op-ed. "He could declare that he would not enforce federal firearms laws, and that a new 'Trump permit' would free any holder of state and local gun-control restrictions."
• "Even if Trump knew that his scheme lacked legal authority, he could get away with it for the length of his presidency. And, moreover, even if courts declared the permit illegal, his successor would have to keep enforcing the program for another year or two."

This might also inform his actions November to January should he lose - Utterly poison the well for an incoming administration.

seamus

partyguinness wrote: »

My point is that the media over this side have got it wrong several times and misread the mood on the ground. Then they are left there scratching their heads in wonderment.

Indeed. Very easy to see the big picture when you're standing so far away.

One of the main differences this time though is something I saw pointed out months ago - fighting a campaign as the newcomer, and defending your position as the incumbent are two entirely different things.

It's a whole lot easier to be the guy making promises and slinging mud than it is to be the one defending failures and dodging the mud.

Your average American is harder to blind with numbers and claims when they've lived his presidency. Especially now.
About 1.2% of Americans have contracted Covid 19 at this stage. That's getting into the "everybody knows somebody affected by it", territory. Which will destroy Trump if he tries to underplay the impact of it or overplay his response.

Leroy42

Yeah, I thought that line about DACA was the most telling. Not because of the two weeks claim, as pointed out he has used that many times before without any follow up, but it signals where the WH thinking is.

They see the next 100+ days as open season to get what they want. So I fully expect a raft of laws, judged, EO's etc. Trump has given up on Covid-19, he is hoping for a miracle, a vaccine or that somehow the infections simply go away. He will instead focus his attention on getting everything that he can done signed off over the next few months.

partyguinness

If and that is a very big "If" he loses the reelection a lot of comedians will lose some great material.

listermint

rossie1977 wrote: »

Writing off anyone running on Republican ticket would be insane. Republicans will vote for their guy in huge numbers regardless. We saw that in 2008 where 60 million thought an ailing McCain with Sarah Palin as VP was a better option than Obama despite the fact a Republican president had oversaw the biggest economic downturn in 80 years with country losing 800,000 jobs a month. Any other Western nation and party in government would have been slaughtered at the election but not the US.

In saying that Trumps been underwater sometimes heavily in the places which won him election in 2016 for most of last 3 years. Double digits in Michigan, Wisconsin where clearly he hasn't delivered what he promised.

I don't think they'll come out and vote in numbers tbh. The hard core bass definitely. The middle no they won't vote democrat but they will spoil with no shows. I think trumps tainted their vote last time out and many just see him for who he is.

Often the extremes get promoted as the majority. But it's not that simple

VinLieger

partyguinness wrote: »

If and that is a very big "If" he loses the reelection a lot of comedians will lose some great material.

If he loses he wont be disappearing from public discourse any time soon, FOX OAN etc will have him on speed dial, plus theres all the likely court cases etc, like it or not hes gonna be around for a while

Tchaikovsky

The best/worst comedy writer couldn't come up with that interview with Chris Wallace. Pure madness.

"Scuse meh, scuse meh!"

Quin_Dub

VinLieger wrote: »

If he loses he wont be disappearing from public discourse any time soon, FOX OAN etc will have him on speed dial, plus theres all the likely court cases etc, like it or not hes gonna be around for a while

He'll definitely be in the public eye , but the court cases might scupper any plans for him personally to be the "voice of the right" around the place.

And depending on how far Vance goes he might block out the kids as well.

There is no doubt that Ivanka and Jared fancy their chances in 8 or 12 years time , but not if they've been indicted for fraud or other stuff.

partyguinness

Publicity is more important to him that oxygen.

I don't find Trump a very interesting person. While none of his know him I get the distinct impresison he is just a shallow vacous bore and really not very interesting. He has zero convictions or principles and a relic of the 1980s.

A poor man's Gordon Gekko.

Sure he has done some interesting crap on one level but I don't believe he would make a very interesting subject for a biography on a personal level.

Leroy42

Yeah, it was a complete car crash. Sure, some are saying that Wallace did well, but he wasn't exactly Vincent Browne or Paxman esque. They were all pretty easy, straightforward and easily dealt with questions (if one had thought about it). But Trump doesn't do preparation, doesn't do facts. He makes stuff up as he goes, he is far more used to the likes of Hannity etc giving him the Lisa Simpson "everyone loves you and admires you, why are so great at everything you do" type interviews.

He regularly gets rattled by journalists, but normally he can simply shout at them and then ignore them at a press conferenence.

Imagine getting into a willy waving contest with a journalist over whether you are intelligent or not! What is it they say? When you are explaining you are losing!

Every American should be deeply concerned at his performance. As a once off you could possibly wave it away, tired/emotional or something, but this is simply a more condensed and clear version of what has happened many times in the past. Hhe clearly has no idea of the facts, doesn't have any grasp of what is going on and has no plan to deal with it. A simple approach to take would be that the numbers are too high, he felt that he wanted to give individual governors the final say but the problem has continued such that it is time for a unified federal lead response. Or something along those lines.

But of course he can't say that as that would involve him taking responsibility, having to actually do something. It might mean less time golfing or less tweets. It might even mean having to make decision that some of his base won't like (mandate masks) which he cannot bring himself to do.

A read somewhere that a big problem for Trump is the lack of a singular 'enemy'. in 2016 it was easy, focus people on their dislike of HC. But due to C19, Biden is relatively hidden and of course Covid itself, as Trump says, is the invisible enemy. He has tried to target it, blaming China etc, but to many that comes off as self pity and only heightens the view that Trump has no answers. Neither of them is a good look.

He would have won many votes in 2016 on the basis of 'what have you got to lose'? People had their view of HC, and they were successful in painting her as simply a continuation of Obama. Of course they will label that on Biden, the difference being that it is no longer a continuation due to the gap of the last 4 years.

I get the feeling that Trump reelection strategy was based on rallies and big events, and lots of use of AF1 and the chopper etc. But that has been taken away form him and he is left struggling to adapt.

Penn

partyguinness wrote: »

Worth noting that the traditional red states are consistently the poorest in the US. But yet they consistently vote for a party that consistently pushes them further and further into poverty. Go figure.

Because it's sold to them as "We're giving you the freedom to be poor"

WOO!!!! FREEDOM!!!!

partyguinness

Trump has never been a politician and does not act like one (which was seen as a plus 4 years ago). He was always Mr Bossman

As a consequence, he is not used to answering questions. he has never had to answer questions and he does what he likes. He runs the White House like he would the Trump Organisation- he calls the shots and he must control the information. Truth and facts are of no relevance- it is all about Brand Trump.

Quin_Dub

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yeah, it was a complete car crash. Sure, some are saying that Wallace did well, but he wasn't exactly Vincent Browne or Paxman esque. They were all pretty easy, straightforward and easily dealt with (if one had thought about it). But Trump doesn't do preparation, doesn't do facts. He makes stuff up as he goes, he is far more used to the likes of Hannity etc given him the Lisa Simpson "everyone loves you and admires you, why are so great at everything you do" type interviews.

He regularly gets rattled by journalists, but normally he can simply shout at them and then ignore them at a press conferenence.

Imagine getting into a willy waving contest with a journalist over whether you are intelligent or not! What is it they say? When you are explaining you are losing!

Every American should be deeply concerned at his performance. As a once off you could possibly wave it away, tired/emotional or something, but this is simply a more condensed and clear version of what has happened many times in the past. but he clearly has no idea of the facts, doesn't have any grasp of what is going on and has no plan to deal with it. A simple approach to take would be that the numbers are too high, he felt that he wanted to give individual governors the final say but the problem has continued such that it is time for a unified federal lead response. Or something along those lines.

But of course he can't say that as that would involve him taking responsibility, having to actually do something. It might mean less time golfing or less tweets. It might even mean having to make decision that some of his base won't like (mandate masks) which he cannot bring himself to do as he is.

A read somewhere that a big problem for Trump is the lack of a singular 'enemy'. in 2016 it was easy, focus people on their dislike of HC. But due to C19, Biden is relatively hidden and of course Covid itself, as Trump says, is the invisible enemy. He has tried to target it, blaming China etc, but to many that comes off as self pity and only heightens the view that Trump has no answers. Neither of them is a good luck.

He would havewon many votes in 2016 on the basis of 'what have you got to lose'. People had their view of HC, and they were successful in painting her as simply a continuation of Obama. Of course they will label that on Biden, the difference being that it is no longer a continuation due to the gap of the last 4 years.

I get the feeling that Trump reelection strategy was based on rallies and big events, and lots of use of AF1 and the chopper etc. But that has been taken away form him and he is left struggling to adapt.

Absolutely - He's missing all the free media attention of his rallies and is trying to fill that News air-time with Interviews.

In 2016 he got to go on stage 3 or 4 times a week in front of adoring fans and spout any old stream of consciousness guff he wanted. Fox would cherry pick the good bits and replay them constantly and all the other outlets would cover them live and then extensively afterwards.

Due to Covid he doesn't have that , so the media narrative is all about his actual work (or lack thereof) as President and it's killing him both from a personal narcissism point of view and in the polls.

So now he's out doing 1:1 interviews to try and control the narrative - His done about 6 in the last 2 weeks .

The problem is that he is an appalling interviewee when even the most basic of journalistic standards are applied. He is utterly uninformed and each time someone fact checks him he goes to pieces.

I mean even when he sits down with someone like Hannity he comes away worse off because of his utter lack of preparation or understanding.

If the debates are held without an Audience which I suspect they might, he will struggle hugely - No oohs or aahs or applause to keep him going or to break the silence.

Just him talking followed by dead-air which Biden and the host will fill with fact checks.

He won't be able to fact check Biden though as he won't have any information to hand , so he'll just name call and shout Hoax and Obamagate etc. which will do absolutely nothing to win him more voters.

TomOnBoard

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

The best/worst comedy writer couldn't come up with that interview with Chris Wallace. Pure madness.

"Scuse meh, scuse meh!"

Looks like Sarah Cooper got enough material for hundreds of her videos from that one interview.

I can't help thinking someone in his own orbit set him up:

His make-up was dreadful- he looked he was in a sauna
His seating/posture was dreadful- who decided to bring out two of the dining room chairs and shoot video from a low angle?
His attitude was dreadful- bullying and totally lacking in charisma
His bluster was dreadful- he was spitting out total and obvious BS

On the other hand, Wallace was in total charge and let him dig his own man traps...

jem

I am expecting him to:
Sign anything and everything to try and make himself popular with his base and with a section of those that are wishy washy not realy engaged with what is realy happening.
Sign a number of presenditial executive orders to make it look like he is suporting the rust belt to try to get votes
Appoint as many republican/ friends/supporters as possible sacking anyone who isnt an out and trumper. FBI to be devistated.
Attempt to do even more gerrymandering and to supress the voters to even new levels
Give clemency/pardons to everyone and anyone. Rudy etc.
If he loses he will make it almost impossible for Biden to put together a new govt. expect paperwork destroyed, computeres wiped etc
Dont expect an easy handover expect the rednecks to be out in force with gune.

partyguinness

Unlike 2016 Trump has to win this time based on his record over the past 4 years and in reality he has nothing. A busted flush.

duploelabs

partyguinness wrote: »

I hope so but at the same time I would not be so sure. There is a long way to go.

partyguinness wrote: »

Unlike 2016 Trump has to win this time based on his record over the past 4 years and in reality he has nothing. A busted flush.

What changed your mind in the last few pages?

partyguinness

duploelabs wrote: »

What changed your mind in the last few pages?

1. In my first post I am alluding to the fact that there is a long way to go and it is a little early to start counting chickens.
2. The second post is my personal opinion.

Penn

Trump is bringing back the 5pm Coronavirus briefings starting tomorrow.

As bad as they were before, I imagine they're going to be a total sh*tshow now.

Quin_Dub

Penn wrote: »

Trump is bringing back the 5pm Coronavirus briefings starting tomorrow.

As bad as they were before, I imagine they're going to be a total sh*tshow now.

What's he going to say?

Open the schools?
It's going away?
We're testing too much?

Guarantee that these will be mini versions of the Rose Garden event from last week - 5 minutes of cursory Covid stuff followed by random unrelated Biden Attacks for an hour , EVERY day!!!