Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

Options
1103010311033103510361190

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 28,346 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    Its rather stating the obvious, but the obvious needs to be stated as often as possible:

    When he loses an election, he claims it’s rigged; when the press reports the truth, he blasts the “fake news”; when he’s investigated, he claims it’s a witch hunt; when he’s indicted, he warns the grand jury is biased; when he loses a case, he condemns the entire court system as corrupt. The mantra of victimization is now at the center of a presidential campaign based on the perception that he’s being politically persecuted and is driving his determination to dedicate a second term to retribution.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/08/politics/donald-trump-supreme-court-2024-analysis/index.html



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,580 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    It goes back to Iowa in 2016, same playbook. Guts of a decade later, rinse & repeat. Depressing really.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,444 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    It goes back much longer than that - That's the 1st political one , but he claimed that the Emmy awards were "rigged" against him as well for years before that.

    He is functionally incapable of processing the concept of defeat/loss and as a result is incapable of any kind of introspection or personal growth. It's why he cannot move on from 2020.

    When things don't go to plan it simply cannot possibly be his fault and has to be as a result of some kind of nefarious actions specifically designed to impact him.

    It's a core feature of Malignant Narcissism.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,298 ✭✭✭PropJoe10


    Indeed. The fact that a fair percentage of the population is willing to believe one man, a conman and court-confirmed sexual deviant with multiple bankruptcies against his name, 4 times indicted and twice impeached, over the findings of the courts and Congress, just confirms to me that its a cult we're dealing with.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,580 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    That's a fair point. One can argue that narcissism seems to be a common trait amongst most high level politicians, so specifying the malignant nature is a good call.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,855 ✭✭✭Rawr


    I kind of doubt he'd be happy even then.

    I think I remember watching a documentary on Trump shortly before the 2016 Election, where they covered a lot of Trump's adventures and failures throughout the 80's and 90's. From his early days working with his father up to the incredible disaster that was the Trump Taj Mahal.

    One segment covered Trump making the move to Reality TV and "The Apprentice". In it, one of the creating producers of The Apprentice described going to Trump Tower in the late 90's to pitch the idea to Donald Trump, to see if he'd be interested being the lead character in their new show. He described a sorry sight upon entering Trump's office. The room apparently stank and looked like it was decaying, as if it hadn't been maintained in years.

    Futhermore, upon agreeing to be in the show Trump apparently insisted that he be described as a "Billionare". Apparently this was very important to him, and came up often.

    Kind of paints a picture of a washed up loser, already then in the late 90's, early 2000's. who had pissed away all of his inheritence on countless failed business ideas and if it hadn't been for the life-saver of Reality TV, he would have decayed futher into obsurity.

    Trump needs the limelight, and something to declare himself as special. Be it "Billionare", "The Donald", or most lately the "President of the United States". I think beyond the protections of the office of POTUS, both legal and financial, it is this sense of *being special and important* that he wants to cling onto, no matter the cost to the rest of the world.

    For his efforts, I hope the history books will remember him as the danger that many of us already percieve him as.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,705 ✭✭✭✭briany


    The thing about Trump is that he's pretty much always been that. Every single thing that goes against him is in some way unfair. What's changed is the amount of people amenable to listening to him when he says that kind of thing. Why have people lost such faith in various public institutions that they will take it as read when Trump says a particular element of an institution is corrupt, and if you would find out the reason why that's happening and reverse it, you'd be on your way to making Trump irrelevant.

    But it's like people either can't get their heads around the fundamental problems which give rise to something like MAGA or figure that they're too big to tackle that we're all just looking to put out fires where and when they appear rather than remove the fuel, so to speak.



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,595 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Regarding the thing about wanting to make sure he was called a billionaire, years ago when they did the Roast of Donald Trump, the comedians were told the only thing that was off limits was his bankruptcies and saying he had less money than he claimed; they could only refer to him as a billionaire not a millionaire.

    His marriages, kids... none of those were off limits. Just don't say he's not a billionaire.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,447 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Apparently, one of the Trump attorneys involved in the Mar-a-Largo documents case (remember that one?,) has never owned a laptop and was unable to process the discovery documents on their tablet. The prosecution graciously provided the attorney a laptop, but they were flummoxed on how to use it and repeatedly called from help from the Prosecution. I mean, the attorney had to look at videos on a laptop, that's hard...


    Amazing. "The best people." An attorney that's never owned a laptop? Sure they're really an attorney?


    Edit: Attorney owns a tablet. Link to abovethelawarticle.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,383 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    SCOTUS are hearing arguments today re whether Trump should be on the ballot.

    Considering his wife was involved, how the **** is it okay for Clarence Thomas to not recuse himself?



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,444 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    It isn't , but he doesn't give a damn and no one is going to tell him otherwise.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,705 ✭✭✭✭briany


    Unless Thomas himself has expressed support for the 'Stop the Steal' movement, then the argument would be that he's unduly influenced by people with whom he has a close association. I cannot discount that as a possibility, but it then opens up the question of what individuals a SCOTUS justice is surrounded by and what their political beliefs are, not just for him, but everyone on the panel. At the end of the day, they're human beings and it has to be trusted that they're making judgements on points of law rather than what their spouse thinks about a particular issue. Not a perfect system, but what system made of people is?



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,389 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Roberts and ACB also worked as lawyers arguing for Bush in Bush v Gore.

    They were quite evasive during confirmation about how much of the case they worked on.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,455 ✭✭✭francois




  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,444 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    There's a very real difference between "A few of my mates down the pub voted for that guy" and "My wife was directly and actively involved in the attempted commission of a coup".

    The 1st one can be forgiven on the basis of objectivity and professionalism , the 2nd one is a conflict of interest without any question because if he were to concur that Trump should be barred from the ballot because he is guilty of Insurrection then his wife instantly becomes open to those very same charges.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,705 ✭✭✭✭briany


    If it is a clear conflict of interest, then is there not some mechanism to recuse him without needing his approval?



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,444 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Sadly no - It's up to each individual Justice to make that determination themselves - They can't be recused against their wishes.

    Roberts could "ask" if he wanted to , but Thomas could equally tell him to get stuffed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,949 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Nope when it comes to scotus they are literally a law unto themselves beyond being impeached which thanks to the high threshold requirement of a super majority in the senate is incredibly hard to do.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,705 ✭✭✭✭briany


    If the court finds against Trump on the questions being asked, then a dissenting opinion from Thomas wouldn't really matter because such a finding requires a majority of justices to agree. If we assume that Thomas and Trump's three appointees are walking around in private wearing MAGA hats, the SCOTUS still has a non-MAGA majority of 5-4, as the assumption of conservative=Trump supporter disregards that Conservatism before Trump and after aren't exactly the same.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,447 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    That is a possible outcome. Some of the legal commentariat are saying the DC appeals court (Circuit #3) did such a good job with their ruling that one realistic outcome is that the SCOTUS doesn't even hear the case. IMO the SCOTUS would be smart to do that. They're pretty busy these days with other Trump nonsense as well as destroying regulatory powers and other "Conservative" agenda items.



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 23,161 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kiith


    There's no way in hell they are ruling against Trump.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,313 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    If the SC rules against Trump, they're gonna need secret service protection if they didn't already, and the Conspiracy Theory of MAGA will go into overdrive and then some.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,383 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Yeah, it looks like they are going to side with Citizen Trump.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,094 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    He describes a partisan worst-case-scenario where some Democratic states rule that a Republican candidate engages in "insurrection" and kick them off the ballot, and Republican-controlled states do the same to a Democrat.


    Then only a handful of swing states would determine the presidency, he theorises. "That's a pretty daunting consequence," he says.


    As opposed to now when only a handful of swing states determine the presidency.


    Whilst there might be attempts a knocking opposing candidates from state elections, there would still need to be some kind of actual legal reasoning behind doing so... Such a engaging in an insurrection.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,304 ✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    Trump speaking now about the democratics interfering in the election again referring to the Supreme court ballot hearing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 82,389 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Based on the justices arguments it sounds like they’re going to decide this along party lines.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,383 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Another word salad, bullshit bingo so he can wrangle some dollars from the uneducated masses.

    No one with their head screwed on listens to him anymore.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,304 ✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    I like to think I have my head screwed on and I listen to him.

    Mostly for comedic effect though. 😋

    The shear volume of people in the US who are listening to him is seriously worrying though.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,383 ✭✭✭✭everlast75




This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement