Donald Trump discussion Thread IX (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Quin_Dub

Brian? wrote: »

Wasn't it dropped because it only applied to network news and not cable news?

It was part of the wider "Deregulation" process that Reagan started.

Rather than close the loop-hole created by the emergence of Cable/Satellite channels they simply removed the rules completely.

Brian?

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It was part of the wider "Deregulation" process that Reagan started.

Rather than close the loop-hole created by the emergence of Cable/Satellite channels they simply removed the rules completely.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Rather than being in new regulations on cable/satellite channels they scrapped the ones on network news.

Interestingly they didn't do the same for entertainment. Imagine HBO if they had to stick to the same rules as NBC? It would be awful.

I know why the deviation occurred obviously. Rich donors.

Gbear

I think it's difficult to gauge how big a factor right wing propaganda is in the US and the UK on its own.

I'm not convinced you'd have as much of an impact if the far right machine didn't have such a powerful platform where they could turn the conservative pluarlity of voters into consistent minority-rule governments.

There would still likely be cross-party anti-worker propaganda, for example, but I don't know that it would be as lucrative or that there would be as strong a return on investment if the current Republican platform never get within an ass's roar of power because progressive or centrist coalitions kept them out.

Quin_Dub

Gbear wrote: »

I think it's difficult to gauge how big a factor right wing propaganda is in the US and the UK on its own.

I'm not convinced you'd have as much of an impact if the far right machine didn't have such a powerful platform where they could turn the conservative pluarlity of voters into consistent minority-rule governments.

There would still likely be cross-party anti-worker propaganda, for example, but I don't know that it would be as lucrative or that there would be as strong a return on investment if the current Republican platform never get within an ass's roar of power because progressive or centrist coalitions kept them out.

It's a bi-directional scenario in terms of power & influence.

It's no coincidence that the places that have these kinds of political parties in power are those in FPTP voting systems with largely binary electoral choices available.

Extremism of any form survives only when compromise is unnecessary.

When political movements know that they have to appeal to an actual majority of voters and not just a plurality and that they will require the support of other groups to form Governments or pass legislation etc. then their more extreme tendencies wither and die as they are incompatible with actual power and influence in that scenario.

The Media supporting that extremism only exists because the extremism has a chance at power.

Brussels Sprout

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It's no coincidence that the places that have these kinds of political parties in power are those in FPTP voting systems with largely binary electoral choices available.

The exception to this is Australia, which is dominated by Murdoch press and elects a lot of hard-right types despite using instant run-off (you have to get to 50% via your votes + transfers) in the lower house and a form of PR-STV in the upper house.

If they had FPTP it would probably be as dysfunctional as the USA is now.

Muahahaha

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

The exception to this is Australia, which is dominated by Murdoch press and elects a lot of hard-right types despite using instant run-off (you have to get to 50% via your votes + transfers) in the lower house and a form of PR-STV in the upper house.

If they had FPTP it would probably be as dysfunctional as the USA is now.

Was just talking to an Australian friend yesterday who was telling me Murdoch controls almost 70% of all the main media outlets down there. It was in the context of a current political scandal down there where a young female staffer for the Liberal Party (who are actually the Conservative Party despite the name) got raped in Parliament by another Liberal Party staffer and it was covered up with her being told if she went to the police it would be the end of her career. .

The Aussie Prime Minister Scotty from Marketing' is denying all knowledge of the cover up and the Murdoch media are trying their best to either ignore the story or throw shade on the victim. He was saying the power and influence the Murdoch media wields is astonishing when political scandals come along that might affect the party the Murdochs have backed. They all act in tandem with the 'nothing to see here' line and when that doesnt work they move on to the 'well its not that big of a deal' line.

Anyway on Trump and the media I think his two page statement on Mitch is the first bit of real world evidence on how badly he is going to miss Twitter. Had he been able to just tweet out 'Mitch is a dour, sullen, unsmiling political hack' the reaction would have been far bigger than what it has been. There would have been comments on the tweet and retweets and it would have spread like wildfire online. Two page statements from him once every few weeks dont suit his followers at all compared to him tweeting short snaps several times a day. He really is completely nobbled without Twitter. It was the tool in his toolbox for bypassing all the legacy media but now without it his only avenue of communication is to issue press releases to the mainstream media, the very same media he has often labelled as fake news.

Tell me how

Muahahaha wrote: »

Anyway on Trump and the media I think his two page statement on Mitch is the first bit of real world evidence on how badly he is going to miss Twitter. Had he been able to just tweet out 'Mitch is a dour, sullen, unsmiling political hack' the reaction would have been far bigger than what it has been. There would have been comments on the tweet and retweets and it would have spread like wildfire online. Two page statements from him once every few weeks dont suit his followers at all compared to him tweeting short snaps several times a day. He really is completely nobbled without Twitter. It was the tool in his toolbox for bypassing all the legacy media but now without it his only avenue of communication is to issue press releases to the mainstream media, the very same media he has often labelled as fake news.

I've been thinking about this and reckon there is probably a lo more going on behind the scenes that has yet to be revealed.

I agree that he must be finding it frustrating to have had Twitter removed from him but I am curious how he has not sought to gain a platform elsewhere to this point. He hasn't appeared on a friendly TV or radio show. When he was President, he used to call in to Fox News, and granted his relationship with them soured, but he hasn't appeared elsewhere.

Is he plotting? Is he still so consumed with rage that no one will risk being sued for what he might say if he appears? Has he lost interest?

Itssoeasy

Seeing this is the Donald trump and he was known for doing and saying stupid things during his time in office.

Did anyone see the cut of Ted Cruz and his explanation about his cancun trip ? So he’s left the state of Texas during a time when the state is freezing and lots of its people have no power or heat. He released a statement saying he had planned to return straight away but nbc news is reporting he changed his flight to return today. Why did he need to charge his flight if as he says it was his plan to return straight away. Caught by the bollocks as they say.

looksee

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Seeing this is the Donald trump and he was known for doing and saying stupid things during his time in office.

Did anyone see the cut of Ted Cruz and his explanation about his cancun trip ? So he’s left the state of Texas during a time when the state is freezing and lots of its people have no power or heat. He released a statement saying he had planned to return straight away but nbc news is reporting he changed his flight to return today. Why did he need to charge his flight if as he says it was his plan to return straight away. Caught by the bollocks as they say.

We were just discussing that at home, and there is a pandemic on. You remember the pandemic, just because its freezing doesn't mean its gone away.

Billy Mays

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Seeing this is the Donald trump and he was known for doing and saying stupid things during his time in office.

Did anyone see the cut of Ted Cruz and his explanation about his cancun trip ? So he’s left the state of Texas during a time when the state is freezing and lots of its people have no power or heat. He released a statement saying he had planned to return straight away but nbc news is reporting he changed his flight to return today. Why did he need to charge his flight if as he says it was his plan to return straight away. Caught by the bollocks as they say.

For someone who was only going away for one night he took quite a large bag :rolleyes:

y0ssar1an22

Billy Mays wrote: »

For someone who was only going away for one night he took quite a large bag :rolleyes:

ah ted. you gotta question the stupidity of these politicians. no matter where they are from, or what their affiliation; it seems silly decisions are never too far away.

Billy Mays

Only changed his flight at 6am this morning awell ��

StringerBell

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

ah ted. you gotta question the stupidity of these politicians. no matter where they are from, or what their affiliation; it seems silly decisions are never too far away.

When you have no fear of consequences you live a charmed life.

Itssoeasy

Ah lads I won’t post the tweet but your man denesh whatshisname who was pardoned by trump tried to make an argument that Ted Cruz going to cancun was a good thing because it freed up resources to help the people of Texas. The level of ****e the right come up is something to admire in a weird way.

pixelburp

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

ah ted. you gotta question the stupidity of these politicians. no matter where they are from, or what their affiliation; it seems silly decisions are never too far away.

Ted Cruz occupies an incredibly safe seat, has no term limits to worry about, this is the system working as designed, the result of an inherently broken electorial system. No more than those safe seats you read of in the UK. Once more its a neat reminder that as wonky as our own political class can be, our actual PR system doesn't generally allow for safe seats to the same degree IMO. Yes, you got the Healy Rae's as a for instance but it's nowhere near as endemic as the US.

banie01

Cruz blamed his kids!
Said he was only trying to be a "good dad".
Was he being a good dad when he had his staffers request police assistance for his trip thru Houston airport?
Taking emergency response away from the biggest natural disaster to hit Texas in recent times?

Then he takes his dad duties so seriously that in his scramble to save face and get back to the states...
He blames his daughters.

Classy.

y0ssar1an22

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Ah lads I won’t post the tweet but your man denesh whatshisname who was pardoned by trump tried to make an argument that Ted Cruz going to cancun was a good thing because it freed up resources to help the people of Texas. The level of ****e the right come up is something to admire in a weird way.

what about nanci?

JohnFalstaff

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

what about nanci?

That's just whataboutery.

banie01

pixelburp wrote: »

Ted Cruz occupies an incredibly safe seat, has no term limits to worry about, this is the system working as designed, the result of an inherently broken electorial.

Given the steady increase in Dem votes in Texas and Cruz's piss poor performance in his last election that seat really is not as safe as it traditionally would seem.

On November 6, 2018, Cruz defeated O'Rourke 50.9%–48.3%.
That was Cruz running against a "pinko liberal" when Cruz wasn't carrying the stain of insurrection or what any half competent campaign manager will spin as cowardice with his "running away" from troubles in Texas and his desertion of his constituents.

Cruz is barring an electoral miracle approaching the end of his senatorial tenure IMO.

Muahahaha

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Ah lads I won’t post the tweet but your man denesh whatshisname who was pardoned by trump tried to make an argument that Ted Cruz going to cancun was a good thing because it freed up resources to help the people of Texas. The level of ****e the right come up is something to admire in a weird way.

Maybe Ted has gone down to Cancun to ask Mexicans for donations to pay for the wall

He really is some twat, imagine being off on holidays when 12 million people in your state are without water or electricity. And he did this knowing full well the snow and storms that were on the way.

Billy Mays

Lyin' Ted

https://twitter.com/DeanObeidallah/status/1362520418490408970?s=20

Tell me how

Ted just torched any chances of running in 2024 with his actions this week.
No way he'll get through a Republican Primary, which he was probably going to be approaching with at least 2 people in front of him as favourites anyway to then be able to talk about commitment to issues, understanding the common mans struggle etc etc with what he did here. Not that that last point was something the last Republican primary winner was able to say with any authority either.

Pence and Haley are rubbing their hands tonight. And not just to keep warm, like Ted is doing.

y0ssar1an22

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

That's just whataboutery.

jeny mac. the definition of

the good thing is, politicians in the US are held to the same standard so whataboutery never comes into play.

Muahahaha

Tell me how wrote: »

Ted just torched any chances of running in 2024 with his actions this week.
No way he'll get through a Republican Primary, which he was probably going to be approaching with at least 2 people in front of him as favourites anyway to then be able to talk about commitment to issues, understanding the common mans struggle etc etc with what he did here. Not that that last point was something the last Republican primary winner was able to say with any authority either.

Pence and Haley are rubbing their hands tonight. And not just to keep warm, like Ted is doing.

I think the real dark horse for 2024 is Mike Pompeo. His CV fits the role perfectly, he is a former army captain, former congressman, former head of the CIA and now a former Secretary of State. Plus he is the closest personality type the Reps have got to Trump (ie he is belligerent and ignornant in equal measure) and he would likely get Trumps endorsement, definitely ahead of Cruz, Pence and Nikki Haley anyway.

Pompeo definitely wants to run too if he can, there were reports that his courting of the Israelis was specifically designed to appeal to the Evangelist vote that Pence would hope to tap into. He was already lining his ducks up on a wall while he was Secretary of State. He's fiercely anti-Chyna too which ticks yet another box. And just like Trump he is an absolute bruiser when it comes to partisan politics.

For these reasons I backed him last week. I normally wouldnt tie up money for almost four years but Pompeos odds of 40/1 were just way too hard to resist. I think the bookies are away with the fairies putting his chances at 40/1 and his real value is more like 10/1 or 12/1. If he does run he can appeal to the Trumpists, the evangelists and the moderates of the Republican Party and he would be a formidable opponent for the presumptive Dem nominee Kamala Harris.

EltonJohn69

Tell me how wrote: »

Ted just torched any chances of running in 2024 with his actions this week.
No way he'll get through a Republican Primary, which he was probably going to be approaching with at least 2 people in front of him as favourites anyway to then be able to talk about commitment to issues, understanding the common mans struggle etc etc with what he did here. Not that that last point was something the last Republican primary winner was able to say with any authority either.

Pence and Haley are rubbing their hands tonight. And not just to keep warm, like Ted is doing.

I thought Teds beard would lock up the common man vote ?

Tell me how

Muahahaha wrote: »

I think the real dark horse for 2024 is Mike Pompeo. His CV fits the role perfectly, he is a former army captain, former congressman, former head of the CIA and now a former Secretary of State. Plus he is the closest personality type the Reps have got to Trump (ie he is belligerent and ignornant in equal measure) and he would likely get Trumps endorsement, definitely ahead of Cruz, Pence and Nikki Haley anyway.

Pompeo definitely wants to run too if he can, there were reports that his courting of the Israelis was specifically designed to appeal to the Evangelist vote that Pence would hope to tap into. He was already lining his ducks up on a wall while he was Secretary of State. He's fiercely anti-Chyna too which ticks yet another box. And just like Trump he is an absolute bruiser when it comes to partisan politics.

For these reasons I backed him last week. I normally wouldnt tie up money for almost four years but Pompeos odds of 40/1 were just way too hard to resist. I think the bookies are away with the fairies putting his chances at 40/1 and his real value is more like 10/1 or 12/1. If he does run he can appeal to the Trumpists, the evangelists and the moderates of the Republican Party and he would be a formidable opponent for the presumptive Dem nominee Kamala Harris.

Can't see him having the persona to attract voters. Think he would be a marketing nightmare but if America was in a time of conflict in 2024, then he might very well appeal through being the tough no nonsense type. 40/1 was probably a good bet to take, but I think they were fair odds at the same time.

I've strongly suggested Haley before but I think Pence will also be a strong contender. Trump might have done him a favour because Pence can both appeal to Trump fans by saying 'I believed in him for so long' but the constitution is more important and to have the Democrats say that his behaviour on the 6th was patriotic could come back to haunt them if they are competing against him.

Muahahaha

Time will tell but I think Pompeos forceful personality is a perfect replacement for Trump and he is as close as the Reps can get to a candidate that will have the backing of Trumpists. Pence is a charisma free zone and I see Haley as too much part of the Washington establishment to appeal to the Trump wing.

If he runs and it comes to the primaries I could see someone like Pompeo steamrolling the likes of Ted Cruz in the exact same way that Trump did, it would be pure bloodsports with Pompeo shouting everyone down. Theres lots of other factors to consider like his ability to fundraise but he has deep links with the military and aerospace industry (he used to own an aircraft parts company with the Kochs) so he will likely have the support of the military industrial complex, he'll probably even promise them a war if he gets elected.

Pompeo would lose handily to any Democrat. I don't think the 40/1 odds are off by any measure. In my opinion anyone looking to style themselves after Trump will doom their campaign. To win you need moderates on your side and being Trump's lapdog without having the cult of personality he has or the decades long brand he built, will turn moderates off in their droves. I think if the GOP chase the Trump hardliners they'll fall off a cliff. In roughly the same way that Corbyn chased the left wing part of Labour so hard he lost the middle who didn't bother to turn up or actively voted against him out of spite.

Trump voters are going to vote Republican not matter who it is. They will turn out because their hatred for the democrats far outweighs their hatred for the establishment. The GOP need to get the middle ground back not only to tempt moderates to vote but to try and neuter the Democrat voter turnout. The more boring a candidate the GOP run the less likely moderate leaning Dems will even turn up to vote. They need to stop appealing to hardline Alabama voters and start appealing to the suburban Texan voter, which they are losing.

Texas has been steadily narrowing for the past 2 decades and brash Trumpist like behaviour has only accelerated that.

Bush won in 04 with 61%
Mccain won in 08 with 55.5%
Romney won in 12 with 57%
Trump won in 16 with only 52%
He also won in 16 with 52% but the Dems voter turnout skyrocketed by 1.4 million votes, but Trump only added 1.2 million

If the Republicans go with Pompeo, a Trump like candidate, those 1.4 million extra votes for the democrats WILL turn up to vote. They will fight tooth and nail to vote against any Trump like clone. The question is would Pompeo be able to add the 1.2 million that Trump did? The answer is absolutely not. The man hasn't a hope of adding half of that to the traditional base vote. Californians are migrating to Texas at a rapid rate and they lean heavily democrat and even their Republicans are socially liberal by and large. Same with Arizona which is second on the list for Californian migration.

Arizona used to be a deep red state even as early as 10 years ago but now the latino vote is dead set against Republicans for their overt appeal to racial bigotry and with Pompeo paying tribute to Limbaugh in a warm tone this week, that wouldn't sit well with latinos in AZ considering the praise Limbaugh used to give Joe Arpaio for locking them up. Latinos are the fastest growing demographic in the US and in quite a few of these swing states like Arizona, Nevada and even now, Texas. The Republicans would be mad to pick Pompeo to run in 2024. No latino is going to look at him and his time in Trump's white house and his friendship with Limbaugh and think "that's a man who has my interests at heart".

Brussels Sprout

Muahahaha wrote: »

Time will tell but I think Pompeos forceful personality is a perfect replacement for Trump and he is as close as the Reps can get to a candidate that will have the backing of Trumpists. Pence is a charisma free zone and I see Haley as too much part of the Washington establishment to appeal to the Trump wing.

If he runs and it comes to the primaries I could see someone like Pompeo steamrolling the likes of Ted Cruz in the exact same way that Trump did, it would be pure bloodsports with Pompeo shouting everyone down. Theres lots of other factors to consider like his ability to fundraise but he has deep links with the military and aerospace industry (he used to own an aircraft parts company with the Kochs) so he will likely have the support of the military industrial complex, he'll probably even promise them a war if he gets elected.

The thing about Trump is that he had a mix of different attributes that when put together just seemed to work for him in attracting the MAGA base. Pompeo certainly has some of these attributes. He's a loud bully who loves nothing more than goading "the libs". The thing is though that he is entirely charmless and only seems to have a single mode.

Like Trump has these odd moments where he would, out of the blue, speak entirely candidly about his plans or his thoughts and the crowds loved that because they recognised that it was real. Mike Pompeo does not possess that ability. He would never announce aloud his inner scheming and as a result he comes across as another calculating politician, albeit an extremely belligerent one.

On the flip side to those moments of earnestness, Trump was also able to get away with saying outrageous stuff at times because people chose not to believe him or at least give him a pass because they saw it as a piece of performance art - like he was a showman. He was also incredibly camp. Like using "Macho Man" as his walkout tune - come on! In contrast, Mike Pompeo would just scare the sh1t out of people if he said some of those things.

expectationlost

what is the position of senators in the US, would it be like a opposition senator here going off on holidays, looks terrible, but he doesn't really have any power to actually do anything for the situation particularly because its Texas.