Trump Thread [Archive] - Page 6

View Full Version : Trump Thread

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12

Seamus Fermanagh

12-12-2017, 23:58

Strike is certainly on point when it comes to Alabama. The state has been staunchly GOP for quite some time now. Moore handed them their best hope of a win in who knows how long, and they really need to plunge that one in to the hilt.

I am not as sure that the Dems are quite as out of touch as he suggests, VA this time around had a lot more "grass roots" level stuff by the Dems and less national level focus and they held onto everything they already had and made some gains.

On the whole though, keeping it local is what works in most US elections.

Hooahguy

12-13-2017, 01:46

Reports (https://thinkprogress.org/alabamians-cry-voter-suppression-50ddc1b53b3a/)of potential voter suppression in Alabama:

Dechauna Jiles was excited to cast a ballot on Tuesday for Democratic Senate candidate Doug Jones. She said her parents grew up two blocks from the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, which was bombed by the KKK during the civil rights movement, and it would be a dishonor to her family to not vote in this election.

But when she arrived at her polling place, the First Assembly of God Church, on Tuesday morning, Jiles was told that she was “inactive” on the rolls and would have to cast a provisional ballot — a ballot that will not be counted unless she is able to verify her voter information.

“That makes no sense,” she told ThinkProgress, explaining that the poll workers told her she’d have to drive to another precinct to update her information, even though she voted here last November.

“It’s not that we’re not showing up to vote — we’re being suppressed,” Jiles said. “[Roy Moore, the Republican nominee] is going to win, not because our people didn’t speak, but because our vote was suppressed.”

Jiles said she witnessed at least six other voters also being forced to vote provisional, and reports on Twitter indicate the issue is more widespread than just this one polling location.

“I wasn’t the only person that got turned away,” she said.

History may not repeat itself but it sure does rhyme.

Seamus Fermanagh

12-13-2017, 03:01

Reports (https://thinkprogress.org/alabamians-cry-voter-suppression-50ddc1b53b3a/)of potential voter suppression in Alabama:

History may not repeat itself but it sure does rhyme.

A recurrent problem. Mostly it is a person who has "always" gone to the polls there whose polling place has been changed and since they only vote infrequently they didn't pay attention. Sometimes, people are taken off the list for various reasons, and sometimes those taken off are done so by party officials who are trying to suppress some perceived voter group.

Our system is not perfect. But at least most states are preserving your right not to have a voter card or need to present ID to vote.

CrossLOPER

12-13-2017, 06:04

Reports (https://thinkprogress.org/alabamians-cry-voter-suppression-50ddc1b53b3a/)of potential voter suppression in Alabama:

History may not repeat itself but it sure does rhyme.
Kiddy-fiddler lost.

Hooahguy

12-13-2017, 06:42

Oh thank the gods. Alabama for once in my life did not let everyone down.

Montmorency

12-13-2017, 08:08

Oh thank the gods. Alabama for once in my life did not let everyone down.

Thank you Black America.

https://i.imgur.com/K5fo3Vm.png

Roy Moore (https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/voters-head-to-the-polls-in-contentious-senate-race-in-alabama/2017/12/11/26e36b56-deb7-11e7-8679-a9728984779c_story.html?utm_term=.35bf726153b7)may seek recount. Inconveniently, the conservative Alabama Supreme Court at the last minute stayed an injunction (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/12/alabama-court-gives-last-minute-order-that-could-impede-recount-procedure) to retain electronic ballots for recount. ha ha?

drone

12-13-2017, 15:59

Roll Tide.

HopAlongBunny

12-13-2017, 17:05

Good news for the Dems: they took an election in a deep red state that hasn't elected a Democrat in 25 years!
Bad news: Not every Dem will be facing trainwreck like Roy Moore in the mid-terms.

Well, a win is a win is a win; sure, but the narrow margin shows that a lot of work remains to be done.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/roy-moore-senate-alabama-election-doug-jones-result-1.4445530

Kralizec

12-13-2017, 19:24

The reason I originally endorsed Luther Strange (and his numbers went up mightily), is that I said Roy Moore will not be able to win the General Election. I was right! Roy worked hard but the deck was stacked against him!

Trump initially endorsed Luther Strange,
Luther Strange lost and so Trump deleted his tweets in his support.

Trump endorsed Roy Moore,
Roy Moore lost and so Trump wants credit for supporting Strange in the first place.

Seamus Fermanagh

12-13-2017, 19:27

Trump initially endorsed Luther Strange,
Luther Strange lost and so Trump deleted his tweets in his support.

Trump endorsed Roy Moore,
Roy Moore lost and so Trump wants credit for supporting Strange in the first place.

And you find this behavior in a politician strange why? Seems to be more of the usual "have/eat cake" efforts I am familiar with from most pols.

Kralizec

12-13-2017, 19:32

Seamus Fermanagh

12-13-2017, 23:03

Granted, this is a rather mundane and harmless example.

Most politicians will tell a lie or bend the truth every now and then. Trump does it a lot more than average, in a much more obvious manner and shows no embarassment when confronted with the truth.

I have no idea why I'm telling you this.

I do not know if his "spinning" efforts are more frequent than others in his line of work. I must agree that he is about as subtle as a bull in a Venetian glass gallery.

HopAlongBunny

12-13-2017, 23:24

I think one lady summed up the best advice for both R's and D's
"Nominate people we can vote for"

Husar

12-14-2017, 00:51

A recurrent problem. Mostly it is a person who has "always" gone to the polls there whose polling place has been changed and since they only vote infrequently they didn't pay attention. Sometimes, people are taken off the list for various reasons, and sometimes those taken off are done so by party officials who are trying to suppress some perceived voter group.

Our system is not perfect. But at least most states are preserving your right not to have a voter card or need to present ID to vote.

My government send me a card or letter that I take to the polling station. Usually no ID is required but I have one on me anyway. The card or letter contains both the information about where I have to vote and how to ask for a ballot that I can mail in.

It is really not a complicated thing, but somehow the USA always seem to make it far more complicated than that.

CrossLOPER

12-14-2017, 01:02

Seamus Fermanagh

12-14-2017, 01:14

My government send me a card or letter that I take to the polling station. Usually no ID is required but I have one on me anyway. The card or letter contains both the information about where I have to vote and how to ask for a ballot that I can mail in.

It is really not a complicated thing, but somehow the USA always seem to make it far more complicated than that.

We were a country that required you to go to your courthouse to register to vote and turned out 40% or more of the electorate on a rainy polling day in November to exercise the franchise for an "off year" election.

We now have voting months labeled "early voting," voter registration at the department of motor vehicles or even online, judges holding polling places open 2-3 hours after their official closing time on election day itself, and an endless litany of "They're trying to suppress our vote" diatribes.

Galling.

Montmorency

12-14-2017, 01:17

Pannonian

12-14-2017, 01:31

Who was the electorate?

Americans presumably.

Husar

12-14-2017, 02:50

We were a country that required you to go to your courthouse to register to vote and turned out 40% or more of the electorate on a rainy polling day in November to exercise the franchise for an "off year" election.

We now have voting months labeled "early voting," voter registration at the department of motor vehicles or even online, judges holding polling places open 2-3 hours after their official closing time on election day itself, and an endless litany of "They're trying to suppress our vote" diatribes.

Galling.

Well, this may be the case in some states, it only takes a cursory look at Wikipedia to see how they do not apply in others. :dizzy2:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression_in_the_United_States#Closure_of_DMV_offices

I didn't read the entire article, but I remember from somewhere that the registration places in some states or counties are open only 1 or 2 times a month during the time most peopple are at work and so on. Additionally they have few of them so people can't just hop over during lunch break because they have to wait in line and so on.

Your dismissal might be a bit over the top and no "making it easier" beats automatic registration anyway.

a completely inoffensive name

12-14-2017, 08:37

Montmorency

12-14-2017, 11:46

Voting should be mandatory. There is no such thing as refusing to participate. Politics is life in a democratic society. Refusing to vote is the same as voting for the winner. Blah, blah, blah but I believe it.

Maybe, but you shouldn't lionize voting per se. It's just one more tool.

Civic participation in general is the key thing. Otherwise, whoever manages to vote in the highest number of local, state, and federal elections for which they are eligible would be considered a paragon. Yet, by voting and then getting back to private affairs one probably would tend to accomplish less than someone who is an activist in their community and country yet never votes.

Three rules for voting:

1. Track how close the race is.
2. Evaluate the importance of the position in the context of the issues that matter.
3. If you're expecting to write in a symbolic vote, just stay away.

spmetla

12-15-2017, 20:39

Voting should be mandatory but there should also be mandatory options of "abstain" "none of the above" "vote against candidate XXX" for each individual contest and ballot issue that way someone can participate without having to blindly casting votes. It's always horrified me when some of my friends have voted and they only know about the top tier candidates (President, Governor, Senators) but haven't got a clue about any of the many other lower positions or ballot issues and as such having to vote by either selecting party or whether the name "sounds good."

Montmorency

12-15-2017, 21:02

spmetla

12-15-2017, 21:28

That'd be nice too

Husar

12-15-2017, 21:57

It's always horrified me when some of my friends have voted and they only know about the top tier candidates (President, Governor, Senators) but haven't got a clue about any of the many other lower positions or ballot issues and as such having to vote by either selecting party or whether the name "sounds good."

Me too, usually when I'm the one voting though. I tend to have no or little idea about the individual ideas of local MPs and when I tried to find some of them online, the local parties barely seemed to have a web presence. Driving to their office or whatever to talk to them is not something that time allows. :shrug:

This might also explain why I'm not the biggest fan of all too localized politics, as it tends to make keeping track of politics on 3 or 4 levels a rather time-consuming task.

Then again I'm not even aware of anything I'd want changed locally but quite a few things I'd want changed (inter-)nationally. :sweatdrop:
Plus where I live right now, most people have appear to have preferences very much unlike my own, so I tend to vote for a party that gets nowhere anyway.

It's an interesting issue though and I won't claim I'm handling it perfectly.

HopAlongBunny

12-16-2017, 00:18

A nice overview of Trumpisms election, arc and consequences.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/trump-tribalism-american-capitalism-171213074012028.html

America will survive Trump, but what will it look like afterward?
Will America have to refight the battles that gave effective regulation, labor standards, environmental protection...etc?
Still need to see whether Trump's America embraces competition or the move to ever greater monopoly :creep:

Seamus Fermanagh

12-16-2017, 03:14

Gilrandir

12-16-2017, 15:49

This might also explain why I'm not the biggest fan of all too localized politics, as it tends to make keeping track of politics on 3 or 4 levels a rather time-consuming task.

IMO there shouldn't be localized politics altogether. Local authorities should deal with the local roads, schools, hospitals etc. When they try to drag politics into what street should be repaired first and the representative of what party should run all parks of the city - streets and parks stay neglected waiting for the authorities to finish their brawl.

Hooahguy

12-17-2017, 02:30

Rumor is (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/365247-rep-speier-rumors-say-trump-could-fire-mueller-before-christmas) Trump will fire Mueller in the coming week or so.

Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) said Friday that "rumors" on Capitol Hill suggest President Trump could fire special counsel Robert Mueller before Christmas, after Congress leaves Washington for the winter recess.

“The rumor on the Hill when I left yesterday was that the president was going to make a significant speech at the end of next week. And on Dec. 22, when we are out of D.C., he was going to fire Robert Mueller," Speier told California's KQED News.

Speier, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said that Trump was trying to shut down the committee's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, pointing to the lack of interviews scheduled for the new year.

If the rumor is true, I would expect a furor from the left about obstruction of justice on the part of Trump. Republicans will probably make excuses for it, or feign outrage and then do nothing. There are massive protests (https://act.moveon.org/event/mueller-firing-rapid-response/) already being planned though by activists. I would expect a full blown crisis from this event, should it occur.

HopAlongBunny

12-17-2017, 03:09

De-legitimizing the present is necessary to set the future.
The rule of law; its already a tiered system, why not make it official?

Seamus Fermanagh

12-17-2017, 04:15

Er....this rumor is trying to make Trump sound like Nixon up to and including a rumored Archibald Cox parallel....this isn't even very original as a rumor concept.

Hooahguy

12-17-2017, 06:19

Er....this rumor is trying to make Trump sound like Nixon up to and including a rumored Archibald Cox parallel....this isn't even very original as a rumor concept.
Well considering how the Nixon thing went down, can you blame Democrats for drawing parallels? Another Saturday Night Massacre would be a field day for opponents of the administration, and force the hand of the GOP to either recognize the obstruction of justice or ignore it and put more fuel on the fire for the 2018 and 2020 elections. After the results of the special election in Alabama, things are trending blue and most people know it.

HopAlongBunny

12-17-2017, 13:49

Rumor or "trial balloon?"
It's not unusual to release a possibly controversial idea as a rumor just to see what reaction it gets.
Is that the case in this instance? No idea.
Fact is though, some commentators are looking at the consequences if the rumor were to become reality.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/11/america-is-heading-for-an-unprecedented-constitutional-crisis/

That it has to be considered is mind boggling; no this not Chile, Nicaragua, Egypt or Syria we are talking about, this is the U.S.

Taking a different tack:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/12/mueller-obtained-thousands-trump-transition-emails-171217094237525.html

I think this is well on the way to: just throw as much crap as you can at the wall, run with anything that sticks.

Seamus Fermanagh

12-17-2017, 15:42

Well considering how the Nixon thing went down, can you blame Democrats for drawing parallels? Another Saturday Night Massacre would be a field day for opponents of the administration, and force the hand of the GOP to either recognize the obstruction of justice or ignore it and put more fuel on the fire for the 2018 and 2020 elections. After the results of the special election in Alabama, things are trending blue and most people know it.

H'guy:

My avidly left-wing family and friends (I have a fair number of such, after all I work in academe) would very much want to see/hope to see/expect to see just that from Trump. This is because they have already judged him as guilty since they cannot accept that enough of the American people in the right combination of states would actually vote for this asshat.

This kind of rumor reflects their pre-judgement more than it does any known fact or evidentiary train leading to the Oval. They want the parallel to be true and they're salivating at the thought. They want this 'conspiracy' to be true with the fervor of a Rosswell X-files tinfoil hatter.

I myself fall back on Hanlon's Razor and find it a powerful tool in explaining the Trump administration's efforts.

And the Dems truly have no one to blame but themselves. They managed to run a woman who is arguably the ONLY candidate who turned voters across the political spectrum off enough so as to allow Trump's coalition of the disgruntled to eke out an EC win.

Montmorency

12-17-2017, 15:50

H'guy:

My avidly left-wing family and friends (I have a fair number of such, after all I work in academe) would very much want to see/hope to see/expect to see just that from Trump. This is because they have already judged him as guilty since they cannot accept that enough of the American people in the right combination of states would actually vote for this asshat.

This kind of rumor reflects their pre-judgement more than it does any known fact or evidentiary train leading to the Oval. They want the parallel to be true and they're salivating at the thought. They want this 'conspiracy' to be true with the fervor of a Rosswell X-files tinfoil hatter.

I myself fall back on Hanlon's Razor and find it a powerful tool in explaining the Trump administration's efforts.

And the Dems truly have no one to blame but themselves. They managed to run a woman who is arguably the ONLY candidate who turned voters across the political spectrum off enough so as to allow Trump's coalition of the disgruntled to eke out an EC win.

The only people to blame are the Trump voters. It's as simple as that.

Fox News (https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/939680540411793408):

There is a cleansing needed in the FBI and the Department of Justice. It needs to be cleansed of individuals who should not just be fired, but who need to be taken out in handcuffs.

Do these unconscionable miscreants realize what they're doing? In the normal course of history their shenanigans would be liable to get them lined up against a wall - at best.

Hooahguy

12-17-2017, 16:02

Montmorency

12-17-2017, 16:10

Couldnt you say the exact same thing about Republicans about Clinton with Benghazi and the emails and whatnot?

Don't fall into the whataboutist cliche, it muddles what's going on around us.

Either there are crimes, or there are not. Either the Republican Party is a legitimate political organization, or it is a criminal front. Either we are a Republic, or a petty despotism.

Hooahguy

12-17-2017, 16:18

Don't fall into the whataboutist cliche, it muddles what's going on around us.

Either there are crimes, or there are not. Either the Republican Party is a legitimate political organization, or it is a criminal front. Either we are a Republic, or a petty despotism.

Well thats a generalization if I have ever heard one, there is a grey area between.

My point is that its a valid tactic to get people into the voting booths. During the Obama years, whipping the base up into a frenzy worked for the GOP to take back the House, and then the Senate. Now look at the Democratic base now. This type of mobilization was not really seen for a non-presidential election race prior to 2016 and so far its working pretty well for Democrats (like in Alabama). Now analysts say that taking back the Senate is actually within reach for Democrats, assuming this furor holds up.

Montmorency

12-17-2017, 16:29

Well thats a generalization if I have ever heard one, there is a grey area between.

My point is that its a valid tactic to get people into the voting booths. During the Obama years, whipping the base up into a frenzy worked for the GOP to take back the House, and then the Senate. Now look at the Democratic base now. This type of mobilization was not really seen for a non-presidential election race prior to 2016 and so far its working pretty well for Democrats (like in Alabama). Now analysts say that taking back the Senate is actually within reach for Democrats, assuming this furor holds up.

I don't think there is a gray area. Or, the Democratic Party constitutes the gray area.

You speak as if it's a worthy goal or great achievement in itself to mobilize voters to vote Democratic, just to get those numbers on paper. But you can't lose sight of the aim here, which is to halt the harms of the current government and to clarify just how deep the water we've gotten into is.

This is much more serious than mere partisan politics. As Max Boot says (http://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari-melber/watch/gop-sen-jones-win-great-for-america-1116110915845), I hope "every single Republican running for election next November loses".

Hooahguy

12-17-2017, 21:15

Of course its serious. I would love it if people were driven to the voting booths by rational policy debates and whatnot. But we as a country are so far past that point that the whole "when they go low, we go high" thing doesnt really seem to work anymore. So I see it as a deal with the devil. Use the same tactics the GOP used during the Obama years to get the Dems back in power. And then when the Trump years are over, try to get the civility back. Of course that is a big if. I honestly dont see this ever happening as both sides realize how profitable this sort of perpetual outrage is. After all, a Fox News host just suggested (http://thehill.com/homenews/media/365331-fox-news-faces-backlash-saying-the-us-may-be-facing-a-coup-with-mueller) that Mueller is orchestrating a coup. Its only going to get worse, and we can only hope it will get better.

Seamus Fermanagh

12-18-2017, 04:52

Couldnt you say the exact same thing about Republicans about Clinton with Benghazi and the emails and whatnot? Chanting "lock her up" isnt reflecting pre-judgement?

Of course you could. If you haven't already guessed from my references to "asshat-in-chief" thus far on divers threads, I am NOT a Trump fanboy. There very much IS a notable slice of the Trump/GOP crowd that is as unthinkingly ant-left as any frustrated communard hanging around the DNC with their 'we-want-Bernie' sign is anti-right.

I am simply, and I think consistently, noting that all of the vitriol and hyperbole dueling isn't substance. If there is a substantive connection between Trump and criminal abuse of the political system during, or obstruction of justice after the election, it eventually will out. Until such time, all of this is just persiflage.

a completely inoffensive name

12-18-2017, 07:05

Maybe, but you shouldn't lionize voting per se. It's just one more tool.

Civic participation in general is the key thing. Otherwise, whoever manages to vote in the highest number of local, state, and federal elections for which they are eligible would be considered a paragon. Yet, by voting and then getting back to private affairs one probably would tend to accomplish less than someone who is an activist in their community and country yet never votes.

Three rules for voting:

1. Track how close the race is.
2. Evaluate the importance of the position in the context of the issues that matter.
3. If you're expecting to write in a symbolic vote, just stay away.
I think when people are forced to make a choice, there is a psychological element that spurs activism.
No studies to prove that hypothesis on my end. Only my own observations that many of the Trump/Bernie supporters were apathetic citizens who bought into the idea of an outsider. Once they committed to vote for them based on their appealing image, they began to spend their money on campaign donations and their time shitposting on the internet. Mandatory voting abuses the sunk cost fallacy that pervades everyday thinking.

a completely inoffensive name

12-18-2017, 07:49

If there is a substantive connection between Trump and criminal abuse of the political system during, or obstruction of justice after the election, it eventually will out.

But what are your reasons for believing this?

Seamus, you must know as well as any honest American in here why the American system has been so resilient for the last 220+ years of American democracy.
We have to be serious that the structural success has been tied to the strength of our American culture towards separation of power and respect for the rule of law.

In other countries where this culture has not been cultivated, primary the Latin American/South American countries, presidents have easily become dictatorships with the support of a politically aligned legislature. The Presidential system by itself cannot be said to be effective at holding off tyranny. We admitted as such when we modeled the Iraqi government under the Parliamentary system, not our own. I have read at times that our Civil War greatly influenced the Australian people to move closer to the Parliamentarian system over the Presidential for their government.

Our own country has been steered away from crucial moments of tyranny, which not talked about too often. Under FDR, we were at risk of a jeopardized SCOTUS by setting the precedent that a popular president with the political clout could stack a hostile court with 5, 10, 15 more sympathetic justices. It was only the individual strength of character by Truman after him, that restored the balance of power by respecting the SCOTUS decision to deny Truman a government take over of striking steel mills during war time (Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer).

The past 200 years have been an exercise, not in the strength of American democracy, but in the strength of America's political and moral character. We lionize ideals and expect politicians to uphold them.

When Monty talks about how deep the waters are, it's more salient than many people realize. Yourself included. There is a tacit approval by a large contingent of Americans, who under the influence of Trumpism, follow this administrations cues to demean and smear the character of our existing law enforcement and policy generating institutions. Our president is calling the FBI political hacks, tainted and infiltrated by the 'other'. He has directly challenged the objectivity of the courts.

American history shows here is another moment where our institutions are vulnerable, and our culture is failing. Our only cure has been to stumble into 'Great Men' blessed with the restraint and character to guide us back to Liberal Democracy.

Will our next president be another Truman? Do you believe such a correction with come from the Republican Party in 2020? The Democrats? If you can't say yes to any of these questions, you should be worried. To maintain your cavalier attitude to current events is naive at best.

Greyblades

12-19-2017, 00:26

Montmorency

12-19-2017, 01:43

Tell me, without hint of incredulity if you are able, what does history tell you happened when your institutions were worthy of the supposed smear? When your courts were not objective and those protective branches acted political?

Socialists (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_socialist_movement_in_the_United_States) scared the piss (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Revolution) out of the elites and forced a little honesty from them. Before that, violence.

Greyblades

12-19-2017, 02:05

Why do you think that diversity of opinion on Trump's character or fitness has merit, rather than being a sign of moral and intellectual defect? Do you actually have anything to offer on the subject besides indistinct contrarianism and water-carrying?

So what?
Diversity of opinion is what keeps you sane, history has shown time and again that excluding those that dont share your consensus results in modes of thought that diverges with reality and an inevitable failure to react once reality doesnt go as expected. It's the same self delusion that every tinpot tyrant of the last two centuries indulged in and thier people suffered for it.

The same mindset has gripped this thread where the most divergeant voice is again seamus and the menagerie have reverted to the pre election dreams of inevitable deliverance. Yet what disturbs me is that such as monty are acting like you are so convinced thar your viewpoint on trump's character or fitness is the only possible one; you think anyone who disagrees is defective.

The more I come here the more it feels that all the posters I used to look up to here have either left in disgust or succumbed to the latest moral panic; you are neither a fool or a provocateur, I have never seen you use such hyperbole before so for someone like you to so dehumanize an entire political subset in apparant sincerity is frankly disheartening.

George W. Bush's tenure is one of the only things keeping Trump from claiming the title of "Worst POTUS".

He long ago claimed "Worst Candidate", however.

This is patently untrue, the fifteen candidates he walked over in victory proves this.

He's instead undermined NATO by reducing his understanding and support to simple transnational accounting.

NATO is an enormous drain on resources the US millitary could be using else where and the urgency for america to garrison the border has become rather thin since '91, why is it so bad that Trump would want to put a fire under the feet of NATO's hangers on? I dont see much cause to believe that they would abandon it, call his bluff perhaps but with the ukranians as example I see little actual risk in this.

Left the TPP which was supposed to help us check China's economic clout. I think you will find little agreement that it was worth having your government open to being sued by companies for causing lost profits through policy decisions, as well as further exposing america's allready struggling working class to competition by vietnamese sweatshops.

I've heard abouth the revisions that have come with the US leaving it, but I must ask those who would point to them what makes you think an american congress (or more specifically it's lobby) that was ensuring such bad terms remained would allow trump to join it without such conditions?
It is perhaps reminiscient Britain's retreat from the EU, the ideal is forever out of reach for the one nation that was willing to leave over its imperfections.

He openly sides with every autocrat around, has yet to criticize Putin for anything.
The first is definitively false, else Trump'd be siding with him over iran and north korea. The second is somewhat hard to cross with the fact that he didnt hesitate to bomb Putin's pet syrian, broke a deal with the iranian and antagonize the korean.

Additionally both assertions require an agreement that autocracies or putins are never right to side with, which as doctrine is one roundly rejected by many of your cold war presidents and the previous two presidents who divested from Realpolitik are remembered as foreign relation catastrophes by all but thier party.

I dare say trump is finding kinship with putin when both bear the brunt of the democrats attempts to excuse thier electoral performance, an irony that in a way the democrats are doing more to bridge the US-Russia divide by criticism than they ever did during their own attempts at extending the olive branch.

Looking at how his trip to Asia has gone he's made it obvious he's no negotiator or deal maker, he just wants to be courted and feel important. You'll have to elaborate; as far as I have seen it has been your standard state visit tour, there hasnt been any visible negociation or deals to exhibit competence or lack thereof.

He's made it plain for all to see that he's actually not used to having to do anything. If any legislation requires more than his vocal support he doesn't seem to do anything to push for it's being passed.
I am assuming you are referring to the attempts to replace obamacare, the bills proposed by GOP congressmen that proved to be political poison and that would have actually made things worse?

I suspect he didnt give them much support for a reason.

His threat to democracy is evident in his on going war with the press. Yes, they don't like him. He is however a compulsive liar and his constant contradictions, statements in the realm of fantasy, and undermining of the very people he picked to do his work for him undermine our democracy. No it doesnt.

Actions that undermine democracy are things that interfere with the voting process, like how democrats bus voters or republicans deny ex convicts the vote, Turkey's use of the coup to rewrite of the constitution or China's state media monopoly actually censoring the press would also count.

I am confused at a definition of undermining democracy that includes verbally chewing out hostile media outlets on twitter and making functionaries lives difficult. Undermining the government's ability to function sounds closer to what you mean but it seems to be silly to be complaining about it now since it had been effectively immobile for just under a decade before trump showed up. As for the tweets, the entirety of thier impact have been entirely on the reaction they entail, typically by those who give those 280 characters far more thought and importance then he did.

He as a key negotiator should know how to schmooze people, instead he feuds with Mitch and Ryan, insults respectable people like Mccain making our system of checks and balances a deadlock instead. I would say the utility of negociating with Mitch and Ryan are minimal, their relationship with trump is close to that of weak vassals; they are not going to rebel over being berated and frankly thier attempts at shifting the obamacare albatross has justified that public humiliation.

A pundit I follow suspects they have been immobile for so long they have forgotten how to do thier jobs. Regardless they need replacing and Trump's haranging I suspect is effort in that direction.

As for Mccain I think you are overestimating his respectability. His opponents like him more than many of his contemporaries currently whose memories of the old man are tarnished by his 2008 electoral suicide, his constant advocating of each and every opportunity to send america's youth to die.

In the eyes of the Trump supporters the insults are justified blastback for two events: supporting the pissgate dossier of which much time and effort have been wasted with little to no actual incrimination, and that time he actively attempted to commit sedition:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JphxA6Lm8P0

Even the image of the war hero has been tarnished with the fairly recent declassification of audio footage of mccain's tenure as guest of the vietcong, for which he apparantly played tokyo rose.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nd304Qo7Iw4

I dare say the man is only seen as respectable due to ignorance of his mistepps and because the democrats say he is; and they only do that because their capacity to block anything is entirely reliant on his cooperation. To trump mccain is currently a dead man walking in more ways than one and likely was never going to cooperate to begin with.

The disintergration of mccain's reputation has allowed trump to hit the old man ith both barrels without detrimental consequence.

Additionally, his complete and utter lack of understanding of how the rule of law works in this country undermines peoples faith in that branch as well. He has projected a poor understanding indeed, but I find it a complete and utter lack of understanding does not account for the year long investigation uncovering so little actual ammuntion to use against him.

The man either has just enough understanding to follow the law despite his running mouth, or an excessive understanding that allows him to so effectively cover up his subversion of it while simultaniously outright taunting anyone to catch him.

I am not exactly inclined to believe the latter myself.

How dare his criticize the federal courts and suggest Gitmo and a military tribunal for a terror suspect instead when the last 15 years of war have shown how ineffective Gitmo and tribunals are. How dare he? Gitmo is the place you send those enemies of the state that cannot be reconciled but whose execution is not desireable, whose best fate is to die of age a hole in the ground. For such a purpose gitmo is eminently suitable and it's criticisms stem not from it's capability but the failures of those who decide who is thrown in that pit. Such concerns however do not apply to Sayfullo Saipov, this is a man whose guilt is undeniable and repentance not forthcoming, prime filler for the pit and one whose entry would be celebrated by those citizens who seek retribution but find death unpalatable.

Perhaps you consider the ongoings of gitmo unconsciable, but I fear at this point I find myself unable to share the sentiment, when everyone in a position of influencing it has no issue using torture I find myself not outraged over the current one not being a rank hypocrite over it, merely exhausted.

Additionally I find the idea of the federal courts being above criticism as equally absurd as the idea of trump holding that privledge, the supreme court may have a good record but the courts underneath them do not. Corruption, conflicts of interest and outright activism are the order of the day in several circuits and with such byzantine difficulty placed between the individual judge and his rightful removal it is a situation I see little improvement possible without reform.

Believe me, I'd love the POTUS to make the economy grow, use a mix of hard and soft power to ensure the stability of the world order. I actually support several of the policies he supposedly is pushing but I've yet to see infrastructure pushed, I've yet to see him be tough of China, I've yet to see sensible immigration that isn't based on religion. Frustration at a lack of progess is one we share, the results of the tax plan will be the litmus test to see if there truly is is an economic brain under that mop, though finding reliable data on it will for a while be a female dog.

We're going to have to disagree on the last two parts, the dealings with china in regards to north korea have been better than I have seen out of the last three admins, though admittedly that was a low standard to begin with; he's hardly a metternich. As for immigration while attempts have been stymied by the circuit courts you have allready seen a marked decrease in crossings simply from the operation wetback effect.

He's made it evident that the Trump brand is the most important thing to him which is terrible to me because the most important thing should be the brand of the United States which he drags through the mud almost every time he opens his mouth.
His brand survived when he was running his mouth the decade or so before becoming potus.

The US's brand is in no danger from his mouth for the simple reason that the US' brand is not based on approval it is based on power and the willingness to use it.

Contrast the squarking of the european governments (mostly thier media and more vocal minority parties) with the actual action they have taken in regards to the americans: none. They have done nothing, they have backed out of no deals with america over trump's attitude, they havent fled america's umbrella, the only action remotely in kind has been noise over economic tarrifs of which the EU has been thus far reluctant to escalate.

Realpolitik overides all PR, obama might have been the media's darling but that didnt stop the chinese snubbing him on his way out, nor did loutishness stop the chinese laying out the red carpet for trump.

America is king. To all but the marginalized or insane America is feared more than it is hated and as long as america shows willingness to justify that fear noone of consequence will rebel over words as long as that fear outweighs the hate, that is why obama's red line was so damaging and the bombing of syria was so important; force becomes power only when it is willing to be used.

Well if he starts two endless wars and takes a growing economy and puts it into recession then he'd get to take a seat with Dubya as well. This tax plan has me worried because it seems to hinge on rosy economic forecasts which if aren't even close to attain will massively skyrocket the debt even more (to think that George W. inherited an economy with a budget surplus and ruined it still pisses me off). As I said, it's the test, though I have a sinking feeling that even if it would work congress will panic over some confidence dip and an actual boom will be killed in the crib. Bush wasnt exactly a republican outlier in respect for economic incompetence.

I think his stats are more in the realm of 2/1/1. I've seen nothing that shown him having any military or diplomatic competence, undermining our military alliance and trade agreements wouldn't point to diplomatic skill. The two is really only there from his business experience which would transfer over to EU4's administrative though looking at the amount of unfilled vacancies perhaps that should be a 1 as well. What makes you think he's got military competency? He doesn't even know where his fleets (or should I say Armadas) are sailing though that would be the diplomatic side in EU4. He knows when to use force and when to hold off to get what he wants and he is willing to defer to his advisors, that physical restraint I would say is suprisingly rare in the history of rulers with the level of autonomy of the president.

That would be enough for at least dip and mil 3 if not 4, though I would conceed a +10% mil tech cost trait, as his ability is in terms of capability not theory; he isnt exactly writing doctrine.

In addition he has been exceedingly effective at walking the line between mere outrage and actually insighting action, he has exhausted his opponents chasing red herrings, blown the credibility of formerly respected outlets on increasingly desperate attacks and frankly has defined teflon coated presidency with how few of the scandals have actually changed anything.

He has maintained such chaos yet suffered little from it and still maintaining the image of an absolute idiot to the point even many of his supporters including myself dont know if it is intentional or some sort of automatic behavior, hence the 4 adm, it'd be a 5 if it was intentional or were doing it without pulling the rug out from under his own staff on occasion.

Spmetla has already explained that maybe Trump is so bad that only very few people like him anymore and most of them aren't here.
Would it make you happy if I posted dissenting opinions about how great Trump is or what do you want?

You seem to be saying that somehow the thread is terrible because everybody in here dislikes Trump. Have you ever considered that maybe the reason this is the only thread where pretty much everyone agrees is that Trump is just terrible or can that not be the case because it does not fit your opinion?

And if you have a differing opinion, why not provide it as Monty says? Don'te be lazy, break up the echo chamber yourself!

What exactly is your point?
It would make me happy if people in this forum didnt keep driving away dissenting voices.

While it certainly doesnt help that the quality of arguments have gone down hill, if intelligence were enough to kill a board this would have been a ghost town years ago. I mean hiding behind another poster and relying on a perception majority agreement to persuade your opponent, it doesnt exactly engender confidence.

However it's been two years since we were on general good terms, you and I were talking fairly civilly over the viability of renewable energy, and coming to a sort of agreement over the viability of hydro electricity.

Since then the tone on this board has gone sour, beyond the customary condescention I have encounterd an increasing number of incidents where disagreement has been treated with hostilty and intolerance, where once at worst we attacked eachother's intelliegence our character has come on the firing line; morality, integrety, sanity.

Attacks not to discredit bad ideas but to demonize for wrongthink. This thread is the worst of it because not only are the tensions high but one side is grossly overrepresented so the cycle of ideological reenforcement has set in such that even our best are beginning to indulge in dehumanizing thier opposition.

The taboo that kept this place civil has been broken by those whose "teams" lost out in 2016 and the resulting downgrade in standards is driving away members and frankly the only think keeping me here has been people like seamus who still is somehow able to refrain from sinking into the depths as I frequently have despite recieving similar provocation.

My point is I wish I was paid by the goddamn russians as it would give me a satisfactory reason for why I keep finding myself drifting back here!

Greyblades

12-19-2017, 02:06

Socialists (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_socialist_movement_in_the_United_States) scared the piss (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Revolution) out of the elites and forced a little honesty from them.

Seems only the first half of that has happened this time.

spmetla

12-19-2017, 03:05

He knows when to use force and when to hold off to get what he wants and he is willing to defer to his advisors, that physical restraint I would say is suprisingly rare in the history of rulers with the level of autonomy of the president.

That would be enough for at least dip and mil 3 if not 4, though I would conceed a +10% mil tech cost trait, as his ability is in terms of capability not theory; he isnt exactly writing doctrine.

In addition he has been exceedingly effective at walking the line between mere outrage and actually insighting action, he has exhausted his opponents chasing red herrings, blown the credibility of formerly respected outlets on increasingly desperate attacks and frankly has defined teflon coated presidency with how few of the scandals have actually changed anything.

We haven't actually seen him use force though. He's made statements about additional bombings in Syria or moving more combat power around but the level or intensity of bombings have NOT changed and the boost to military power in Korea have been scheduled years in advance and had nothing to do with his directing a buildup.
A restraint in using force is actually the norm for the US minus very minor conflicts in our periphery (Grenada, Panama, Haiti). Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan are far from the norm for the US but the longlasting cultural, political, and military impacts make them seem as we're a nation at constant war when we aren't (up to the Global War on Terror at least).

I'm certainly no fan of too much restraint which is why I still think Obama was a foreign policy wimp, especially in regard to the Ukraine which merited a strong reversal of our policies in Europe in addition to sanctions.
As for his deferring to advisors, on the face of his administration it seems that he doesn't defer to them. He seems to just have zero interest in the day to day operations in any of the departments and only weighs in on the big issues which would normally be fine but when he weighs in it seems to be in contrast and in ignorance of those day to day policies. A good boss doesn't need to do the small stuff but should at least be aware of what the small stuff is.

As for his walking the line between outrage and action, I think that's primarily because his got the protection of the other two branches of government at the moment. If the Republicans lose the Senate (or the House if things go terrible for them somehow) he will see a lot more action against him for sure just as Hillary and Obama had (bengazi, emails, endless executive orders).

He has maintained such chaos yet suffered little from it and still maintaining the image of an absolute idiot to the point even many of his supporters including myself dont know if it is intentional or some sort of automatic behavior, hence the 4 adm, it'd be a 5 if it was intentional or were doing it without pulling the rug out from under his own staff on occasion.

I'd say he's suffered a lot from it. He's lost a lot of support from on the fence folks. People like myself that were forced to accept that one of two horrible candidates would win are now in the opposition to him.
Maintaining the image of an absolute idiot isn't a win for anyone. If it's intentional, well then perhaps those conspiracy theories about him being a Democratic Trojan horse to discredit and splinter the Republican party are true. The constant crazy and chaotic news cycle that is largely fed by his tweets are draining a lot of support for him. Even people like my brother who voted for him, doesn't read any news but what's shared on facebook are wondering what the heck the POTUS is doing.

If I ever seem hostile, I sincerely apologize. This President exasperates me a lot. The most difficult thing for me to understand with his ardent supporters is how they could also support George W. Bush, or John McCain, or even Bob Dole for those that remember. Trump is the farthest from any of those politicians, he's not a traditional republican in the slightest but my card carrying republican friends are more loyal to the party brand than any of the previous principles (such as free trade, NATO, and fiscal conservatism).

a completely inoffensive name

12-19-2017, 06:06

The Personal is Political.

HopAlongBunny

12-19-2017, 06:07

A little update on the tax bill from PolitiFact:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/dec/18/whats-final-version-tax-bill/

It is likely more will be coming out shortly.

Husar

12-19-2017, 16:09

It would make me happy if people in this forum didnt keep driving away dissenting voices.

Indeed, all the left-leaning members who were driven away by the right wing members so that every thread on refugees is now dominated by people talking about how their race ideologies explain why we need ethnic separation. The exodus of left-wing posters is really unbearable, which is why I may have become less nice in my replies. It just costs too much time to explain the same things to three people because they all want their own debate with me and I'm the only communist who still bothers replying in order to prevent the forum from looking like a racist circlejerk. :sweatdrop:

While it certainly doesnt help that the quality of arguments have gone down hill, if intelligence were enough to kill a board this would have been a ghost town years ago. I mean hiding behind another poster and relying on a perception majority agreement to persuade your opponent, it doesnt exactly engender confidence.

I'm not hiding behind Spmetla, what quality would you gain by reading his exact argument again from me?
Or do I have to find a new bogus argument just to be different?

Since then the tone on this board has gone sour, beyond the customary condescention I have encounterd an increasing number of incidents where disagreement has been treated with hostilty and intolerance, where once at worst we attacked eachother's intelliegence our character has come on the firing line; morality, integrety, sanity.

Indeed, a tragedy how some posters thought belittling others somehow invalidates arguments. Morality is a perfectly fine subject of debate though IMO. If your argument is immoral, I'm going to point that out. If you want a nicer debate, morality is the basis, otherwise it could become hard to define a nicer debate in the first place. If my morality were off, I might think insulting your intelligence is the only moral thing to do since you deserve it. :dizzy2:

Attacks not to discredit bad ideas but to demonize for wrongthink. This thread is the worst of it because not only are the tensions high but one side is grossly overrepresented so the cycle of ideological reenforcement has set in such that even our best are beginning to indulge in dehumanizing thier opposition.

Given how many of this board's active members are on the "right" side of politics, the overrepresentation of anti- Trump rhetoric in this thread might just be a hint at how bad he really is, when even a lot of the people you'd expect to support him think he's acting like a buffoon in most of what he does. The overrepresentation of one side in a single thread does not necessarily hint at there being something wrong with the discussion, it might just hint at some kind of bi-partisan consensus. Even though Seamus tries to see the good in Trump, I don't think he's a fan. And when you give your opponents very human traits to show their flaws, it's not dehumanizing. I'm thinking of the dementia talk here for example. On the other hand, the refugee threads with people basically trying to explain to me how refugees were suppeosedly genetically on a lower level than us European Humans....

The taboo that kept this place civil has been broken by those whose "teams" lost out in 2016 and the resulting downgrade in standards is driving away members and frankly the only think keeping me here has been people like seamus who still is somehow able to refrain from sinking into the depths as I frequently have despite recieving similar provocation.

This is demonstrably false as I had several ugly fallouts in refugee threads in 2015 already. And they weren't coming from the side that lost in 2016...

My point is I wish I was paid by the goddamn russians as it would give me a satisfactory reason for why I keep finding myself drifting back here!

This is a tough one. I could now try to drive you off in a selfless effort to increase your happiness. But it would make your point about driving people away true...
Or I could be really nice to you to make you stay here, but actually condemn you to continued misery...
Do you see how the actual result or the public image would always be contrary to the intention? :clown:

As for your stance on Trump, your entire argument is based on him being a hidden genius who is actually well-meaning, like a positive conspiracy theory. If that seems plausible to you, then you also have to believe the reports that Kim Jong Un is actually trying to open up North Korea, but has to do the murders and stuff because he is struggling against the NK Deep State. It's interesting how this benefit of the doubt seems to apply to Trump but not to Kim Jong Un. Can the noble Swiss have possibly not raised him well?

And how do you explain that Trump wants to make coal great again when even coal mine owners think it's not going to create any job growth anymore? How is he the peoples' candidate when he placed 4 or more Goldman Sachs people and many, many millionaires and billionaires in his government after blasting Clinton for being too close to Wall Street? How is the tax reform good for workers? Do you still believe in trickle down economics?

Seamus Fermanagh

12-19-2017, 23:45

Bernie did more blasting of Hillary's Wall street support than did Trump

Husar

12-20-2017, 00:28

Bernie did more blasting of Hillary's Wall street support than did Trump

But did he plan to recruit them all for his government like Trump did?
The blasting is not what I take issue with, I might even appreciate it from Trump if he actually acted accordingly. The problem is that he doesn't. His excuse that they're "the best" and that he needs them to fix the very problems they created has now resulted in a long term tax increase for poor people and tex decrease for the rich, favoring industry and fake jobs (like all the mining jobs he won't actually create) over public health and the environment and other such nonsense that proves many of his campaign promises to have been somewhere between outright lies and "only" hot air. Perhaps he also joined the wrong party in the first place if he actually wanted legislators who would help him help the working class.

And if we want to talk morals even though some dislike that...is it actually moral in the greater world to give a job to an American worker that you "stole back" from a Chinese worker? Is the suffering of an unemployed American worker worse than that of an unemployed Chinese worker?

Can jobs even be "stolen"? What if the American worker requires a higher wage, makes the products more expensive and then can't afford them himself anymore? And what if they're only so expensive because the profit margin needs to be so high because investors expect their ROI? What if he gets laid off again after two years because demand has decreased since the price went up? I rarely see answers to all these questions, and no, "trickle down" is not an answer.

My argument is that the privatization craze and trickle down don't work. And my example is Chile. In Chile this system was introduced under Pinochet with the help of the "Chicago Boys", which were students of Milton Friedman (or at least, his ideas) IIRC. They privatized and "marketed" almost everything in Chile, much like the Republicans tend to plan it in the US. The result? Private schools are expensive, but the teaching is still very bad. Water is entirely on the market and bought by mining corporations, even if that means local residents get none. The mining corporations cheat on the government because toll duty is performed by the provate firms that also secure the mines. Four families own ~90% of the entire wealth of the country and the rest work hard to send their kids to school and buy some water. Some people will see their properties flooded because corporations will flood the valley by building dams to make more money with the water. Resistance is almost futile because the poor people can't even afford a lawyer to go to court (remember, they spend all their money on useless things like schools and water)...

Why is this important regarding Trump? Because he and his cronies think introducing more of that would fix the US. I'm sure it will fix something, but that something does not include the problems of the working class...
Yes, he is different, and he said it like it was and blabla, but I don't believe for a second that any of his "solutions" will actually deliver on these promises...
Remember that he also sold some people a "university education", we all know how that turned out...

I get that some people work hard and might deserve more and I'm even okay with my boss making more than I do, the question is to what degree this can be allowed to happen and how much of this should be inheritable by the children if you actually do acknowledge that the working class is not doing well and want to fix the problem?
Trickle down has been implemented to various degrees since the 70ies and all it has done was slowly get us to where we are now, caused the problems in the first place. It's more like a trickle up and the fewer taxes the wealthy pay, the faster it trickles up...

I won't claim Sanders addressed all of these problems (does he care about the working class in China? probably less so). But he was a whole lot better than both the alternatives IMO. his secondary or tertiary house or whatever is small stuff compared to golden toilets in golden phallus towers. :dizzy2:

And just because I keep forgetting to add it, Xiahou once linked an article that said Trump would be richer now if he had just invested his money into something relatively secure instead of "working with it". That does seem to set his "business skill" into perspective quite a bit...

Devastatin Dave

12-20-2017, 02:44

Emperor Trump continues to win! Win, win WIN!!!! Praise his supremacy! Its unfortunate that his competition is simply to inept and weak to be worthy of his greatness. MAGA!!!

Montmorency

12-20-2017, 03:39

If I ever seem hostile, I sincerely apologize. This President exasperates me a lot. The most difficult thing for me to understand with his ardent supporters is how they could also support George W. Bush, or John McCain, or even Bob Dole for those that remember. Trump is the farthest from any of those politicians, he's not a traditional republican in the slightest but my card carrying republican friends are more loyal to the party brand than any of the previous principles (such as free trade, NATO, and fiscal conservatism).

The problem of Trump's success is that he is inspirational almost entirely on the basis of racial and cultural anxiety. Where such anxiety is the primary motivator and frame for one's worldview, one will suffer anything if one thinks their enemies can be made to suffer more. It transitions from "cutting off your nose to spite your face" to "death cult".

I said this a couple of weeks ago:

Beyond the presidential race, there's something to be said of ideological clarity and consistency.

The Democratic Party offers wishy-washy incrementalism that coddles moneyed interests.

The Republican Party offers a truly RADICAL platform.

Revolution, no matter its contents or injustices, is inherently sexier than incrementalism.

The figure of Trump appeals to white grievance, and the Republican platform - which is quite fine by white grievance, to be sure, but is more narrowly focused on privatizing government and society - can ride along in its wake. Trump is the culmination of the Republican Party since Goldwater, and a more valuable tool than the superficial resistance would suggest. Trump(ism) is both workhorse and meat shield for the Republican agenda.

Two quotes reinforce this point, and also suggest that the way out is a clear, consistent, and radical opposing agenda, and a broad-based campaign to promulgate it:

If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.

Stay Tuned with Preet Bharara (http://www.wnycstudios.org/story/putin-pawns-and-propaganda-garry-kasparov) (12/7/17)

...America should come up with a bright vision of the future. We just have to excite people about this vision. If you don't excite young people with some kind of projects, ideas, then you have Al Qaeda, ISIS, and other groups. [The] status quo always loses to dynamic ideology, even if this ideology is very unhuman and heinous.

The trouble is, who will be the grassroots drivers of this shift? Republicans are depraved, Democrats* in terms of the class of elected party politicians are quite similar to the (pre-Trump) Republicans qua transpartisan elite... I can only suppose that socialists in office, throughout the country and at all levels of government, are the prerequisite for the necessary inflection point in the Overton window (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window). Today, it likely means the Democratic Party needs to be hollowed out by ideologues and lose most of its big donors...

*Including Obama, who was in fact more of a Clintonite than Hillary Clinton. His chief mastery was in the Clintonian Third Way techniques, couching hedged bets and a stylized status quo in the language of "hope and change": hence his victory over Clinton in 2008. Yet I doubt any of you here dislike Obama as much as you dislike Hillary Clinton. That's propaganda for you, folks.

Kralizec

12-20-2017, 15:58

As for Mccain I think you are overestimating his respectability. His opponents like him more than many of his contemporaries currently whose memories of the old man are tarnished by his 2008 electoral suicide, his constant advocating of each and every opportunity to send america's youth to die.

In the eyes of the Trump supporters the insults are justified blastback for two events: supporting the pissgate dossier of which much time and effort have been wasted with little to no actual incrimination, and that time he actively attempted to commit sedition:

[youtube video]

McCain was tortured by the North Vietnamese and coerced by his captors to produce propaganda material. This is not news, and neither was his case unique.

That these people are trying to paint this as a wilfull case of collaboration is laughable, he says in the audio recording that he received excellent medical care yet somehow, he returned to the USA as a crippled man.

You are only debasing yourself when you post stupid stuff like this.

Kralizec

12-20-2017, 16:00

Emperor Trump continues to win! Win, win WIN!!!! Praise his supremacy! Its unfortunate that his competition is simply to inept and weak to be worthy of his greatness. MAGA!!!

Molesters Are Great Americans?

Make America Grope Again?

Make Another Gilded Age?

HopAlongBunny

12-20-2017, 21:55

The LBJ quote above is a regular theme of American elections.
Through one lens (at least) the political process is best described in https://www.amazon.ca/White-Trash-400-Year-History-America/dp/0670785970; which can be summed as: I'm alright, as long as there is someone I can look down on.
The question of who will occupy the bottom wrung got a little more complicated after the slaves were made citizens...

Devastatin Dave

12-21-2017, 00:49

Molesters Are Great Americans?

Make America Grope Again?

Make Another Gilded Age?

Grope, molestation, gilded age? Back in the day, it was called romance. Don't let these bitches fool you. They use their vaginas much like someone uses a credit card. Any females on here take offence? Good! You liked out having a vagina which is nothing more than a ATM. Empires rise and fall because of vagina. And those with vaginas DESTROY civilizations because of their vaginas (see Merkel, Hillary, May). But thankfully, Kek granted we in the United States Emperor Trump who shall deliver us from these filthy one world sluts who bring foreign rapists and murderers from 3rd century hell holes in order to destroy their own culture and civilizations. Guys, stop being cucks. Find your nads Euroweenies before all your women are in burkas and you live in desolate slums.... Praise Emperor Trump and his wisdom! MAGA!

Montmorency

12-21-2017, 01:29

High standards (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?132001-Hate-Makes-The-Backroom-Great)

Seamus Fermanagh

12-21-2017, 03:45

Grope, molestation, gilded age? Back in the day, it was called romance. Don't let these bitches fool you. They use their vaginas much like someone uses a credit card. Any females on here take offence? Good! You liked out having a vagina which is nothing more than a ATM. Empires rise and fall because of vagina. And those with vaginas DESTROY civilizations because of their vaginas (see Merkel, Hillary, May). But thankfully, Kek granted we in the United States Emperor Trump who shall deliver us from these filthy one world sluts who bring foreign rapists and murderers from 3rd century hell holes in order to destroy their own culture and civilizations. Guys, stop being cucks. Find your nads Euroweenies before all your women are in burkas and you live in desolate slums.... Praise Emperor Trump and his wisdom! MAGA!

DevDave:

There is not another poster like you on this forum. Vous etes sans peur et sans pair.

Montmorency

12-21-2017, 20:19

So the tax... Holy moly.

VP Pence's praise for Trump in a Cabinet Meeting (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/12/all-the-sycophantic-compliments-republicans-gave-trump-today.html)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK_7spws64o&t=1s

1.“Thank you for seeing, through the course of this year, an agenda that truly is restoring this country.”
2.“You described it very well, Mr. President.”
3.“You've restored American credibility on the world stage.”
4.“You've signed more bills rolling back federal red tape than any president in American history.”
5.“You've unleashed American energy.”
6.“You've spurred an optimism in this country that's setting records.”
7.“You promised the American people in that campaign a year ago that you would deliver historic tax cuts, and it would be a 'middle-class miracle.' And in just a short period of time, that promise will be fulfilled.”
8.“I’m deeply humbled, as your vice president, to be able to be here."
9.“Because of your leadership, Mr. President, and because of the strong support of the leadership in the Congress of the United States, you're delivering on that middle-class miracle.”
10.“You've actually got the Congress to do, as you said, what they couldn’t do with [the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska] for 40 years.”
11.“You got the Congress to do, with tax cuts for working families and American businesses, what they haven’t been able to do for 31 years.”
12.“And you got Congress to do what they couldn’t do for seven years, in repealing the individual mandate in Obamacare.”
13.“Mostly, Mr. President, I’ll end where I began and just tell you, I want to thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank you for speaking on behalf of and fighting every day for the forgotten men and women of America.”
14.“Because of your determination, because of your leadership, the forgotten men and women of America are forgotten no more. And we are making America great again.”

Pence paused from praising Trump only briefly to also praise the other people seated around the table. But in doing so, he made clear that it was because Trump would want him to — and that these were members of a team that Trump was savvy enough to have assembled.

But Pence was hardly alone in furiously sacrificing his dignity on the altar of the president’s fragile ego. Here is what 83-year-old Utah senator Orrin Hatch had to say about a president who watches television for four-to-eight hours a day; goes on a golf vacation nearly every weekend; and who has effectively turned the White House into an “adult daycare center,” according to other Republican senators:

Mr. President, I have to say that you’re living up to everything I thought you would. You’re a heck of a leader. And we’re all benefiting from it. This president hasn’t even been in office for a year and look at all the things that he’s been able to get done — by sheer will, in many ways … I came from very humble roots. And I have to say that this is one of the great privileges of my life to stand here on the White House lawn with the president of the United States who I love and appreciate so much … We’re going to make this the greatest presidency that we’ve seen, not only in generations, but maybe ever.

Tennessee congresswoman Diane Black opted to debase herself with a bit more concision, saying “Thank you, President Trump, for allowing us to have you as our President.”

Meanwhile, Paul Ryan praised Trump’s “exquisite leadership,” and thanked him for “getting us over the finish line.” Mitch McConnell declared Trump’s entire first year in office to be an “extraordinary accomplishment.”

Ben Carson thanked God for giving America a president who is “courageous” and “willing to face the winds of controversy in order to provide a better future for those who come behind us.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fik2-kgOgng

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhTBKqs3nCk

HOLY MOLY

https://i.imgur.com/O5UIQVR.jpg

Beskar

12-21-2017, 21:08

Trump will personally save up to $15m under tax bill, analysis finds -
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/20/trump-tax-bill-savings-analysis

Devastatin Dave

12-21-2017, 23:55

Trump will personally save up to $15m under tax bill, analysis finds -
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/20/trump-tax-bill-savings-analysis

As he should. you pay more you get more. Wealth envy does not create thriving societies. Greed is the key baby! At least its out in the open, not like the rest of these politicians that become Senators making $175,000 a year and when they leave office they are millionaires due to years and years of kick backs and backroom deals. How many of your Euro Elite overlords in your governments in Europe are rich AF while preaching to their peasant class that they are fighting for them? LOL

Praise Emperor Trump for he is worthy of PRAISE!!! I will eat a bag of Cheetos in his honor tonight and maybe grab the old lady by the butter gutter.....

Seamus Fermanagh

12-22-2017, 01:39

He may not be a Stalinist on economics or a bunch of other issues, but the cult of personality riff works BIG time.

Devastatin Dave

12-22-2017, 03:06

He may not be a Stalinist on economics or a bunch of other issues, but the cult of personality riff works BIG time.

Bigly, the term is BIGLY!!! MAGA! I love My Donald BIGLY!!!!

Strike For The South

12-22-2017, 03:32

Husar

12-22-2017, 03:43

As he should. you pay more you get more. Wealth envy does not create thriving societies. Greed is the key baby!

What is the difference between wealth envy and greed? And people pay more because they get more and they still get more after paying more.
At some point it will be that you get more and then you get even more....rope or bullets, your choice... :sweatdrop:

Make America Communist Again! :vietnam:

Devastatin Dave

12-22-2017, 03:56

Husar

12-22-2017, 04:37

[...]doesn't give you the right to accuse the United States as becoming communist.

You have to be very deeply indoctrinated to think that I was accusing anyone...

Graphic

12-22-2017, 04:41

Seamus Fermanagh

12-22-2017, 04:47

What is the difference between wealth envy and greed? And people pay more because they get more and they still get more after paying more.
At some point it will be that you get more and then you get even more....rope or bullets, your choice... :sweatdrop:

Make America Communist Again! :vietnam:

The Middle Class/professional Class is too robust in the USA and the potential for socio-economic mobility is frequent enough to undercut any real threat of a communist uprising. If the "1%" ends up going too far, it will be taxed back. These things ebb and flow in the USA.

In Western Europe, Communism never quite took hold because of the presence of a middle class and political systems that allowed for reform. Perhaps Germany cam the closest in the 20's, but that threat paled (becoming more a foil for the NSDAP than a true takeover threat by the 30's. Italy marginalized the communist threat even sooner. The rest of Central Europe and the Balkans became communist only because of the presence of Soviet armies.

Communist takeovers have succeeded in China, Cuba, Russia, and Vietnam. None of those would have succeeded if anything RESEMBLING decent institutions existed and/or any government that wasn't utter kleptocracy.

Gilrandir

12-22-2017, 15:21

https://i.imgur.com/O5UIQVR.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXINZxodu9U

HopAlongBunny

12-24-2017, 13:39

Hurray!
With any luck, the withering away of the state under Trump will free you to choose your poison:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/12/trump_s_quiet_attack_on_the_regulatory_state_is_another_part_of_his_broader.html

Not only will pretty much any form of snake oil be available, but you will be free to purchase it :)
The market is self-regulating, and if you have the money you might live long enough to see the cream rise to the top :birthday2:

rory_20_uk

01-02-2018, 11:49

The Middle Class/professional Class is too robust in the USA and the potential for socio-economic mobility is frequent enough to undercut any real threat of a communist uprising. If the "1%" ends up going too far, it will be taxed back. These things ebb and flow in the USA.

In Western Europe, Communism never quite took hold because of the presence of a middle class and political systems that allowed for reform. Perhaps Germany cam the closest in the 20's, but that threat paled (becoming more a foil for the NSDAP than a true takeover threat by the 30's. Italy marginalized the communist threat even sooner. The rest of Central Europe and the Balkans became communist only because of the presence of Soviet armies.

Communist takeovers have succeeded in China, Cuba, Russia, and Vietnam. None of those would have succeeded if anything RESEMBLING decent institutions existed and/or any government that wasn't utter kleptocracy.

Italy had a threat of communists after WW2, but luckily(?) the CIA could afford to buy the elections.

You can't "tax back" when the methods of offshoring money is easier than ever. Americans have a wonderful / imbecilic belief that they too will be successful in the near future and continue to strive to do so.

~:smoking:

Montmorency

01-03-2018, 18:22

Excerpts from the next big Trump book:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/03/donald-trump-russia-steve-bannon-michael-wolff

The meeting was revealed by the New York Times in July last year, prompting Trump Jr to say no consequential material was produced. Soon after, Wolff writes, [Steve] Bannon remarked mockingly: “The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor – with no lawyers. They didn’t have any lawyers.

“Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it’s all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately.”

Bannon went on, Wolff writes, to say that if any such meeting had to take place, it should have been set up “in a Holiday Inn in Manchester, New Hampshire, with your lawyers who meet with these people”. Any information, he said, could then be “dump[ed] … down to Breitbart or something like that, or maybe some other more legitimate publication”.

“You realise where this is going,” he is quoted as saying. “This is all about money laundering. Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr and Jared Kushner … It’s as plain as a hair on your face.”

Last month it was reported that federal prosecutors had subpoenaed records from Deutsche Bank, the German financial institution that has lent hundreds of millions of dollars to the Kushner property empire. Bannon continues: “It goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They’re going to go right through that. They’re going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me.”

Scorning apparent White House insouciance, Bannon reaches for a hurricane metaphor: “They’re sitting on a beach trying to stop a Category Five.”

Don't know whether to take this as funny or scary.

Seamus Fermanagh

01-03-2018, 18:33

...Don't know whether to take this as funny or scary.

Both. Definitely both.

Of course, I have always found gallows humor entertaining....

spmetla

01-03-2018, 19:34

The new book at the least seems to show that Bannon thinks the Trump presidency is sunk and he wants to be seen as the guy who could have saved MAGA (make america great again) but was pushed aside by Don Jr, Kushner, and Ivanka.

Here's the Trump website Inaugural Year Approval Poll:
https://action.donaldjtrump.com/inaugural-year-approval-poll/

1. How would you rate President Trump’s first year in office (2017)?
Great
Good
Okay
Other
2. How would you rate President Obama’s first year in office (2009)?
Great
Good
Okay
Poor
Other
3. Do you believe the Fake News Media will fairly cover President Trump’s first year approval rating?
Yes
No
Other
4. Are there any other thoughts you’d like to share with the team? (Optional)

And here is their Presidential Approval Poll:
https://action.donaldjtrump.com/presidential-approval-poll-nov/

1. How would you rate President Trump’s job in office so far?
Great
Good
Okay
Other, please specify:

2. (Optional) Do you have any feedback to add?

You can't submit your entry without entering you last name, email and zip code though. Not a lot of options or angles they are looking at though. The options don't allow my more negative opinion which I guess will be classified as Other. Funny that the poll question for Obama's first year has 'poor' as an option but not for Trump's first year.

Husar

01-03-2018, 20:08

Don't know whether to take this as funny or scary.

Hilarious, especially when he calls his own (former?) news outlet less legitimate than others. :laugh4:

HopAlongBunny

01-04-2018, 00:53

The Trump team are beginning to look like a ship, stuck in the ice.
The alternative to gracefully shedding this mortal coil, is to eat your own.
Bannon goes "buffet style" - with extra helpings of Jared:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/12/23/swamp-diary-breitbart-bannon-kushner-216166

I do hope for a Congressional Committee report about all this some day :daisy:

Hooahguy

01-04-2018, 02:59

You can't submit your entry without entering you last name, email and zip code though. Not a lot of options or angles they are looking at though. The options don't allow my more negative opinion which I guess will be classified as Other. Funny that the poll question for Obama's first year has 'poor' as an option but not for Trump's first year.
Why is this a surprise at all? His ego is so fragile that he needs these manufactured polling numbers to inflate his self esteem. Sad.

Meanwhile I am wondering how much longer it is until he tweets us into a war.

rory_20_uk

01-04-2018, 10:13

He's the first proper Reality President. In his world, there is no more real war than one fought via Twitter / the Cable Networks and the Internet.

Proper wars are so long, boring and complex. He'd not have the patience for one.

~:smoking:

Husar

01-04-2018, 13:57

The Trump team are beginning to look like a ship, stuck in the ice.
The alternative to gracefully shedding this mortal coil, is to eat your own.
Bannon goes "buffet style" - with extra helpings of Jared:

Would it go too far to think that maybe Bannon always thought of the Trumps as idiots, but ones he could manipulate well enough to further his own agenda? :sweatdrop:

rory_20_uk

01-04-2018, 15:15

Would it go too far to think that maybe Bannon always thought of the Trumps as idiots, but ones he could manipulate well enough to further his own agenda? :sweatdrop:

With a background of the Navy and Goldman Sachs, I imagine he is of the view that anything that furthers the desired agenda is an ally / tool and anything that doesn't is an enemy. Trump, more than anything else, does things that enrich himself and make him look good (often the two are linked). This attack goes after both of them in a not-exactly-subtle way. But "fixing" the problem is as easy as moving the agenda back to something Bannon wants. Everything will be quickly blamed on "deep government" and the shadowy forces that are at play - if that is even required since the new cycle is so quick who will even remember?

Bannon doesn't have the money to buy nor the clout to quietly manipulate. So he's doing the only route he has (and truth be told, probably his favourite) which is the aggressive, public attacks.

I personally think Bannon's idealism is as deeply flawed as most ideals are, and he'll never be happy since what he wants can never work: the USA will never be the manufacturing exporter of the 1950s again with a surplus of well paid blue collar workers until the rest of the world obliges by destroying themselves... and even then it probably won't happen.

Good thing he seems to like being the maverick outsider back by fellow idealists with very deep pockets.

~:smoking:

Montmorency

01-04-2018, 15:55

There have been various optimistic articles published lately about 2017 events, despite the damage sustained by our institutions, being testament to the enduring strength of those institutions in the face of Trump's weak, low-energy fumbling.

The Lawfare blog published a bunch, of which one (https://www.lawfareblog.com/president-cant-kill-mueller-investigation):

One of most remarkable stories of 2017 was the extent to which President Donald Trump was prevented from executing his many pledges—both on the campaign trail and in office—to violate the law. As predicted, courts, the press, the bureaucracy, civil society, and even Congress were aggressive and successful in stopping or deterring Trump from acting unlawfully.*

[...]

In short, the political appointees in the Justice Department who are connected to the Mueller investigation have shown that they follow the rules and norms of the department despite the president’s wishes otherwise. This is all an amazing (though widely unappreciated) testament to DOJ’s independence and the rule of law. I think the mechanisms that worked so well in 2017 will keep working to see the investigation through, no matter what steps Trump takes to stop it.

The state is bigger than Trump, but Trump isn't the only 'enemy of the state'; let's not start counting our dicks and sucking our chickens.

Agent Miles

01-04-2018, 17:46

Megyn Kelly supposedly gives Trump a hard time at the debates and boom...she has her own TV show. Amarosa does a year at the WH and now she's writing a book after being "let go". Bannon "the Maverick" is going to do a tell-all about his time as a staffer (flunky) describing how Trump is betraying his base. Have any of you actually ever watched a reality show? Everyone is being played by Trump and his pals. They're laughing all the way to the bank.

Trump is the most liberal Republican that ever lived. He contributed to both Clintons' earlier campaigns. He won't start a war because he's having too much fun.

Look, his base are tired of liberal's trying to create the America in Kurt Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron. They want the government to stop handicapping our businesses, our workers and our country. Dems say MAGA means a return to Jim Crow, segregation and slavery. They want to forget that these were institutions the Democrats created. The Republicans had nothing to do with those. That's why MAGA works for the Reps. Republicans are not ashamed of the Civil War, or the Emancipation Proclamation or working with free African Americans.

We now know as a scientific fact that 75,000 years ago, only a few thousand people were left alive after Mount Toba exploded in the Pacific. They all lived in Africa. Every human alive today is descended from an African and only one race, the human, exists. Reps don't wallow in 19th century fears and ignorance about race. More people are working now and I hope that more people vote, one way or the other, in 2018 than ever before.

Husar

01-04-2018, 18:13

spmetla

01-04-2018, 20:12

Trump is the most liberal Republican that ever lived. He contributed to both Clintons' earlier campaigns. He won't start a war because he's having too much fun.

Look, his base are tired of liberal's trying to create the America in Kurt Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron. They want the government to stop handicapping our businesses, our workers and our country. Dems say MAGA means a return to Jim Crow, segregation and slavery. They want to forget that these were institutions the Democrats created. The Republicans had nothing to do with those. That's why MAGA works for the Reps. Republicans are not ashamed of the Civil War, or the Emancipation Proclamation or working with free African Americans.

We now know as a scientific fact that 75,000 years ago, only a few thousand people were left alive after Mount Toba exploded in the Pacific. They all lived in Africa. Every human alive today is descended from an African and only one race, the human, exists. Reps don't wallow in 19th century fears and ignorance about race. More people are working now and I hope that more people vote, one way or the other, in 2018 than ever before.

Trump's contributions don't make him liberal, it just makes him a rich guy buying political favors, he's said so himself.

I don't know why you bring up that the Democrats were the party of the south in the past. How is that relevant to now? After Kennedy and Johnson the Democrats lost the south and those voters have been republican supporters since. Yes, the Democrats have a past with shame in it, so do the Republicans but both parties now are not at all like they were 20 or 30 years ago much less 150 years ago.

The whole mantra of MAGA seems to be wallowing in dreams of an ivory towered past. America is great now, lets make it better. America in the '50s wasn't like leave it to beaver and I love Lucy for most Americans, why pretend that it was. We were at our height because all our competitors had been completed destroyed and bankrupted in WW2 while our industrial and financial base was untouched and therefore without any real competition left until the mid 60s into the 70s. That's not going to happen again unless Europe and East Asia into in a WW3 without our interfering for the first few years again.
Additionally for the MAGA idea that advocates isolationism, that worked for us when the Pax Britannia allowed us to piggy back on their world wide security and creation of an English speaking world market. For us to revert now with no one to play global policeman would be to go without the anglo-sphere world order that has allowed the rise of the USA since the 18th century. Being a globalist power is in our interest.

Agent Miles

01-05-2018, 14:44

Husar, you did not demonstrate how any of my post was fake. Thanks for trying to shoot the messenger. I'm told that is the major tactic in "The losers guide to intellectual cowardice."

Spmetla, I can't prevent some racist jerk from voting Republican any more than a Democrat can stop a marxist, anarchist thug from pretending to be a champion of anti-fascism. Nonetheless, 150 years ago my Republican ancestors were indeed at war with Democrats that thought they owned African Americans, could think for them and tell them what to do. We're still working on that one. When LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act, he was heard to say, "Now the (n-word)s will vote for us for the next 200 years."

After WW2, the USA was not destroyed by the conflict. However, we used open markets to rebuild our allies and former enemies both. Yes, we profited, but we knew that we were doing the right thing. Our new competitors profited from our open markets too and grew their economies. However, free trade does not mean you can sell us everything and we can't sell you our best paying products. It doesn't mean that the PRC can sell us cheap crap and we must give them the blueprints and intellectual property to anything we sell in China. That's not free trade. It's also not an open border for imports when what we really get are drugs, foreign gangs and human trafficking. If you control what your children watch on the internet it's not tyranny. When we control what crosses our borders it's not isolationism.

The PRC leaders believe that they have 3 times the population of the US, so eventually they will have 3 times our GDP. That would of course equate to a military 3 times ours as well. I shudder at what you may mean by "anglo-sphere world order", but we need to fix the economy that 8 years of socialism has gutted in order to compete. That's what Trump is already doing.

rory_20_uk

01-05-2018, 15:23

After WW2, the USA was not destroyed by the conflict. However, we used open markets to rebuild our allies and former enemies both. Yes, we profited, but we knew that we were doing the right thing. Our new competitors profited from our open markets too and grew their economies. However, free trade does not mean you can sell us everything and we can't sell you our best paying products. It doesn't mean that the PRC can sell us cheap crap and we must give them the blueprints and intellectual property to anything we sell in China. That's not free trade. It's also not an open border for imports when what we really get are drugs, foreign gangs and human trafficking. If you control what your children watch on the internet it's not tyranny. When we control what crosses our borders it's not isolationism.

The PRC leaders believe that they have 3 times the population of the US, so eventually they will have 3 times our GDP. That would of course equate to a military 3 times ours as well. I shudder at what you may mean by "anglo-sphere world order", but we need to fix the economy that 8 years of socialism has gutted in order to compete. That's what Trump is already doing.

Right thing? Giving up Eastern Europe was the "Right Thing"? This was done on moral grounds?

The USA took a vast amount of IP and property after both WW1 and WW2 never big on giving this back. So yes, the markets were open... after they'd ensured they were as biased in their own direction as humanly possible. Right up there with The British Empire wanting "free Markets" with China - absolutely fine since the rules are massively fixed.

The USA continues to have vast amount of their own rules about how one can work and play in the USA.

You appear to have overlooked the vast amount of weaponry that leaves the USA, both to support the gangs that would not exist without the USA's "war on drugs" as well as sold to dictators around the world.

8 years of problems that the Root Cause was Socialism. Not unregulated Capitalism that led to the massive crash...? Oh, and the National Debt went up massively under Bush II. But these things hardly fit the narrative, do they? Trump might "Sort Everything Out". Time will tell. So far... not much to show. I know, I know... Deep State right?

~:smoking:

Agent Miles

01-05-2018, 15:57

Churchill and FDR (a socialist Democrat by the way) gave up Eastern Europe, not Trump or a Republican.

Here's a site from your own UK that credits post war Free Trade to your favorite empire:

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/22351/1/wp78.pdf

Actually, all of the countries originally lowered their tariffs to near zero and the US suffered industry adjustments to cheaper imports. So unless you have proof to your posts, then thank you soooo much.

The Obama (a democratic Socialist BTW) program "Fast and Furious" to sell guns to Mexican Drug lords is not on Trump's list of things to continue. As to dictators buying our weapons, will someone please explain the part about how adults should only do business with the really nice people in the world? Before everyone jumps at the chance, remember that you then take responsibility for the millions of people that will perish at the hands of their neighbors who were not armed by the US.

The "crash" was indisputably caused when Democrats (really, really nice people BTW) passed a law that banks absolutely had to give home owner mortgages to people who could not afford to pay them. When they actually could no longer pay the fees, the banks, who could not allow default by law, added the deficit to the mortgage until the sum was unbearable. The capitalism, i.e. basic math, wasn't unregulated. Ever. Also, Bush II didn't double the national debt as Obama did. I suppose over five trillion dollars invested in the economy and the lowest unemployment for Blacks in 17 years and Hispanics in the entire history of the records isn't much to show for it...yet.

rory_20_uk

01-05-2018, 16:31

It takes a... "special" type of person to in a system of government with two chambers and a president to manage to blame everything on "the other lot" regardless of when an event happened and who is in power. Clearly you fall into that category. I have little interest in whether Democrats or Republicans are responsible.

The USA gave up Eastern Europe. Britain was all but defeated in 1941 if the USA had not joined since Germany declared war. The USA has undertaken almost every intervention on grounds that are miles away from a "moral" standpoint.

The paper itself states the author disagrees with others. So you've found someone with a point of view. Well done. Given it is a view that disagrees with me, I should be calling it "Fake News!". As it is I'll just say it is a viewpoint and apparently one that is not shared by many others in the

Industry adjustments. Wow, that must have been a tough period. Meanwhile most empires in Europe had fallen; Germany was partially occupied by France and had a currency collapse. America, meanwhile had to deal with some changes to imports! Then WW2 where everything in Europe was almost flattened. Yes, clearly everyone suffered.

Proof how this could benefit the USA:

The territory USA annexed from the Germans post-WW1; from Japan post WW2
The patents USA took post WW1 - such as the company Merck. Oh, and a bit more: Half a billion taken (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/us-confiscated-half-billion-dollars-private-property-during-wwi-180952144/)
A reference that Europe was damaged by the war. You seriously need a reference that industry was damaged?

The USA is still selling guns. They have done under Republicans and under Democrats. And I LOVE how selling guns doesn't need to be moral (or sort of is since it is more good old moral relativism) yet invading (sorry - saving) Libya should be.

But don't forget - it can all be dismissed as Fake News.

~:smoking:

Hooahguy

01-05-2018, 17:59

The Obama (a democratic Socialist BTW)
:laugh4:

program "Fast and Furious" to sell guns to Mexican Drug lords is not on Trump's list of things to continue. Program started in 2006 but ok. Not going to argue the morality of the program as the whole drug war is a farce but it was hardly a program started by Obama.

The "crash" was indisputably caused when Democrats (really, really nice people BTW) passed a law that banks absolutely had to give home owner mortgages to people who could not afford to pay them. When they actually could no longer pay the fees, the banks, who could not allow default by law, added the deficit to the mortgage until the sum was unbearable. The capitalism, i.e. basic math, wasn't unregulated. Ever. Pointing to one single action as the cause of the 2008 crash shows a major misunderstanding of what actually caused the crash, which was caused by an amalgamation of issues within the financial and housing markets.

Also, Bush II didn't double the national debt as Obama did.
No but he did get us into two wars, one of which is still going on today and the other was under false pretenses and destabilized the Middle East even further.

Agent Miles

01-05-2018, 18:06

Montmorency

01-05-2018, 18:10

In case you missed it, I clearly blamed exactly the people who actually caused those incidents and when. I'll use smaller words...the Dems.

The Dems sold out East Europe (2 syllables, sorry).

You do not seem to have a view. "Site cynic" is not a view.

Free trade good! We lost low wage jobs to trade. We got new jobs though.

Men from GE in US in WW1: 1,000,000s. Men in camps: 2300. Ooooh.

So we should have saved east Europe, but not Libya? Got it.

I doubt that it's possible for reasoned discourse to go on when individuals have such dramatically different understandings of even the most basic facts, but I will start here:

Eastern Europe was not the Democrats' to sell out, and at the time a large contingent of the Republicans was still oriented towards selling out Western Europe in the post-war order.

Agent Miles

01-05-2018, 18:34

Hooahguy

01-05-2018, 19:23

How could FDR decide to not nuke Moscow? The first atom bomb test was in July 1945. FDR passed away in April 1945.

You must mean Truman, who at the time erroneously thought that the Soviets wouldnt get the bomb so why nuke Moscow which by the way probably wouldnt have done much since the USSR is so vast and if we learn anything from Napoleon, taking Moscow wont subjugate the Russians.

Montmorency

01-05-2018, 21:07

The executive branch decides foreign policy. Congress votes to ratify most decisions. FDR decided not to nuke Moscow to save Eastern Europe. A decision not to do something doesn't get ratified by anyone. So no Republican involvement in the decision.

Can you try to see why this statement (leaving aside the FDR anachronism pointed out by Hooah) is so astonishing to sober minds?

First, the assumption that nuking Moscow would even be possible. Numerous aspects to address here, including technical (specifications of bombs and planes) and operational (where in the world could America launch this suicide mission from, and how would this force survive traversing hundreds of kilometers of Soviet territory to reach Moscow?).

Second, the premise that accomplishing a nuclear strike on Moscow in, say, 1946, would not be a great evil, whether relative to the aim or not. You must be familar with the debate on the legality and morality of the original nuclear attacks; a covert countervalue attack on the political capital of the Soviet Union in a time of peace would unarguably be the single greatest crime against humanity in the history of the United States of America.

Third, the argument that simply bombing Moscow and killing thousands of civilians would end the Soviet presence in Eastern Europe and magically bring about a democratic revival, rather than shattering the role of the United States in shaping the post-war peace in the eyes of the nations - instigating World War 3, a Soviet wave across Central Europe, millions more dead worldwide, and the collapse of the United States government and armed forces.

I must very strongly impress upon you my belief that only a dangerous lunatic on the scale of 10 Curtis LeMays could seriously endorse the above position.

Seamus Fermanagh

01-05-2018, 23:25

Can you try to see why this statement (leaving aside the FDR anachronism pointed out by Hooah) is so astonishing to sober minds?

First, the assumption that nuking Moscow would even be possible. Numerous aspects to address here, including technical (specifications of bombs and planes) and operational (where in the world could America launch this suicide mission from, and how would this force survive traversing hundreds of kilometers of Soviet territory to reach Moscow?).

Second, the premise that accomplishing a nuclear strike on Moscow in, say, 1946, would not be a great evil, whether relative to the aim or not. You must be familar with the debate on the legality and morality of the original nuclear attacks; a covert countervalue attack on the political capital of the Soviet Union in a time of peace would unarguably be the single greatest crime against humanity in the history of the United States of America.

Third, the argument that simply bombing Moscow and killing thousands of civilians would end the Soviet presence in Eastern Europe and magically bring about a democratic revival, rather than shattering the role of the United States in shaping the post-war peace in the eyes of the nations - instigating World War 3, a Soviet wave across Central Europe, millions more dead worldwide, and the collapse of the United States government and armed forces.

I must very strongly impress upon you my belief that only a dangerous lunatic on the scale of 10 Curtis LeMays could seriously endorse the above position.

While it would have been a crime against humanity with little or no fig leaf at all, and while it is arguable whether it would have destabilized the Soviets enough (my bet is not), an atomic strike on Moscow was doable in 1946, B-29 Silverplates and P-51Ds both had operational altitudes that would have made interception almost impossible by the Soviet air forces. This is only true of 1946 and part of 1947 however, as the Russians were aware of the problem and rapidly developing planes that could intercept and fight above 35k feet. By 1947/1948 that window had been closed.

Kralizec

01-06-2018, 01:57

The "crash" was indisputably caused when Democrats (really, really nice people BTW) passed a law that banks absolutely had to give home owner mortgages to people who could not afford to pay them. When they actually could no longer pay the fees, the banks, who could not allow default by law, added the deficit to the mortgage until the sum was unbearable. The capitalism, i.e. basic math, wasn't unregulated. Ever. Also, Bush II didn't double the national debt as Obama did. I suppose over five trillion dollars invested in the economy and the lowest unemployment for Blacks in 17 years and Hispanics in the entire history of the records isn't much to show for it...yet.

Banks were not obliged to give anyone a loan. Ever. You are peddling fantasies.
Before you mention Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the fact is that the mortgages they gave out actually turned out better on average than those of private companies who also dealt in subprime mortgages. Private banks, which obscured the risks of subprime loans with sophisticated securitization schemes, had a much larger hand in the crisis.

It's undeniable that the USA's national debt exploded in the Obama years, but when he took office the economy had imploded. Most countries in the world took refuge in deficit spending after the crises. Also, some of the bigger budget busting expenditures, such as TARP, were actually approved in the last year of the Bush administration.

Devastatin Dave

01-06-2018, 02:57

Xiahou

01-06-2018, 05:50

I plan on masturbating on just the nonsense I've read on this thread. If you cannot see the Bannon acted as a suicide bomber much like Scaramucci was a suicide bomber to get rid of Reince Priebus, then you guys just keep playing checker while the Lord God Trump continues to play chess. Kek be praised! You beta male cucks will never fully understand the greatness and brilliance of the all knowing and seeing Trump. Fools! Please continue to underestimate and chase these nonsense stories as He continues to Make America Great Again!!!
Trump publicly disemboweling Bannon seems to be something that all Republicans can agree was good. Maybe it was a sacrifice to unite the party?

I mean, I kind of doubt it because I think Bannon was just a self-important con man who started to believe his own hype. But hey, let's all just enjoy the moment. ~;)

HopAlongBunny

01-06-2018, 06:01

The War on Drugs is back baby!

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cloud-of-uncertainty-looms-over-legalized-pot-as-feds-nix-obama-era-accommodation/

The new approach may not make any real difference; it would still be up to state attorney generals to decide whether to prosecute.
I wonder if this will cause even larger problems for the "merchants of weed" to find banks that will work with them...

While not "Too big to Fail" the market is growing, and mainstream influence has expanded:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/06/jeff-sessions-marijuana-legalization-congress-216251

Yes, it would be ironic if this was the push to get legislators to legalize pot.

Gilrandir

01-06-2018, 14:52

Please continue to underestimate and chase these nonsense stories as He continues to Make America Great Again!!!

I heard that over the year the has elapsed American economy has displayed a growth greater than in 12 previous years. So Trump electorate may be proud of bringing him to the White House. If the tendency persists he has a good chance of being re-elected whatever his opponents may say or do. After all, it is what happens with their wallets that is gonna move people to vote for him in 3 years.

Husar

01-06-2018, 18:46

I plan on masturbating on just the nonsense I've read on this thread. If you cannot see the Bannon acted as a suicide bomber much like Scaramucci was a suicide bomber to get rid of Reince Priebus, then you guys just keep playing checker while the Lord God Trump continues to play chess. Kek be praised! You beta male cucks will never fully understand the greatness and brilliance of the all knowing and seeing Trump. Fools! Please continue to underestimate and chase these nonsense stories as He continues to Make America Great Again!!!

You're probably right:

20427

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/949618475877765120
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/949619270631256064

HopAlongBunny

01-06-2018, 19:03

I heard that over the year the has elapsed American economy has displayed a growth greater than in 12 previous years. So Trump electorate may be proud of bringing him to the White House. If the tendency persists he has a good chance of being re-elected whatever his opponents may say or do. After all, it is what happens with their wallets that is gonna move people to vote for him in 3 years.

https://wonkette.com/627942/donald-trump-takes-obamas-new-job-gains-and-shoves-them-we-mean-trump-created-fewer-jobs

Rather,Trump has not yet upset the Obama apple cart.

Devastatin Dave

01-06-2018, 20:48

https://wonkette.com/627942/donald-trump-takes-obamas-new-job-gains-and-shoves-them-we-mean-trump-created-fewer-jobs

Rather,Trump has not yet upset the Obama apple cart.

Only a dummy would think that Obama's policies were anyway beneficial to this nation's economy. Obama had no quarters in 8 years of anything over 3% growth in the economy. When you remove regulation, move to lift demoralizing and unfair taxes on businesses, and give productive tax PAYING citizens back more of their money that the government has stolen from their labor, you get economic growth like we are seeing now. Obama was a international ####-boy for globalist scumbags and when this nation's businesses saw that Obama with the wrinkled vagina and kankles lost her bid to continue to ruin this country from the inside, the economy took off knowing that they were no longer beholden to third world wannabe dictator sluts like the Clintons.... MAGA!!!

Montmorency

01-06-2018, 20:55

Many have called Michael Wolff, author of the new Trump Exposé, was sleazy and unprofessional in misleading his principals and violating reporting norms. Another perspective considers it laudable:

Michael Wolff Did What Every Other White House Reporter Is Too Cowardly to Do (https://www.gq.com/story/michael-wolff-white-house-trump-access)

I’m gonna begin this post with the same disclaimer that needs to come with every post about Michael Wolff, which is that Wolff is a fart-sniffer whose credibility is often suspect and who represents the absolute worst of New York media-cocktail-circuit inbreeding. But in a way, it’s fitting that our least reliable president could finally find himself undone at the hands of one of our least reliable journalists.

All of Wolff’s excerpts from Fire & Fury so far (the book was rushed into stores today) read like jayvee fan fiction. They read like a pilot that Steve Bannon himself wrote, pitched to Hollywood, and had rejected 17 times over. They read, in short, like bullshit. And yet…Wolff has audio. He’s got hours upon hours of audio. Not only that, but the book has already caused legitimate upheaval in the administration, opened a permanent rift between President Trump and Bannon, AND it confirms what we have all always known to be true: that the president severely lacks the cognitive ability to do this job, and that he is surrounded at all times by a cadre of enablers, dunces, and outright thieves. As much as I wanna discredit Wolff, he got receipts and, more important, he used them. Wolff got it all. Wolff nailed them.

And look how he did it. He did it by sleazily ingratiating himself with the White House, gaining access, hosting weird private dinners, and then taking full advantage of the administration's basic lack of knowledge about how reporting works. Some of the officials Wolff got on tape claim to be unaware that they were on the record. Wolff denies this, but he's very much up front in the book's intro about the fact that he was able to exploit the incredible "lack of experience" on display here. In other words, Wolff got his book by playing a bunch of naive dopes.

Thank God for that. Wolff has spent this week thoroughly exploiting Trump and his minions the same way they've exploited the cluelessness of others. And he pulled it off because, at long last, there was a reporter out there willing to toss decorum aside and burn bridges the same way Trump does.

Everyone around Donald Trump is too polite to Donald Trump. Democrats, foreign dignitaries, underlings… all of them. And the White House press is perhaps the worst offender. From the media pool playing along with Sarah Sanders during press conferences—conferences where Sanders openly lies and pisses on democracy—to access merchants like Maggie Haberman doling out Trump gossip like so many bread crumbs, too many reporters have been far too deferential to an administration that is brazenly racist, dysfunctional, and corrupt. And for what purpose? It’s clear to me that Haberman and the like aren’t saving up their chits for just the EXACT right time to bring this Administration down. No, the only end goal of their access is continued access, to preserve it indefinitely so that the copy spigot never gets shut off. They are abiding by traditional wink-wink understandings that have long existed between the government and the press covering it.

But Wolff didn’t do that. He did not engage in some endless bullshit access tango. No, Wolff actually USED his access, and extended zero courtesy to Trump on the process, and it’s going to pay off for him not just from a book sales standpoint, but from a real journalistic impact. I am utterly sick to death of hearing anonymous reports about people inside the White House “concerned” about the madman currently in charge of everything. These people don’t deserve the courtesy of discretion. They don’t deserve to dictate the terms of coverage to people. They deserve to be torched.

Trump ascended into power in part because he relied on other people being too nice. It’s fun to rampage through the china shop when the china shop owner is standing over there being like, “SIR, that is not how we do things here!” If Trump refuses to abide by the standard (and now useless) “norms” of the presidency—shit, if he doesn't even KNOW them—why should ANYONE in the press adhere to needless norms of their own? They shouldn’t, and it appears that Michael Wolff was one of the few people to instinctively grasp that, and I hope more White House insiders follow his lead. Sometimes you need a rat to catch a rat.

Montmorency

01-06-2018, 21:01

You're probably right:

20427

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/949618475877765120
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/949619270631256064

I thought this was the parody account, but it's real.

Sorry Dave, but Emperor Trump outmatches you.

HopAlongBunny

01-06-2018, 21:38

Something a little more comprehensive about the Trump effect:

https://slate.com/business/2018/01/donald-trump-has-not-made-the-economy-great-again.html

The economy does not react with the alacrity of a TV show; things are good because of the last administrations policies, this bunch has yet to make its mark.
Trump does have the benefit of a Senate and Rep. team that is not (that we know of) trying to make him a "1-term President"

Beskar

01-06-2018, 22:35

It is 6th of January 2018. Donald Trump is still a bad choice for President.

Husar

01-06-2018, 22:59

I thought this was the parody account, but it's real.

Sorry Dave, but Emperor Trump outmatches you.

I don't like to use fake sources for such serious matters. :shrug:

Fragony

01-07-2018, 10:55

It is 6th of January 2018. Donald Trump is still a bad choice for President.

At least better than that creepy borderliner, bitch out of hell

Husar

01-07-2018, 14:44

At least better than that creepy borderliner, bitch out of hell

I doubt it, just sounds like someone is afraid of giving a woman power.
She is no more creepy than mister "I'd do my daughter" or his VP "I can't control myself without my wife".

Fragony

01-07-2018, 16:28

I doubt it, just sounds like someone is afraid of giving a woman power.
She is no more creepy than mister "I'd do my daughter" or his VP "I can't control myself without my wife".

Not women in general, but that woman yeah.. just look at how she takes her loss, she is furious and blames everything but herself, she's a total psychopath. These eyes..brrrr

Husar

01-07-2018, 17:10

Not women in general, but that woman yeah.. just look at how she takes her loss, she is furious and blames everything but herself, she's a total psychopath. These eyes..brrrr

And Trump is never furious and never blames anyone but himself? Don't make me laugh...
The difference is that Hillary is at least corrupt on the "better" side of politics and actually more intelligent than Trump.
And while she may be somewhat psychopathic, Trump is even more so. It has been shown before that psychopathic traits can be found in many leaders:

Some say it's nothing to worry about: https://www.elitedaily.com/life/motivation/psychopaths-make-the-best-leaders/1108247

According to research, Teddy Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton all possessed psychopathic characteristics.

Scott Lilienfeld, professor of psychology at Emory University, led a study that assessed the personalities and rated the performances of US presidents.

Ultimately, the research revealed presidents were more successful when they possessed fearless dominance, a quality frequently attributed to psychopaths.

Other think the riskier behavior of psychopaths can put organizations in danger: https://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2013/04/25/the-disturbing-link-between-psychopathy-and-leadership/#6068f4bd4104

The study’s findings were disturbing, bearing out the large amount of anecdotal evidence the researchers had long been gathering. The research showed that approximately 3% of those assessed in this management development program study scored in the psychopath range – well above the incidence of 1% in the general population. By comparison, the incidence of psychopathy in prison populations is estimated at around 15%.
[...]
One final but not insignificant topic: Given the very real potential for harm that psychopaths in positions of power have (both for other people and for entire organizations), what steps can companies take to help prevent costly and damaging hiring and promotion mistakes?
[...]
In short, this is just another lens through which to view high-level hires and promotions. But it can be a lens worth carefully looking through - when one considers the high human and financial costs of psychopathic leadership.

After all, Trump is the one who wants to destroy the Affordable Care Act even if people die in the process, who wants to risk more global warming, made the environmental protection agency toothless...shooting a guy in the face on 5th avenue sounds like a small thing compared to all the people he could kill with his agenda. I'm not sure how exactly Hillary proposed worse policies.

Beskar

01-07-2018, 19:38

https://i.imgur.com/cmeCLRp.jpg

rory_20_uk

01-08-2018, 12:53

Those who are anti-Trump do not have to be pro-Clinton or indeed of the view that all other politicians are wonderful people who are there solely to help their fellow citizens. Yes, the system is massively broken and the only ones who can fix it are those who have the least incentive to do so which is why things remain so similar with only cosmetic tweaks - "Yes we can" becomes "Make America Great Again" and in both cases bar some small tweaks at the edges (and of course Obamacare which appears to already be dying).

~:smoking:

Montmorency

01-11-2018, 22:04

Speaking of Bannon, I couldn't find a proper edit in this vein, so I made my own attempt. I lack skill, but there's a little bonus included.

https://i.imgur.com/HoLlfE9.jpg

Strike For The South

01-12-2018, 06:57

I don't think anyone is being too nice to Trump. I think there is simply 1/3 that lives to trigger the libs. These people are essentially unreachable beyond some cataclysm.

Beskar

01-12-2018, 18:51

And Trump uses his diplomatic wit to refer to Haiti, African Nations, etc as "Shitholes".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42664173

Seamus Fermanagh

01-13-2018, 05:00

And Trump uses his diplomatic wit to refer to Haiti, African Nations, etc as "Shitholes".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42664173

His 'deplorables' will respond positively to Trump using the wording they would and which they understand.

I wonder just how many of the oh so very offended have said much the same? We shall never know.

The man is an asshat.

CrossLOPER

01-13-2018, 17:51

unfair taxes on businesses
Relaxing taxation does not encourage business growth because growth is linked to things other than taxes, namely people buying goods and services. People will only buy things if they have the money to do so. In general, businesses should be the last ones to receive tax breaks if your goal is economic growth.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42111.pdf

a completely inoffensive name

01-14-2018, 02:47

Anyone promoting supply side economics is a shill or a moron.

All I do is ask the question: Would you buy more fidget spinners if the supply increased to make them 5 cents apiece?

As soon as they say no, because who the fuck needs two fidget spinners, I ask them why they feel that giving the fidget spinner company a tax cut will give you a new and better job at the fidget spinner company.

rory_20_uk

01-14-2018, 15:53

The best way to get money flowing is... to give it to poor people. They almost always spend most / all of it on things. I say that as someone who loathes paying tax for anything and would not get any money if this were to occur. If I was given money I'd probably save it - hell, possibly even offshore it.

~:smoking:

Husar

01-17-2018, 03:36

Good news, the President is in perfect health, mental health included:

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/dr-ronny-jackson-donald-trump-clean-bill-of-health/index.html

Dr. Ronny Jackson, the presidential physician, gushed about President Donald Trump's health during a briefing before the White House press corps on Tuesday, touting the President's "good genes," how he did "exceedingly well" on his cognitive test and his "excellent" cardiac health.

[...]

"I think he will remain fit for duty for the remainder of this term and even the remainder of another term if he is elected," Jackson said.

Montmorency

01-17-2018, 03:51

Good news, the President is in perfect health, mental health included:

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/16/politics/dr-ronny-jackson-donald-trump-clean-bill-of-health/index.html

The President doesn't have a daily physical fitness routine, the doctor said. And Trump's penchant for Diet Coke, McDonald's, red meat and vanilla ice cream has been widely reported.
But while Jackson acknowledged he advised Trump -- who is 6 foot, 3 inches and weighs 239 pounds -- to eat better and exercise more, he said it's genetics that have kept Trump in sterling health.
"He has incredible genes, I just assume," the doctor said.

"He has incredibly good genes, and it's just the way God made him," Jackson said at one point, later joking that Trump could live a long, long time.
"I told the President that if he had a healthier diet over the last 20 years he might live to be 200 years old," Jackson said, eliciting laughter from reporters.

Watch the clip of Jackson speaking. I like to read into it.

EDIT: With a reported height of 6'3", and a reported weight of 239 lbs, Trump's BMI is 29.9, just under the 30 mark for obesity.

We should definitely read into that.

Fragony

01-17-2018, 10:09

About time, less money to Hamas and Fatah. Go Trump. Never support anything that wants you dead

rory_20_uk

01-17-2018, 10:12

About time, less money to Hamas and Fatah. Go Trump. Never support anything that wants you dead

If Israel stopped running the territory like their own personal Gulag then there would be less need for handouts. The locals hate you? Yes - the locals generally hate occupying forces who treat the locals really badly.

~:smoking:

Fragony

01-17-2018, 10:55

If Israel stopped running the territory like their own personal Gulag then there would be less need for handouts. The locals hate you? Yes - the locals generally hate occupying forces who treat the locals really badly.

~:smoking:

Oh ffs they are refugees from Libanon mostly, it's a refugee-camp that doesn't behave very well nothing more,

Strike For The South

01-17-2018, 17:07

If Trump is 239 pounds, I have a 12 inch button.

Seamus Fermanagh

01-17-2018, 19:22

Husar

01-17-2018, 20:59

This means, of course, that my interpretation thus far has been correct. He is neither crazy nor ill. He is an asshat.

Yes, it looks that way.
It does make his slurring and covfefeing that much weirder though.
Trevor Noah sums it up quite well:

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

Montmorency

01-18-2018, 00:22

This means, of course, that my interpretation thus far has been correct. He is neither crazy nor ill. He is an asshat.

Two things to note:

Given the overwhelming barrage of lies from all levels of the administration, it's hard to take adulatory health assessments from underlings seriously. I suspect that Trump is in poor overall health even for his age, but not (inasmuch as can be assessed) in immediate danger of dropping dead. The president's work schedule (https://www.vox.com/2018/1/8/16865588/report-trump-work-schedule-7-hours) in this administration is not overly burdensome, and the content of his efforts uncongenial to me, so this is fine.

A proper assessment of mental and cognitive health would require a long period of observation, and sustained cooperation from Trump; it's not going to happen. I've felt this question doesn't actually matter beyond giving Republicans some pretense to remove the President (and there's no shortage there). A clinical diagnosis would make Trump's conduct neither more nor less acceptable, therefore it's superfluous. Maybe he's senile, maybe he's congenitally... a low-grade imbecile "fucking moron"... Knowing the case wouldn't and shouldn't change our perceptions of him, or calculations as to his removal. (I.e., he should be removed.)

Montmorency

01-18-2018, 00:27

Also: ain't nothing wrong with McD and a Diet Coke. I think they've actually improved the flavor and quality over the past two decades. It's Trump's fear of contamination (clinical or otherwise) leading to a restricted diet that seems off-putting and unhealthy.

CrossLOPER

01-18-2018, 02:05

Yes, it looks that way.
It does make his slurring and covfefeing that much weirder though.
Trevor Noah sums it up quite well:

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

"Genetics"? This is the same garbage argument that incels use to describe why they can't get anywhere in life. If your body is capable of processing junk in such a manner, it's genetics in that you are simply not human.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ8EAwRauoM&t=511s

Seamus Fermanagh

01-18-2018, 02:43

... The president's work schedule (https://www.vox.com/2018/1/8/16865588/report-trump-work-schedule-7-hours) in this administration is not overly burdensome, and the content of his efforts uncongenial to me, so this is fine....

LOL. I always wondered why it bothered candidate Trump so much that Obama went golfing a fair bit. Since he opposed virtually EVERY Obama initiative, wouldn't you WANT him taking as many days off as possible? It's like the old borscht-belt joke about the two women complaining about a lunch café. The first says "the food was horrible." The second says, "I agree, and the portions were small."

Montmorency

01-18-2018, 02:59

"Genetics"? This is the same garbage argument that incels use to describe why they can't get anywhere in life. If your body is capable of processing junk in such a manner, it's genetics in that you are simply not human.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ8EAwRauoM&t=511s

Caprisun!

!!!

HopAlongBunny

01-18-2018, 08:29

The "bloody nose" option in N. Korea.
This has been touted as a demonstration of American will to engage with N. Korea! Leaving no doubt...blah blah blah!
Chances are it would end badly, for all concerned:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/12/north-korea-strike-nuclear-strategist-216306

Quick fact, N.Korea is so small that if it believes war has been declared, it has no option but to go (without delay) to an illustration of cost.
The article suggests a limited strike at Hawaii, Guam, Japan and S. Korean assets as a first round; this could easily end up in an all out exchange.
Yes, N. Korea would likely cease to exist, and S. Korea and a random selection of US cities. Yay?

Just a bluff you say?
A bluff needs to be credible; this is not a credible action.

rory_20_uk

01-18-2018, 12:00

Trump has had a very cushy life, and continues to do so. Not smoking / drinking has helped. If he's kept his blood pressure under control, small vessel dementia is not likely and other forms are more genetic.

So, his diet and indolence probably mean he's at risk of macrovascular disease (and for the good of the world may he have a stroke / heart attack sharpish) but what he does is if anything Psychological pathology which is always a grey area - when does a lazy self-obsessed liar, braggart and cheat become mentally ill?

~:smoking:

Strike For The South

01-18-2018, 16:27

Strike For The South

01-18-2018, 16:39

Husar

01-18-2018, 17:37

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/17/opinion/trump-voters-supporters.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region

Tangentially related, but people see what they want to see I guess.

Donald Trump has succeeded where Barack Obama failed. The economy is up, foreign tyrants are afraid, ISIS has lost most of its territory, our embassy will be moved to Jerusalem and tax reform is accomplished. More than that, Mr. Trump is learning, adapting and getting savvier every day. Entitlement reform is next! Lastly, the entrenched interests in Washington, which have done nothing but glad-hand one another, and both political parties are angry and afraid.

Who knew that all it would take to make progress was vision, chutzpah and some testosterone?

STEVEN SANABRIA
OAKDALE, CALIF.

(Emphasis mine)

That's top-down class warfare at its finest! :wall:

Seamus Fermanagh

01-18-2018, 18:08

A huge chunk of folks are invested in the market, though most are using funds of one sort or another (safer, since picking single stocks IS as tough as handicapping horses).

At best, the market's value at a given time represents what significant portion of professional investors feel will be the value/health of the economy 3-6 month from now. And that guestimate of the future is just that -- an educated guess. If I were to attempt to publish a study that used that reliability level of data to suggest conclusions, I MIGHT be told to redo the measurement and statistical treatments and try again. More likely it would just be rejected.

Stock markets are not a roulette table, but there is a good deal of randomness in them nevertheless.

CrossLOPER

01-19-2018, 01:57

spmetla

01-19-2018, 03:54

Seamus Fermanagh

01-19-2018, 04:10

Montmorency

01-19-2018, 04:14

Well to his credit Trump thankfully didn't change our engagement in Iraq which continued Obama's slow defeat of ISIS via providing SOF and enablers to the Iraqi Army and the Kurdish Peshmerga. I'm definitely in the camp of people unhappy with the slow Obama approach to ISIS and personally feel more sooner would have been much more appropriate but so long as they are defeated in the end I'm content. The moment Mosul fell we should have been there in a big way to steady the Iraqi government and defeat ISIS instead of letting it drag out for nearly half a decade.
Upon his election I was worried that he'd pull us out of there and Afghanistan as part of his isolationist stance.

Same for the stock market I guess. It's really just a continuation of Obama's policies. The recent tax bill is the only thing that may have an effect that's been done that wasn't just a continuation of present policy. The norm for all Presidents is to claim everything that happens as their personal doing such as his taking personal ownership for the USS Gerald Ford as part of his strengthening the US Military when it was all planned and built under the previous president.

As noted in the Syria thread, if IS retreats into endemic guerrilla activity in West Asia while hundreds of its most skilled fighters, leaders, and technicians disperse around the world to join regional groups - it's not really a victory. Ultimately the Obama policy was less a principle of rebalancing than of minimizing direct liability, and that's probably the plurality consensus among the political and military leadership to this day. Decisive military campaigns won't accomplish much (outside perhaps the nakedly-destructive "raid" model of constantly repeating Afghanistan 2001 in trouble areas, then pulling out immediately), but long-term political and diplomatic strategies are too complicated, hard to devise and to propound, require concomitant comprehensive changes in other areas of strategy and policy: path of least resistance it is then.

I never knew much about Al Franken, the senator resigning over photo-groping allegations, but I like this story (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2003/05/bushs_armyor_bills.html) about him and Paul Wolfowitz:

At last weekend's White House Correspondents' Dinner, one gossip column reports, liberal comedian Al Franken went up to Paul Wolfowitz, the neoconservative deputy defense secretary and said, "Clinton's military did pretty well in Iraq, huh?" Wolfowitz responded by proposing that Franken perform an anatomically impossible act.

spmetla

01-19-2018, 05:09

if IS retreats into endemic guerrilla activity in West Asia while hundreds of its most skilled fighters, leaders, and technicians disperse around the world to join regional groups - it's not really a victory.
It means it has retreated into just another terrorist organization as it was before it took Raqqa and Mosul. At least they are no longer able to capture towns and cities and enslave thousands of women and children while summarily executing their opposition enmasse. Yes, if given the space and time they could always pose another threat to the region but right now they are a force that is no longer able to be a banner of victory for the extreme islamists that flocked to the middle east to wage war or were inspired to conduct terrorism in their home country. Yes, terrorism will still occur but sadly that's just part of the new normal of our times.

Decisive military campaigns won't accomplish much
Correct if it's just a campaign on its own. In the middle east there is no military solution to create peace but there's also no peace without some sort of military component. The current Iraq model of letting US firepower hammer ISIS while the Iraqis can shed blood clearing streets and buildings works to our strength at the least and is politically sustainable for us and the host nation. A "great raid" approach against ISIS could probably have been done sooner though with a more significant military footprint but not necessarily one so large that we're re-establishing semi-permanent bases again.

Again, Trump IS affecting it because the stock market is (if anything) a leading indicator, unlike economic growth reports, which lag. The Street is happy with Trump because they see an era where very little regulation will be added or changed and where some regulation may well be removed. This make Financial game players happy, so they invest I what they see as a brighter future and the market goes up.
I do understand that but I would not credit Trump with that too much. FYI I too have been personally benefiting from this booming stock market and happy about it.

His protectionist personal stance is at odds with the free market policies of the Republicans. If were to actually undo NAFTA, be tough on China via tariffs, and punish companies that outsource labor the market would react quite poorly. He has been thankfully hamstrung by Ryan and McConnell from doing these things and the economy is running along in a business as usual approach just as it did before Trump.
The Tax bill which has many things I like and hate in it is a product of anything but what Trump was speaking about during his populist campaign rallies. Trump at the very least though has learned to listen to his betters on the economy which is far more complicated than his real-estate business ever was.

Kralizec

01-19-2018, 15:48

edit: nevermind

a completely inoffensive name

01-20-2018, 05:12

My condolences to all the park rangers out there who now have to put up those signs that say "please stop walking in this part of the country".

Montmorency

01-20-2018, 07:04

Run liberals in Republican primaries (http://politicsofhope.com/temple-of-the-underdog-stirs-up-district-21.html?), run socialists in Democratic primaries.

Seamus Fermanagh

01-21-2018, 04:05

Run liberals in Republican primaries (http://politicsofhope.com/temple-of-the-underdog-stirs-up-district-21.html?), run socialists in Democratic primaries.

Elect people of good character against their will and force them to serve.

a completely inoffensive name

01-22-2018, 06:37

Elect people of good character against their will and force them to serve.

2,500 years later and we ended up going back to rounding up the children with gold souls to serve the public.

Gilrandir

01-25-2018, 09:36

20488

Montmorency

01-25-2018, 21:43

20489

Montmorency

01-25-2018, 22:15

Extraordinary Implication:

Nyarlathotep . . . the crawling chaos . . . I am the last . . . I will tell the audient void. . . .
I do not recall distinctly when it began, but it was months ago. The general tension was horrible. To a season of political and social upheaval was added a strange and brooding apprehension of hideous physical danger; a danger widespread and all-embracing, such a danger as may be imagined only in the most terrible phantasms of the night. I recall that the people went about with pale and worried faces, and whispered warnings and prophecies which no one dared consciously repeat or acknowledge to himself that he had heard. A sense of monstrous guilt was upon the land, and out of the abysses between the stars swept chill currents that made men shiver in dark and lonely places. There was a daemoniac alteration in the sequence of the seasons—the autumn heat lingered fearsomely, and everyone felt that the world and perhaps the universe had passed from the control of known gods or forces to that of gods or forces which were unknown.
And it was then that Nyarlathotep came out of Egypt. Who he was, none could tell, but he was of the old native blood and looked like a Pharaoh. The fellahin knelt when they saw him, yet could not say why. He said he had risen up out of the blackness of twenty-seven centuries, and that he had heard messages from places not on this planet. Into the lands of civilisation came Nyarlathotep, swarthy, slender, and sinister, always buying strange instruments of glass and metal and combining them into instruments yet stranger. He spoke much of the sciences—of electricity and psychology—and gave exhibitions of power which sent his spectators away speechless, yet which swelled his fame to exceeding magnitude. Men advised one another to see Nyarlathotep, and shuddered. And where Nyarlathotep went, rest vanished; for the small hours were rent with the screams of nightmare. Never before had the screams of nightmare been such a public problem; now the wise men almost wished they could forbid sleep in the small hours, that the shrieks of cities might less horribly disturb the pale, pitying moon as it glimmered on green waters gliding under bridges, and old steeples crumbling against a sickly sky.
I remember when Nyarlathotep came to my city—the great, the old, the terrible city of unnumbered crimes. My friend had told me of him, and of the impelling fascination and allurement of his revelations, and I burned with eagerness to explore his uttermost mysteries. My friend said they were horrible and impressive beyond my most fevered imaginings; that what was thrown on a screen in the darkened room prophesied things none but Nyarlathotep dared prophesy, and that in the sputter of his sparks there was taken from men that which had never been taken before yet which shewed only in the eyes. And I heard it hinted abroad that those who knew Nyarlathotep looked on sights which others saw not.
It was in the hot autumn that I went through the night with the restless crowds to see Nyarlathotep; through the stifling night and up the endless stairs into the choking room. And shadowed on a screen, I saw hooded forms amidst ruins, and yellow evil faces peering from behind fallen monuments. And I saw the world battling against blackness; against the waves of destruction from ultimate space; whirling, churning; struggling around the dimming, cooling sun. Then the sparks played amazingly around the heads of the spectators, and hair stood up on end whilst shadows more grotesque than I can tell came out and squatted on the heads. And when I, who was colder and more scientific than the rest, mumbled a trembling protest about “imposture” and “static electricity”, Nyarlathotep drave us all out, down the dizzy stairs into the damp, hot, deserted midnight streets. I screamed aloud that I was not afraid; that I never could be afraid; and others screamed with me for solace. We sware to one another that the city was exactly the same, and still alive; and when the electric lights began to fade we cursed the company over and over again, and laughed at the queer faces we made.
I believe we felt something coming down from the greenish moon, for when we began to depend on its light we drifted into curious involuntary formations and seemed to know our destinations though we dared not think of them. Once we looked at the pavement and found the blocks loose and displaced by grass, with scarce a line of rusted metal to shew where the tramways had run. And again we saw a tram-car, lone, windowless, dilapidated, and almost on its side. When we gazed around the horizon, we could not find the third tower by the river, and noticed that the silhouette of the second tower was ragged at the top. Then we split up into narrow columns, each of which seemed drawn in a different direction. One disappeared in a narrow alley to the left, leaving only the echo of a shocking moan. Another filed down a weed-choked subway entrance, howling with a laughter that was mad. My own column was sucked toward the open country, and presently felt a chill which was not of the hot autumn; for as we stalked out on the dark moor, we beheld around us the hellish moon-glitter of evil snows. Trackless, inexplicable snows, swept asunder in one direction only, where lay a gulf all the blacker for its glittering walls. The column seemed very thin indeed as it plodded dreamily into the gulf. I lingered behind, for the black rift in the green-litten snow was frightful, and I thought I had heard the reverberations of a disquieting wail as my companions vanished; but my power to linger was slight. As if beckoned by those who had gone before, I half floated between the titanic snowdrifts, quivering and afraid, into the sightless vortex of the unimaginable.
Screamingly sentient, dumbly delirious, only the gods that were can tell. A sickened, sensitive shadow writhing in hands that are not hands, and whirled blindly past ghastly midnights of rotting creation, corpses of dead worlds with sores that were cities, charnel winds that brush the pallid stars and make them flicker low. Beyond the worlds vague ghosts of monstrous things; half-seen columns of unsanctified temples that rest on nameless rocks beneath space and reach up to dizzy vacua above the spheres of light and darkness. And through this revolting graveyard of the universe the muffled, maddening beating of drums, and thin, monotonous whine of blasphemous flutes from inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond Time; the detestable pounding and piping whereunto dance slowly, awkwardly, and absurdly the gigantic, tenebrous ultimate gods—the blind, voiceless, mindless gargoyles whose soul is Nyarlathotep.
https://i.imgur.com/GVshudg.jpg

CrossLOPER

01-26-2018, 02:16

Elect people of good character against their will and force them to serve.

Make public policy decisions using a See 'n Say with policies taped over the animal pictures.

Shaka_Khan

01-26-2018, 06:13

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKYmPk39U4M

rory_20_uk

01-26-2018, 10:29

Trump... Trump is apparently going to... apologise! I fear more than ever for his health... Link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42829555)

He does plead ignorance that he had no idea about the group he was re-tweeting which certainly is plausible.

~:smoking:

Strike For The South

01-26-2018, 15:16

Does not even haven the backbone to fire Mueller. Amazing.

HopAlongBunny

01-27-2018, 08:16

Opinions on the results of the investigation are pretty split.
Even if obstruction seems pretty solid, would (or even could) the President be charged?:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/26/trump-tried-to-fire-mueller-so-what-216539

To me, the safest answer seems the best course:

Dump the turd in the lap of Congress; this plays directly to the perception that ultimately impeachment is a political decision.
Would the report get a "public viewing"? You would think so, but I have read that Congress would have some discretion in this; in any case it seems hard to believe that this lot could actually keep anything secret.

spmetla

01-28-2018, 16:30

I think in the end his findings will be dumped in the lap of congress. I can't imagine that they would be released publicly though someone will eventually leak them. I'd expect that at the end Mueller would have a press release with essentially a summary of the findings and his recommended courses of actions to congress.

Mueller's taking such a long time and proceeding so apparently methodically and with minimum leaks means he's undoubtedly trying to make an air-tight case for any conclusions he comes to. Whatever his findings need to be so clear cut and provable in court that only the most partisan would contest them as a politically driven hit.

There's a possibly that the Republicans would start an impeachment trial and find the president not guilty in order to prevent his being tried by the Democrats in the event of a blow out loss during the mid-term elections. Other possibility is they just sit on it and use it as leverage against him in a "you support this bill or we might have to head the clamoring of the Democrats and have an impeachment trial"
That's assuming that this is concluded before November. If it's only concluded shortly before the elections and the Democrats grab the majority in one or both houses there's a good chance of an impeachment trial no matter what the results of the investigation. Whether Trump is removed from office or not wouldn't matter much to the Republicans because either way it would fire up their base against the deep-state, liberals, socialists, progressives, and globalists that are the ire of their world view and allow them to use it for propaganda and try to regain those seats in 2020. Pence would work alongside their agenda much more easily but he is nowhere near the lightening rod for anger and protest as Trump is which allows so many 'small cuts' to go unnoticed by the news while we focus on Trump's latest outrage.

a completely inoffensive name

01-30-2018, 05:20

Fragony

01-30-2018, 08:30

Fisherking

01-30-2018, 10:16

Less than dozen members of Congress voted against Russia sanctions.

Trump signed it into law.

Trump refuses to enforce the sanctions.

Where is Greyblades to perform the mental gymnastics to conclude that this isn't dereliction of duty or that *gasp* WHAT ABOUT OBAMA/HILLARY.

With regard to enforcing sanctions, the last eight years, if not previous president, have opened the door to selective enforcement. Congress did practically nothing over it then when it clearly violated their intent and have not made a real peep this time. Under the previous administration congress blamed the lack of enforcement on the executive agencies involved. International sanctions would involve any number of them so perhaps it is too much trouble and the players are too Establishment to risk blaming in order to get to Trump.

A president in the US can overule the congres, that's in your constitution I believe. It's probably smart to not make these sanctions, it's better to have Russia as a poor friend, Russia isn't hostile to the west.

The president can not over rule congress without constitutional grounds. Under the question of sanctions, that would be difficult. Congress’s actual constitutional powers are primarily external. International trade, commerce, and relations are clearly theirs, so there is no actual constitutional ground not to enforce their will. It can only be called a policy dispute.

Fragony

01-30-2018, 11:49

Why hurt something that isn't interested in hurting you. Solid question I think. Trump might be remembered better later

Gilrandir

01-30-2018, 12:11

Russia isn't hostile to the west.

This statement can be thought accurate only by those who aren't exposed to Russian media.

Fragony

01-30-2018, 13:27

This statement can be thought accurate only by those who aren't exposed to Russian media.

lol it doesn't work like that, they aren't our friends. They must be laughing their asses of how we destroy ourself with just a little nudge.

Gilrandir

01-30-2018, 13:43

lol it doesn't work like that, they aren't our friends. They must be laughing their asses of how we destroy ourself with just a little nudge.

Laughing is one thing and expressing profound contempt and enmity is quite another.

Fragony

01-30-2018, 14:52

Laughing is one thing and expressing profound contempt and enmity is quite another.

Well they are clever. The west is the dealbreaker here the west shouldn't creep up on their borders and that's exactly what is being done anyway. I wonder how long it takes before the Russians feel too cornered by the Nato, at some point they will and they would be right

rory_20_uk

01-30-2018, 15:21

Well they are clever. The west is the dealbreaker here the west shouldn't creep up on their borders and that's exactly what is being done anyway. I wonder how long it takes before the Russians feel too cornered by the Nato, at some point they will and they would be right

Russia has been trying to increase its sphere of influence since at least the 1800s. Western Europe has been trying to contain them; in the Far East they have been jostling with China and Japan - both who would be keen to have territories returned that Russia annexed. They take what they can when they can. As do we.

Russia is as always picking for weaknesses from the Arctic circle to the Med. And in Syria they're having quite a lot of success as well as Ukraine. They're really doing well at getting the maximum results for the minimum effort.

~:smoking:

Fragony

01-30-2018, 15:46

China is a bigger concern for Russia. We ourselves, we couldn't possibly do anything, we are too weak, both in budget and mind. The eurozone can be taken with a schnaps and a laugh

rory_20_uk

01-30-2018, 15:50

Gilrandir

01-30-2018, 15:55

And in Syria they're having quite a lot of success as well as Ukraine.

Depends on what you consider a success.

rory_20_uk

01-30-2018, 16:11

Depends on what you consider a success.

A few years ago it could be thought that Syria would end up being a western-friendly puppet backed by the West, Israel and Saudi Arabia it is now a place where Turkey is currently shelling troops that are backed by the USA - both NATO members whilst Saudi Arabia squares off against Iran. They've got their warm water ports for at least the time being at least. They got to try out all sorts of toys on borderline defenceless targets.

So they dropped a load of old ordinance on targets and have got most of the world bickering about Syria rather than talking about how to force Russia to give back the Crimea.

~:smoking:

Fragony

01-30-2018, 17:13

Indeed. A tooled-up China would worry me a hell of a lot more than West Europe. Europe probably would do something (such as a strongly worded letter) should they move in our direction whereas China might take measures to exert control over Eastern Russia. And all of China will be behind that. Quite an unsettling thought.

~:smoking:

It's going to happen, a friend of mine worked as an English teacher in China, she told me that some Russian areas are already Chinese in schoolbooks. She also been to Russia many times so I kinda take her word for it. I am also still secretly in love with her but never tell her that. The Russions know what's comming their way

Beskar

01-30-2018, 17:36

Fragony

01-30-2018, 17:56

The EU is already dead they are just a bit slow-thinking in that. War over territories between Russia and China will come, how it will turn out I don't know

rory_20_uk

01-30-2018, 18:17

War between Russia and China would be interesting (but very unwanted). Especially as the Narrative puts Russia and China on loosely partnership basis.

Such a loss for Russia in losing Siberia could see them joining the European Union too.

Two large, autocratic, nuclear-armed powers going at it? Interesting is a word I would use if I was living on a self-sustaining colony on the Moon / Mars.

After loosing 3/4 of their area I don't envisage the rump Muscovy would then morph in to a Western facing democracy and join the EU.

~:smoking:

Gilrandir

01-30-2018, 18:19

A few years ago it could be thought that Syria would end up being a western-friendly puppet backed by the West, Israel and Saudi Arabia it is now a place where Turkey is currently shelling troops that are backed by the USA - both NATO members whilst Saudi Arabia squares off against Iran. They've got their warm water ports for at least the time being at least. They got to try out all sorts of toys on borderline defenceless targets.

So they dropped a load of old ordinance on targets and have got most of the world bickering about Syria rather than talking about how to force Russia to give back the Crimea.

~:smoking:

I meant "success with Ukraine".

Strike For The South

01-30-2018, 19:11

Putting my Kissinger hat on, War between China and Russia would be good for the west. Not good for the millions who would die needlessly however. War is funny about having that as a sticking point.

The picture is starting to become clearer. Trump laundered money for the Russians, had his debt wiped, and now this is the quid pro quo. The Russian propaganda is little more than a Soviet style throwback that has more to do with Putin flexing his muscles rather than whoever the candidates were.

The vote is so lopsided it is veto proof. This may actually do it. A lot of republican senators can feel themselves on the precipice. Both Cornyn and Cruz were hawking some pre natal pain bill when this news broke. It is a desperate attempt at a feint.

Strike For The South

01-30-2018, 19:11

I meant "success with Ukraine".

They prefer The Ukraine.

ConjurerDragon

01-30-2018, 19:55

Two large, autocratic, nuclear-armed powers going at it? Interesting is a word I would use if I was living on a self-sustaining colony on the Moon / Mars.

They had border disputes several times already, e.g.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict
and they solved them more or less peacefully with the Soviets conceding seemingly minor patches of land
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/China_USSR_E_88.jpg/800px-China_USSR_E_88.jpg

After loosing 3/4 of their area I don't envisage the rump Muscovy would then morph in to a Western facing democracy and join the EU.

~:smoking:

The Soviets already lost a large part of their colonial empire but I don’t think that China would be out for the whole of Siberia. In my opinion chinese politics are really patient, planning not for the next election period of 4 years but for the next decades, slowly grinding away resistance. I mean, Tibet, Hongkong, Macao, the minor areas ceded by the USSR...

Currently the Chinese seem to be occupied trying to get full control of the South China Sea with the Spratley islands but once they look towards Russia my guess would be that at first they do their usual request of returning areas that once belonged to the Quing Empire and only were lost due to "unequal treaties".
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/40/Ct002999.jpg/784px-Ct002999.jpg

And if they do my guess would be that shortly before they have some friendly negotiations with Japan to ensure them that they get the southern Kuriles back from Russia if they support China diplomatically.

Beskar

01-30-2018, 20:11

Two large, autocratic, nuclear-armed powers going at it? Interesting is a word I would use if I was living on a self-sustaining colony on the Moon / Mars.

Hence the "very unwanted" part! I was kind of hoping of perhaps visiting China this year too for some sightseeing...

After loosing 3/4 of their area I don't envisage the rump Muscovy would then morph in to a Western facing democracy and join the EU.
It really depends on the aftermath. If China gobbled up all that territory successfully, it would become a second cold war. Russia would either become a Chinese proxy-state, or it would join Europe Union/Nato, or it would become a border-state. The Russian proxy-state scenario would be more likely if there was deepening of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation rather than a war between the two nations.

Seamus Fermanagh

01-30-2018, 21:21

A president in the US can overule the congres, that's in your constitution I believe. It's probably smart to not make these sanctions, it's better to have Russia as a poor friend, Russia isn't hostile to the west.

Technically he or she cannot. The President may veto any bill passed by Congress before it becomes law. Congress can override that veto with a 2/3 majority in both chambers.

Once it is law, the President is charged with seeing the laws executed.

Our founders specifically tried to establish an executive that was subordinate to Congress.

In practice, Presidents are pretty good at dragging their feet etc. to not execute a law they disagree with. This is extra constitutional, however, and not part of the basic framing.

Montmorency

01-30-2018, 22:02

With regard to enforcing sanctions, the last eight years, if not previous president, have opened the door to selective enforcement. Congress did practically nothing over it then when it clearly violated their intent and have not made a real peep this time. Under the previous administration congress blamed the lack of enforcement on the executive agencies involved. International sanctions would involve any number of them so perhaps it is too much trouble and the players are too Establishment to risk blaming in order to get to Trump.

What did Obama (not) do?

I assume you have Iran or Cuba in mind, but I don't recall the government declining to enforce existing sanctions.

Rejecting sanctions on the basis that their Congressional approval is itself a sufficient deterrent to the target of the sanctions is likely a novel argument.

Fragony

01-30-2018, 22:22

pluning americans into debts, more than all his precedetors combined? That?

Pannonian

01-30-2018, 23:42

pluning americans into debts, more than all his precedetors combined? That?

Hang on, weren't we talking about enforcing sanctions and ignoring Congress thereof? Constitutionality and all that? How does the above relate to the constitutional relationship between President and Congress?

Seamus Fermanagh

01-31-2018, 02:07

pluning americans into debts, more than all his precedetors combined? That?

Every President since 1835 has presided over an increase in the absolute total of the national debt. While the debt has gone up and down as a percentage relative to the entirety of our GDP. the raw total increases every year.

Each and every year, CONGRESS votes to increase the debt and the President then signs it into law.

That blame is as broadly spread as anything in government.

Montmorency

01-31-2018, 03:01

Every President since 1835 has presided over an increase in the absolute total of the national debt. While the debt has gone up and down as a percentage relative to the entirety of our GDP. the raw total increases every year.

Each and every year, CONGRESS votes to increase the debt and the President then signs it into law.

That blame is as broadly spread as anything in government.

Correct.*

IIRC one of the larger drivers of debt during the Obama admin was borrowing above what was strictly needed to pay overall dues as they came up. I can't find the broken-down figures, and I don't know how this borrowing is described in public finance practice.

Debt growth decelerated in Obama's second term excepting FY 2016, and at a glance it doesn't look like FY2017 was anything exceptional in that regard.

https://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/spending_chart_1960_2021USb_XXs2li111mcn_H0f
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Long-term damage of political and diplomatic damage to the standing of the US government and its currency is unfortunately more worrying, and intangible.

*We could have retired the national debt in the 1860s, if it weren't for war-monger Lincoln and the tax money-mooching failed Southern states. Sad!

Montmorency

01-31-2018, 04:35

I actually watched a SotU for once, since 2009 (the 2009 inauguration anyway, but give me the mulligan).

Thousands of flags placed on veterans' graves is a wasteful exercise, and a lop-sided symbolism that perpetuates the valorization of soldiers' corpses.

One thing to do it as a publicity stunt or even unexamined institutional practice - but propagandizing the Jugendliche for doing it?

That's what bothered me most. Never mind the sinister swipes at the 'impure' federal bureaucracy and request for authority to cleanse it, "beautiful clean coal", $1.5 trillion for infrastructure a step after funneling at least that much into their own and donors' pockets, the immigrant/gang violence mastication, the implication that Israel is the only friend America has in the world, and the standard Republican and bipartisan platitudes - this one callout just reflects so poorly on our government and society.

And yes, the man just had to give the longest address in post-war American history. (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/sou_minutes.php).

CrossLOPER

01-31-2018, 06:48

That's what bothered me most. Never mind the sinister swipes at the 'impure' federal bureaucracy and request for authority to cleanse it, "beautiful clean coal", $1.5 trillion for infrastructure a step after funneling at least that much into their own and donors' pockets, the immigrant/gang violence mastication, the implication that Israel is the only friend America has in the world, and the standard Republican and bipartisan platitudes - this one callout just reflects so poorly on our government and society.
This has been around since the late 80's. Republicans have been feeding their base these ideas and they have become the only truths in their eyes. Linking it with religion or some misguided modern idea of nationalism has made it exceptionally difficult to dislodge.

pluning americans into debts, more than all his precedetors combined? That?
Let's spend 5 seconds researching this statement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:51129-land-summaryfigure1(1).png

Oh look, it didn't hold up at all. What a surprise.

Fragony

01-31-2018, 08:38

Gilrandir

01-31-2018, 11:16

War between Russia and China would be interesting (but very unwanted). Especially as the Narrative puts Russia and China on loosely partnership basis.

Such a loss for Russia in losing Siberia could see them joining the European Union too.

China won't go into open war with Russia. It is smarter than that. Instead of taking anything by force it has been populating Russian territory with its citizens - in many cities of the Russian Far East Chinese communities are rather numerous. Besides, China gets economic control over swathes of Russian Siberia. So sooner or later China will have everything under its control without the need of an open war.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=82969
http://euromaidanpress.com/2016/06/25/why-invade-when-you-can-buy-china-already-owns-80-of-russian-region/#arvlbdata
https://www.ft.com/content/700a9450-1b26-11e5-8201-cbdb03d71480

Strike For The South

01-31-2018, 15:43

Thousands of flags placed on veterans' graves is a wasteful exercise, and a lop-sided symbolism that perpetuates the valorization of soldiers' corpses. One thing to do it as a publicity stunt or even unexamined institutional practice - but propagandizing the Jugendliche for doing it?

He has to rally the base somehow, the military is an easy dunk for him. Military veneration runs deep and it something Trump can hide behind.

That's what bothered me most. Never mind the sinister swipes at the 'impure' federal bureaucracy and request for authority to cleanse it, "beautiful clean coal", $1.5 trillion for infrastructure a step after funneling at least that much into their own and donors' pockets, the immigrant/gang violence mastication, the implication that Israel is the only friend America has in the world, and the standard Republican and bipartisan platitudes - this one callout just reflects so poorly on our government and society.

Anybody who has been paying attention understands how grating it was. However, it is eminently frustrating he stayed on message. Any supporter who watched him last night was probably buoyed by the speech. The bar is so low for him that simply sounding reasonable (to say nothing of the haphazard policies themselves) illicits a "see the left is going crazy".

Montmorency

01-31-2018, 18:47

He has to rally the base somehow, the military is an easy dunk for him. Military veneration runs deep and it something Trump can hide behind.

Anybody who has been paying attention understands how grating it was. However, it is eminently frustrating he stayed on message. Any supporter who watched him last night was probably buoyed by the speech. The bar is so low for him that simply sounding reasonable (to say nothing of the haphazard policies themselves) illicits a "see the left is going crazy".

I mean, I won't refer to the audience footage but generally hailing a FlagVeteransPatriot boy is an unhesitatingly bipartisan sentiment. Heck, you have Democratic presidential contenders (Tammy Duckworth) setting their ProudInjuredMilitaryService against DraftdodgingCadetBoneSpurs. The Democrats wish they could be the party of Reagan.

The SotU was noted for its optimistic tone. Well, yes - why would the rulers want to paint a bleak picture of their government? Trump may not care about strategy (give him a few hours now), but I'm sure the kapo does. Paid family leave! But I don't think they know how to do Volksgemeinschaft.

HopAlongBunny

02-01-2018, 03:50

It looks like Trump and friends are going "all in" on disinformation.

"The four-page memo, which was compiled by staffers for the House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, claims that the Department of Justice abused the surveillance programme known as FISA to unfairly target a member of the Trump campaign."

The FBI and the democratic members of the committee have stated the memo omits information and is flawed.
The strategy does get the version out the White House wishes to see; errors in fact make no difference. Even if a subsequent release of information discredits the memo, it will have infected discourse about the FBI and their investigation. "Alternate facts" are alive and well in America.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42894292

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/31/fbi-expresses-grave-concerns-about-house-gop-memo-380233?lo=ap_b1

Kralizec

02-01-2018, 20:25

HopAlongBunny

02-01-2018, 23:50

There is no public interest in releasing it, other than a thinly veiled desire to lower public trust in the FBI. Worse still, any information they could use to discredit the memo could very well be classified.

Which raises a couple of important issues.
The Democrats, looking to clarify the matters raised, have an incentive to leak the classified info that makes their case.
Politicization of intelligence info, runs the risk of competing "disclosures" undermining the formal intelligence process.
As Kralizec notes, the reasons behind the Republican desire to declassify and reveal the information are not compelling national security matters. The wish to undermine the FBI and the special prosecutor might be.

Husar

02-02-2018, 03:53

[...]FlagVeteransPatriot[...]ProudInjuredMilitaryService[...]DraftdodgingCadetBoneSpurs[...]

While we're on the subject of composite words...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG62zay3kck

CrossLOPER

02-02-2018, 05:36

Pick whatever http://www.google.nl/search?hl=en-NL&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=obama+debt&gbv=2&oq=obama+debt&gs_l=heirloom-hp.3..0l4.2479.8082.0.10029.10.8.0.2.2.0.153.697.6j2.8.0....0...1ac.1j4.34.heirloom-hp..0.10.740.rV9xYtqDshs

No, YOU pick whatever and defend your statement instead of having me do your work for you.

The FBI and the democratic members of the committee have stated the memo omits information and is flawed.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42902537

They produced what is basically a forgery.

a completely inoffensive name

02-02-2018, 07:46

Correct.*

IIRC one of the larger drivers of debt during the Obama admin was borrowing above what was strictly needed to pay overall dues as they came up. I can't find the broken-down figures, and I don't know how this borrowing is described in public finance practice.

Debt growth decelerated in Obama's second term excepting FY 2016, and at a glance it doesn't look like FY2017 was anything exceptional in that regard.

https://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/spending_chart_1960_2021USb_XXs2li111mcn_H0f
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Long-term damage of political and diplomatic damage to the standing of the US government and its currency is unfortunately more worrying, and intangible.

*We could have retired the national debt in the 1860s, if it weren't for war-monger Lincoln and the tax money-mooching failed Southern states. Sad!

It's becoming increasingly clear that the turning point from zenith to decline and fall of the American experiment was September 11th, 2001.
It's all downhill from here.

CrossLOPER

02-02-2018, 17:05

It's becoming increasingly clear that the turning point from zenith to decline and fall of the American experiment was September 11th, 2001.
It's all downhill from here.

I have found that people have a weird disrespect for history. It's as if it's a joke to them. They look at events going on around them and ask "how could this have happened?" They point to major events and conspiracy theories, but they ignore the fact that certain things come about as a result of trends. You don't get fat from eating a single piece of cake. You don't get outcast by your friends because you ordered a small salad when going out. You don't fail out of Uni because of a couple of bad quiz grades.

It's trends. The US has been having a lot of bad ones for some time, and they all culminated in what is happening today. The good news is that trends work the other way, too.

HopAlongBunny

02-03-2018, 02:26

The memo appears to be a dud.
If you read it carefully, it discredits every claim it makes.
As Slate points out, it's just complicated enough and boring enough that few will actually read it, in other words its absolutely perfect. Within their own respective bubbles most will simply let someone else tell them what it means. That is just what Team Trump needs; was it Humpty Dumpty who said: "It means exactly what I say it means. Neither more nor less"

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/the-nunes-memo-is-a-big-win-for-donald-trump.html

https://www.npr.org/2018/02/02/582828461/fact-check-read-the-gop-memo-released-by-house-intelligence-committee

spmetla

02-03-2018, 05:27

It is a very unexceptional memo that's for sure. It makes false assertions such as saying that the Steele Dossier was just a Democrat/Clinton creation. It also ignores that the FISA warrant in effect on Carter Page had been in effect for years before Trump was even running for president and before the dossier was even a thing.

The odd conclusion within is that because the Steele dossier is 'opposition research' that it must be false. It seems to ignore the elephant in the room that the FBI seems to have followed up on the Steele Dossier because many of the claims actually bear out. While not everything within the dossier has been proved in public I don't recall any of it's assertions being proved as fabrications.

I don't see how any of the accusations that say this is proof any any wrong doing by the Russia investigation. It ignores so many other established facts to come to a conclusion that seems fanciful. Hannity's claim that the FBI is using circular reporting to pretend to have multiple sources seems odd when this memo seems to cherry pick some items to come to different conclusions and then is blessed off by the white house in order to exonerate the white house.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/02/02/sean-hannity-monologue-fisa-surveillance-memo-release-ending-mueller-russia-probe

Seamus Fermanagh

02-03-2018, 18:40

I have found that people have a weird disrespect for history. It's as if it's a joke to them. They look at events going on around them and ask "how could this have happened?" They point to major events and conspiracy theories, but they ignore the fact that certain things come about as a result of trends. You don't get fat from eating a single piece of cake. You don't get outcast by your friends because you ordered a small salad when going out. You don't fail out of Uni because of a couple of bad quiz grades.

It's trends. The US has been having a lot of bad ones for some time, and they all culminated in what is happening today. The good news is that trends work the other way, too.

Nice point. There is an ebb and flow to this, and while I take ACIN's point that 11Sep2001 triggered a downward trend in personal liberty and US military intervention, I do not think this signals the end of the "experiment."

One might suggest, however, that our experimental status is over and that we are at least in beta testing.

Hooahguy

02-03-2018, 21:07

Well the purpose of this memo wasnt to produce hard evidence of wrongdoing, it was to muddy the waters and give enough cover/support for Trump to fire Mueller or Rod Rosenstein (and then fire Mueller). Enough people arent going to read the memo and will just be like "well that makes sense due to the memo they released." I would be surprised if Mueller made it to March.

I dont know if this has been brought up, but something worrisome that Trump said in his state of the union address was this:

I call on the Congress to empower every Cabinet secretary with the authority to reward good workers and to remove federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the American people.

That is one heck of a broad mandate to fire people and really should concern anyone who cares about the rule of law.

a completely inoffensive name

02-04-2018, 07:04

I have found that people have a weird disrespect for history. It's as if it's a joke to them. They look at events going on around them and ask "how could this have happened?" They point to major events and conspiracy theories, but they ignore the fact that certain things come about as a result of trends. You don't get fat from eating a single piece of cake. You don't get outcast by your friends because you ordered a small salad when going out. You don't fail out of Uni because of a couple of bad quiz grades.

It's trends. The US has been having a lot of bad ones for some time, and they all culminated in what is happening today. The good news is that trends work the other way, too.

Psychologically, 9/11 did start some new trends in the American culture, or at the least revived nearly dead trends. Yes, there was a chain of events with Osama BL throughout the 80s and 90s, but sometimes there are inflection points that you look back and recognize could have set the next chain of events in an entirely different direction.

I simply don't see Donald Trump happening in a world where the US still maintains a mentality of world dominance and safety.

Husar

02-04-2018, 15:04

Seamus Fermanagh

02-04-2018, 16:48

It's 04/02/2018 and I still haven't seen Trump announce the following two things:

1. That he closed the FEMA camps of the Obama NWO government, including proof.

2. That he rescued all the children the Obama NWO government "took" at the airport.

I need answers and explanations!

Trump is too busy [CHARLIE SHEEN RANT VOICE]winning[/CHARLIE SHEEN RANT VOICE] to deal with such pettifogging minutiae.

Sarmatian

02-04-2018, 17:39

Psychologically, 9/11 did start some new trends in the American culture, or at the least revived nearly dead trends. Yes, there was a chain of events with Osama BL throughout the 80s and 90s, but sometimes there are inflection points that you look back and recognize could have set the next chain of events in an entirely different direction.

I simply don't see Donald Trump happening in a world where the US still maintains a mentality of world dominance and safety.

Realistically, 9/11 is a non issue. Even with all the irrational emphasis that has been placed on it for the last almost two decades, the fact is that no one really truly cares at this point.

Trump is a consequence of the crisis and the fact that white Americans can't let go of their privileges.

Seamus Fermanagh

02-04-2018, 20:43

Realistically, 9/11 is a non issue. Even with all the irrational emphasis that has been placed on it for the last almost two decades, the fact is that no one really truly cares at this point.

Trump is a consequence of the crisis and the fact that white Americans can't let go of their privileges.

It is no doubt that the "white" vote such as it is broke for Trump, but the ones most likely to do so were NOT privileged whites but those at disadvantage for education or employment. Source (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/exit-polls/)

And rest assured, the Democrat party does its fair share to keep the privileged in their comfortable perches -- they just have a different recipe for achieving it. Our war on Poverty was every bit as successful as our War on Drugs, and even more costly.

Sarmatian

02-04-2018, 21:30

It is no doubt that the "white" vote such as it is broke for Trump, but the ones most likely to do so were NOT privileged whites but those at disadvantage for education or employment. Source (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/exit-polls/)

Oh, I very much agree. You generally try to look for someone to blame when it's uphill, not downhill, and lack of education helps with that. "honest working Americans can't find a job because of those immigrants..."

And rest assured, the Democrat party does its fair share to keep the privileged in their comfortable perches -- they just have a different recipe for achieving it. Our war on Poverty was every bit as successful as our War on Drugs, and even more costly.

Agree, this is not party specific at all.

Was there ever a war on poverty, though?

a completely inoffensive name

02-04-2018, 23:13

Was there ever a war on poverty, though?
I don't agree it was just as successful as the War on Drugs. I think these policies have had a measured, beneficial impact to American society, whereas the War on Drugs has barely brought drug use down one-tenth of a percent (if that).

As to answer your question, the wiki page has a couple of specific bills usually lumped under the 'War on Poverty' term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Poverty

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Poverty)

Gilrandir

02-05-2018, 11:41

Trump is too busy

... erecting the wall? Or exacting tribute from Mexico to build one?

Fragony

02-05-2018, 13:24

I don't agree it was just as successful as the War on Drugs. I think these policies have had a measured, beneficial impact to American society, whereas the War on Drugs has barely brought drug use down one-tenth of a percent (if that).

As to answer your question, the wiki page has a couple of specific bills usually lumped under the 'War on Poverty' term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Poverty

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Poverty)

Drugs is just a currency nothing more, war on drugs is bigger than usage.

Seamus Fermanagh

02-05-2018, 15:41

... erecting the wall? Or exacting tribute from Mexico to build one?

You quoted my joke to ask a serious snide question about Trump? That's unkind.

Beskar

02-05-2018, 23:34

It was neither. He is perfecting his golf swing at Mar Lago especially since Rocketman got 11 holes-in-one.

Beskar

02-06-2018, 00:40

The fascination with the stock market is the worst combination of horse race coverage and statistics. Does nothing for the majority of working folk but they are tricked into believing it is a real measure of the economy.

On that note...
"largest point drop in history"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/02/05/dow-falls-300-points-open-extending-declines-last-week/306400002/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-42955578/us-market-meltdown-explained

Seamus Fermanagh

02-06-2018, 01:59

On that note...
"largest point drop in history"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/02/05/dow-falls-300-points-open-extending-declines-last-week/306400002/

It dropped because the economy is doing well. Wall street logic is not common wisdom.

Very low unemployment coupled with the best wage growth in years might lead to just a bit more inflation. This would cause the fed to make money more expensive to rent. So some of them are panicking that the gravy train won't have quite so much suet in it.

They'll get over it, and the drawback is probably healthy so that it doesn't bubble over too much. A few more investors in bonds etc. will be a good thing. There are too many strengths for this to be more than a correction.

Montmorency

02-14-2018, 00:44

Discussing the Trump budget proposal is rather pointless since it won't be taken up, but this:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/13/white-house-proposes-delivering-food-boxes-instead-of-food-stamps.html

A proposed food delivery program would replace about half of food stamp benefits for households who qualify for the boxes.
The plan would put the U.S. government directly in charge of what goes on the dinner plates of more than 16 million low-income households.

HA HA HA HA HA HA nanny state

Would actually support this under two conditions though:

1. Rationally constructed for healthfulness and divorced from contractors' pork needs
2. Opt-in and complementary to, not in displacement of, a SNAP-like program

Husar

02-14-2018, 03:09

Well, yes, if this is forced onto people it just reminds me of slavery because slaves get their only food from their master.

rory_20_uk

02-14-2018, 15:53

Well, yes, if this is forced onto people it just reminds me of slavery because slaves get their only food from their master.

Slaves generally had to work. Those who get money for nothing are called children. I doubt it is forced on to them - they could choose to accept it or choose not to accept it.

Making something"opt in" means it is even more complicated to undertake.

A flat rate of free money at the very least lets them pretend to be adults where they have to make grown up decisions of where to spend the money.

~:smoking:

Husar

02-14-2018, 16:31

Slaves generally had to work. Those who get money for nothing are called children.

*have to work, let's not forget that actual slavery still exists.

As for being forced to work, depends on your definition. The whole point is to force them to work on getting a job. However, if there simply is no job for them to get, it's a bit much to blame them. And if they just get food and shelter, the things they can actually do become quite limited since even going somewhere beyond what can be reached on foot or bike can become expensive. Taking a minimum wage job in the next city can be impossible unless the government subsidizes the commute.

Montmorency

02-15-2018, 01:25

To get it out of the way, it seems like the administration is claiming (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/13/us/harvest-box-snap-food-stamps.html) 'lol I troll you' wrt the proposal, just the standard desire to eliminate the welfare program entirely.

Instead, the idea, according to two administration officials who worked on the proposal, was a political gambit by fiscal hawks in the administration aimed at outraging liberals and stirring up members of the president’s own party working on the latest version of the farm bill. The move, they said, was intended to lay down a marker that the administration is serious about pressing for about $85 billion in other cuts to food assistance programs that will be achieved, in part, by imposing strict new work requirements on recipients.

Now let's clarify what SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) is.

https://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-introduction-to-the-supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap

SNAP provides important nutritional support for low-wage working families, low-income seniors, and people with disabilities living on fixed incomes. Close to 70 percent of SNAP participants are in families with children; nearly a third are in households with seniors or people with disabilities. After unemployment insurance, it is the most responsive federal program providing additional assistance during economic downturns.

The federal government pays the full cost of SNAP benefits and splits the cost of administering the program with the states, which operate the program.

You get a debit card with the prescribed monthly balance and you head to most (eligible) grocery stores or supermarkets to use it. Most recipients work, are often obliged to meet work requirements, are restricted from using benefits to purchase :luxury" goods such as tobacco, alcohol, and in harsher environs even seafood and red meat, yadda yadda.

Taking the Trump admin proposal at face value, instead of permitting SNAP recipients to choose what food to buy for themselves (and conservatives fetishize "choice"), it would simultaneously make applying for SNAP more difficult, reduce the benefits across the board, and replace them substantially with government-selected and assembled items. To be delivered in a monthly package.

And that really is what's at the root of welfare chauvinism: 'To hell with all these regulations and taxes affecting me, I'm a good, honest, hardworking person who doesn't need their hand held or progress restrained. All my virtue deserves to be rewarded with the benefits and entitlements of government - as opposed to those lazy, stupid, immoral people, the undeserving parasites leeching my tax dollars, those ni-BOING. They are the ones who the government needs to monitor and interfere with, for our collective prosperity and security.'

But more than anything, the reason this proposal is/would have been DOA, and why SNAP is a relatively-secure welfare administration, is because it counts as a substantial subsidy (http://business.time.com/2012/07/09/food-stamps-more-benefit-to-big-food-than-to-the-poor/) to food producers and retailers.

HopAlongBunny

02-15-2018, 01:27

This highlights the way we all subsidize "entrepreneurs".
When work does not pay the cost of living gov't steps in to provide "supports"; public housing, food stamps, welfare...etc.
A common trope is "the poors are picking my pocket!"; when it's just the way we chose to allow the economy to operate.
Is the "welfare state" a necessary outcome of capitalism?

rory_20_uk

02-15-2018, 10:26

*have to work, let's not forget that actual slavery still exists.

As for being forced to work, depends on your definition. The whole point is to force them to work on getting a job. However, if there simply is no job for them to get, it's a bit much to blame them. And if they just get food and shelter, the things they can actually do become quite limited since even going somewhere beyond what can be reached on foot or bike can become expensive. Taking a minimum wage job in the next city can be impossible unless the government subsidizes the commute.

Mea culpa - yes, slavery still exists. It always has and it probably always will. And the slavery-lite options called crofting / serfs / bondsman.

I'm not blaming anyone. I accept that amongst both employed and unemployed there are angels (who are genuinely trying whilst life has dealt them a really bad hand / are doing a decent job and declaring all their money) and daemons (who are taking everything they can, whilst also working but not declaring).

Although the view that it is "impossible" to get to the next town / city has changed with time. It used to be something you just had to do as the alternative was probably to starve / become a full time criminal; and of course joining the armed forces was another escape but standards have been increased to such a degree many are excluded when so many places would benefit from some cannon fodder. Having some sort of bus pass as part of the unemployed benefit would be a good idea.

~:smoking:

Strike For The South

02-15-2018, 21:07

Replacing SNAP with boxes of food (which would presumably be filled with simple grains and sugars) is an affront to these dignity.

Alexander the Pretty Good

02-15-2018, 21:39

Strike For The South

02-15-2018, 23:08

Wealthy progressives pay big buxxx to not have a choice in the food they get from Blue Apron-style deliveries and/or their local farm CSA program. Setting aside for a moment that government cheese won't be at that level of quality, is there anything about a CSA subscription that lacks dignity if it was part of a government welfare program?

We're talking about people who's kids already get breakfast and lunch at school. Is the lack of a deep and refined menu for those government meals an affront as well?

First of all, Hello.

School lunches are absolute trash. We fail feeding kids nearly as bad as we do preventing them from getting shot.

Let's set aside the dignity comment. I'll wheel back around to it.

This is a supply chain nightmare. The USDA has made assumptions that it would be cheaper for the states to pick and ship these goods rather than have people make their own food choices. Warehouses are expensive, labor is expensive, Trucks are expensive, Drivers are expensive. So instead of using the existing corporate supply chains, the USDA thinks it will be cheaper to make and maintain these things out of whole cloth. Good luck to them. They mentioned blue apron in their press release, blue apron is having massive supply chain problems right now. It won't work but that's about par for the course for this presidents business ventures.

Every reputable study on SNAP spending habits has shown it to be roughly in line with American spending on food as a whole. It absolute right wing propaganda the propagates the myth of steak and lobster being charged to the EBT card. 65 percent of SNAP beneficiaries are under 18, over 60, or disabled. That is hardly the picture of the able bodied on the dole.

These boxes will be filled with simple carbs, simple sugars, and chock full of grains. This is food that makes people sick. It is not designed to be healthy. It is designed as form of control. It is designed to shame those who partake in the welfare system. It is not feasible to kick out the illegal immigrants, starve the poor, or kill the sick. However, you can shame and shackle them until their voices are crushed and that is the goal of the actors bankrolling both sides of the aisle.

Even from a purely self interested stand point, it should be noted, Ideas don't start revolutions, hungry people do.

Montmorency

02-16-2018, 00:00

The idea is not bad in itself. FDIPR (https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/ops/StudyofFDPIR.pdf) is a federal program that does just the same thing for Native Americans on reservations, and at a glance here and in other studies it seems to work... decently, at least.

However, this program is complementary to SNAP, rather than a replacement for it. It exists because on some isolated reservations (or reservations in general, because frankly the rez be dirt-poor) families in need of food assistance may not have ready access to quality food in the market.

As an official suggestion, gutting SNAP and replacing it with curated commodities because the poors can't be trusted to shop for themselves is an obvious asshole move. It's a restriction and a diminution. Public school breakfast and lunch, meanwhile, is subsidized because children may have nothing else available. Children, as far as I know, are not ever mandated to forswear their parents' baloney sandwich and obtain school lunch.

It absolute right wing propaganda the propagates the myth of steak and lobster being charged to the EBT card.

Then again, why shouldn't SNAP recipients get to eat steak and lobster? In line with what you're saying, the underlying assumption either way is that poor people should only partake of the shittiest food and be grateful for it. It's the same sentiment underlying the snide comments when a food bank distributes donations of premium items: isn't it more efficient to give food bank customers the absolute cheapest canned food?

Even from a purely self interested stand point, it should be noted, Ideas don't start revolutions, hungry people do.

"One day the poor will have nothing to eat but the rich" is a satisfying thought, but the poor as a group will not be allowed to want for calories until the time to die is at hand.

Strike For The South

02-16-2018, 00:20

The idea is not bad in itself. FDIPR (https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/ops/StudyofFDPIR.pdf) is a federal program that does just the same thing for Native Americans on reservations, and at a glance here and in other studies it seems to work... decently, at least.

The reservation boxes are literal jokes to those who receive them. If by works decently you mean "gets there" sure.

However, this program is complementary to SNAP, rather than a replacement for it. It exists because on some isolated reservations (or reservations in general, because frankly the rez be dirt-poor) families in need of food assistance may not have ready access to quality food in the market. They get powdered milk, white bread, and processed cheese, hardly quality.

Then again, why shouldn't SNAP recipients get to eat steak and lobster? In line with what you're saying, the underlying assumption either way is that poor people should only partake of the shittiest food and be grateful for it. It's the same sentiment underlying the snide comments when a food bank distributes donations of premium items: isn't it more efficient to give food bank customers the absolute cheapest canned food? It is simply to deflect the most common brought up argument against SNAP. As a whole people do not suddenly try to game the system.

"One day the poor will have nothing to eat but the rich" is a satisfying thought, but the poor as a group will not be allowed to want for calories until the time to die is at hand.

Everything is impossible until it happens.

Montmorency

02-16-2018, 01:54

The reservation boxes are literal jokes to those who receive them. If by works decently you mean "gets there" sure.

They get powdered milk, white bread, and processed cheese, hardly quality.

. Although FDPIR is intended to be a supplemental food package program, it
was the sole or primary source of food for 38 percent of households

Participant satisfaction with FDPIR was overwhelmingly positive. Of the 15 household survey questions
that asked respondents to rank satisfaction on food packages, facilities, and the operation of the program,
respondent satisfaction rates on 12 items were over 90 percent. Strikingly, 99 percent of survey
respondents indicated that they would recommend FDPIR to family and friends

The process for ordering produce was different from that for ordering other USDA Foods. Nearly all
sites ordered produce to be delivered once per week to ensure the availability of fresh produce to
participants throughout the month.

Participants commonly suggested adding back to the food package products that had been removed,
including lunchmeat or spam, tuna, and syrup. Other products that participants would like to see, in no
particular order, included spices, garlic, frozen vegetables, baking soda or baking powder or yeast, fresh eggs
(currently being piloted), sugar, frozen fish, whole milk, bread, alternative grains and flours (barley, quinoa),
and coffee and tea.
Other participants requested a greater variety of frozen meats, canned beans, and canned soups. In the
discussion groups, households in one program indicated that they would like more meat and to be able to
receive both oil and butter. Staff noted that the amount of butter offered has decreased since its
reintroduction into the food package, and recipients would like more of it. For a detailed discussion of
participants’ food preferences, see chapter 8.

Some participants in discussion groups raised issues about the availability of all food items. For example,
they mentioned food being out of stock when they arrived or not available that month. Unavailability of
products and inconsistency of inventory were mentioned as key reasons why people might leave the
program

By "decent", I mean useful. Maybe it's more reflective of the quality of reservation life than the quality of the food or the process, but still. My point is just that a distinct and well-funded program of curated packages isn't an inherently bad idea as long as it isn't presented as a replacement for anything. If really ambitious, assemble and distribute to all comers (i.e. without special enrolment) on a local basis.

:shrug:

HopAlongBunny

02-16-2018, 21:45

More fake news.
Mueller and the grand jury have indicted 13 Russians and 3 Russian entities for the interference that didn't happen.
Charges include attempting to defraud the U.S., wire fraud, bank fraud and identity theft.
For something that never occurred this is certainly leaving quite a trail:

https://www.npr.org/2018/02/16/586500591/grand-jury-indicts-russians-linked-to-interference-in-2016-electionhttp://

While the administration might wish to sow doubt about the election interference, there is no doubt that Russia is actively engaging in an information war at present:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/16/586361956/as-an-american-tragedy-unfolds-russian-agents-sow-discord-online

Denial while under attack is not a winning strategy.

Montmorency

02-17-2018, 02:10

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/964594780088033282

Russia started their anti-US campaign in 2014, long before I announced that I would run for President. The results of the election were not impacted. The Trump campaign did nothing wrong - no collusion!

12:18 PM - 16 Feb 2018

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-thinking-again-about-running-for-president/

May 27, 2013, 2:55 PM

Trump thinking - again - about running for president

Serial presidential campaign explorer Donald Trump is at it again, spending $1 million researching a 2016 run, according to his executive vice president.

"The electoral research was commissioned," Trump's executive VP and special counsel Michael Cohen first told the New York Post and confirmed to CBS News. "We did not spend $1 million on this research for it just to sit on my bookshelf," he said.

"At this point Mr. Trump has not made any decision on a political run, but what I would say is that he is exactly what this country needs. The turnout at these political speeches indicates his following remains very strong and is growing."

[...]

"Everybody tells me, 'Please run for president. Please run for president.' I would be much happier if a great and competent person came along," Trump said, according to the Source Newspapers. "I'd be happy if President Obama did a great job. I'm a Republican, but before anything, I love this country. I would love to see somebody come in who is going to be great."

He also said that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee and the GOP "has to pick the right candidate because it will not be an easy election in three years."

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/donald-trump-russia-moscow-miss-universe-223173

When Donald Trump brought Miss Universe to Moscow
How a 2013 beauty pageant explains Trump's love for Russia and obsession with Vladimir Putin.

On June 18, 2013, Donald Trump had some exciting news: He would soon be whisking dozens of the world’s most beautiful women to Russia.

“The Miss Universe Pageant will be broadcast live from MOSCOW, RUSSIA on November 9th,” Trump tweeted that day, referring to the beauty pageant he owned at the time. “A big deal that will bring our countries together!”

Oops

a completely inoffensive name

02-17-2018, 05:24

First of all, Hello.

School lunches are absolute trash. We fail feeding kids nearly as bad as we do preventing them from getting shot.

Let's set aside the dignity comment. I'll wheel back around to it.

This is a supply chain nightmare. The USDA has made assumptions that it would be cheaper for the states to pick and ship these goods rather than have people make their own food choices. Warehouses are expensive, labor is expensive, Trucks are expensive, Drivers are expensive. So instead of using the existing corporate supply chains, the USDA thinks it will be cheaper to make and maintain these things out of whole cloth. Good luck to them. They mentioned blue apron in their press release, blue apron is having massive supply chain problems right now. It won't work but that's about par for the course for this presidents business ventures.

Every reputable study on SNAP spending habits has shown it to be roughly in line with American spending on food as a whole. It absolute right wing propaganda the propagates the myth of steak and lobster being charged to the EBT card. 65 percent of SNAP beneficiaries are under 18, over 60, or disabled. That is hardly the picture of the able bodied on the dole.

These boxes will be filled with simple carbs, simple sugars, and chock full of grains. This is food that makes people sick. It is not designed to be healthy. It is designed as form of control. It is designed to shame those who partake in the welfare system. It is not feasible to kick out the illegal immigrants, starve the poor, or kill the sick. However, you can shame and shackle them until their voices are crushed and that is the goal of the actors bankrolling both sides of the aisle.

Even from a purely self interested stand point, it should be noted, Ideas don't start revolutions, hungry people do.

All I have to say is Blue Apron = Scam Apron. I'm looking at the Beef Medallion meal. Four beef medallions likely each the size of a pack of cards, two potatoes, broccoli, a lemon, an onion and minor amounts of garlic and green onion... all for $20.
If you are middle class and don't live in a food desert...take the 25 min trip to Ralphs and buy it yourself.

HopAlongBunny

02-17-2018, 08:23

Mueller Indictment (full text via bbc):

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43091945

Sarmatian

02-17-2018, 14:50

As always, Americans are so lonely on top of their hill that they don't understand this is something that happens all the time.

CrossLOPER

02-17-2018, 16:07

Wealthy progressives...

...It is not feasible to kick out the illegal immigrants, starve the poor, or kill the sick. However, you can shame and shackle them until their voices are crushed and that is the goal of the actors bankrolling both sides of the aisle...

I like how Americans have been convinced that there are two sides, and either one sees the other as rich and trying to profit off of them, while they are poor, righteous and hardworking.

HopAlongBunny

02-18-2018, 02:57

So the indictments dropped: So what?
Somehow it's a little hard to believe Russia will extradite anyone.
If it's for domestic consumption fine, most people will realize that it is practically meaningless.
As as solution? Absolute zero.

It does make clear that Russian interference happened. It won't change anyones mind about it, and deniers will likely double down on denial.
While there may be comfort in the clear illustration of investigatory prowess, the clear lack of a penalty should instill no confidence.

https://slate.com/technology/2018/02/the-russians-indicted-for-election-meddling-will-never-face-consequences.html

Fragony

02-18-2018, 18:29

Oh it happens, it's just much more subtle.

drone

02-18-2018, 19:40

So the indictments dropped: So what?
Somehow it's a little hard to believe Russia will extradite anyone.
If it's for domestic consumption fine, most people will realize that it is practically meaningless.
As as solution? Absolute zero.

It does make clear that Russian interference happened. It won't change anyones mind about it, and deniers will likely double down on denial.
While there may be comfort in the clear illustration of investigatory prowess, the clear lack of a penalty should instill no confidence.

True, chances are no Russians will face jailtime. But buried in the indictment are mentions of conspiracy with persons "known and unknown to the grand jury". This set of indictments has two purposes: highlight what the Russians did, and tie in any coordination to other targets of the probe. Mueller has internal documents from the troll farm, how he got them is the real story...

Montmorency

02-18-2018, 21:33

True, chances are no Russians will face jailtime. But buried in the indictment are mentions of conspiracy with persons "known and unknown to the grand jury". This set of indictments has two purposes: highlight what the Russians did, and tie in any coordination to other targets of the probe. Mueller has internal documents from the troll farm, how he got them is the real story...

It underscores that obstruction of the special counsel is in fact a matter of sedition and treason, as well as an impeachable offense on its face.

a completely inoffensive name

02-18-2018, 23:00

It underscores that obstruction of the special counsel is in fact a matter of sedition and treason, as well as an impeachable offense on its face.

I think the criteria for impeachable offenses has already been met. What does this add to it, except for maybe convincing a few more radical centrists that perhaps we did in fact elect a bad man.

rory_20_uk

02-18-2018, 23:24

The "political class" would rather put up with a leader they dislike than try to fix a system that might lead to them not, y'know,having the cushy job that they've come to like - and in the meantime, Trump means almost all the rest of them get a free ride.

If the Dems got in, would they start impeachment? Might they too prefer to have Trump wreck as much as possible with the eye on the next major election?

~:smoking:

Montmorency

02-18-2018, 23:37

I think the criteria for impeachable offenses has already been met. What does this add to it, except for maybe convincing a few more radical centrists that perhaps we did in fact elect a bad man.

Yes, but this restrains Trump's alternatives more than ever. It gives Mueller security. Now it's not just a matter of an "anti-Trump witch hunt", but of national security.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r09WtKVwaMU

Give me a better metaphor, sports people.

The "political class" would rather put up with a leader they dislike than try to fix a system that might lead to them not, y'know,having the cushy job that they've come to like - and in the meantime, Trump means almost all the rest of them get a free ride.

If the Dems got in, would they start impeachment? Might they too prefer to have Trump wreck as much as possible with the eye on the next major election?

~:smoking:

Possibly, but it might short-circuit this loop. We don't need Vichy Democrats.

https://i.imgur.com/lSSMkuk.png

Beskar

02-19-2018, 01:40

If the Dems got in, would they start impeachment? Might they too prefer to have Trump wreck as much as possible with the eye on the next major election?

Even though there are grounds for various actions and reprimands on the president, anything happening is next to zero. What will most likely happen is they will simply obstruct him or even.. persuade him to pass some democrat policies.

Seamus Fermanagh

02-19-2018, 19:23

I think Beskar is correctly summing up the practical strategy being applied. He doesn't mention that the Dems and progressives are seeking to oust him in the next election, but that really doesn't need much mention as it is obvious. Trump's being an asshat certainly makes this less difficult.

The indictments of Russians for attempting to influence the elections are clear evidence in support of what most of us were sure of from the get go. Trump's public flailings about could have been China and the like during the campaign were his effort to keep the focus on Hillary. Apparently it worked, at least just enough. Did Russian media manipulation make a difference in swaying the minds of some voters? Mayhap.

The indictments, however, do not yet mean that Trump or persons working for him knowingly colluded to get Russian support to beat Hillary. Did the Russians try to do so? Very probably. Would Trump personnel have been dumb enough to be played by them? Very Probably. Knowing collusion? We shall see. That requires evidence of active effort to do so by both halves of the equation.

Sarmatian

02-19-2018, 21:48

I skimmed through the indictment, didn't read it thoroughly, but it could be summed up with "much ado about nothing".

There were some people who used faked and/or stolen identities to set up pages on social media. Russian government is not explicitly mentioned. No amounts of money were mentioned, except in one case - 1.25 million $ monthly, but that was not the amount spent but rather monthly budget of an organization that operates in many countries of the world. Even if the entire budget was spent on influencing American elections for two years without spending anything elsewhere and not paying a cent for staff and infrastructure, it's not even 30 million. Double or triple or quadruple that and it is still a drop in the ocean compared to the money spent on the elections by just two candidates.

And, still, even journalists can't draw conclusions and are still sticking with the story "Russia supported Trump" even when the indictment says that the same people who tried to rally support for Trump, also helped promote "not my president" when he won. The goal was never supporting Trump, but promoting political instability. Only now are some picking up on that. The problem is, the mass hysteria created about Russian support for Trump is now proving detrimental to serious discourse on the issue.

New York Times today had an editorial mentioning US meddling in the elections over the world. They had experts counting both overt and covert meddling in various elections since the WW2. They came up with 81 for USA and 39 for USSR/Russia, and at least in my humble opinion, those are quite conservative figures. This is nothing new, this is same old, same old, just digital instead of analog.

When you have mainstream media that's more interested in click bait qualities of an article rather than its substance, you're gonna get stories like this.