The Trump presidency

[Johnny Canuck3]

Spies have ‘considerable intelligence’ of collusion between Russian officials and Donald Trump team

 

[Wilf]

Fair point, but,
"Doesn't the fact that he still won suggest there might just be something going on with the Democrats and the way they are regarded?"
Also has a lot to do with the briefart press winning the media war and the way they demonised the Clintons.

Probably does. There are a whole set of individual elements that had they not been in place might just have led to Dems winning (voter suppression, email links, poor campaigning decisions, Hilary as candidate). But ultimately, it's about the Dems - they couldn't beat Donald Trump, DONALD FUCKING TRUMP!!!

 

[CRI]

I very much admire your commitment to avoiding elephants in the room.

Well, if you don't want to see the socio-economic background to the election, don't want to think about whether the Dems are still connected to the working class, if you want about it entirely in terms of events.... well, what about trump admitting to carrying out sexual assaults in the campaign, what about the women coming out and saying he assaulted them - along with any number of bizarre statements coming from his actual gob. Doesn't the fact that he still won suggest there might just be something going on with the Democrats and the way they are regarded?

I don't think the selective visibility of elephants is coming from my side of the room!

It's been pointed out that support for Trump was from across the socio-economic spectrum, and those in lower income brackets were MORE likely to back Clinton. The idea that most blue collar people backed Trump is false, and the idea that those who did just need a wee bit of coaxing and they'll turn Democrat is also as they say, an "alternative fact."

Yes, Trump did and said some things during the campaign that seemed shocking to people who regard themselves as progressive, liberal, left-wing or socialist. Likewise, the policies he's pushed since in office have also been shocking to these people.

But guess what? These things weren't shocking or upsetting to the people who voted for him. If anything made them uneasy, they were willing to give him a pass because they embraced the rest of his agenda so firmly.

Is it really that hard to understand that there are lots of people in America who genuinely believe in Trump's vision for America.

Is it really that hard to understand that there are lots of people in America who find his dream their worst nightmare, and see no benefit in reaching out for a cuddle with the people who despise them, and in some cases would gleefully see them prevented from voting, sent to prison, deported or killed?

 

[coley]

Probably does. There are a whole set of individual elements that had they not been in place might just have led to Dems winning (voter suppression, email links, poor campaigning decisions, Hilary as candidate). But ultimately, it's about the Dems - they couldn't beat Donald Trump, DONALD FUCKING TRUMP!!!

they couldn't beat Donald Trump, DONALD FUCKING TRUMP!!!

Just can't argue with that and the Dems seem to be intent on more of the same.

 

[Wilf]

I don't think the selective visibility of elephants is coming from my side of the room!

It's been pointed out that support for Trump was from across the socio-economic spectrum, and those in lower income brackets were MORE likely to back Clinton. The idea that most blue collar people backed Trump is false, and the idea that those who did just need a wee bit of coaxing and they'll turn Democrat is also as they say, an "alternative fact."

Yes, Trump did and said some things during the campaign that seemed shocking to people who regard themselves as progressive, liberal, left-wing or socialist. Likewise, the policies he's pushed since in office have also been shocking to these people.

But guess what? These things weren't shocking or upsetting to the people who voted for him. If anything made them uneasy, they were willing to give him a pass because they embraced the rest of his agenda so firmly.

Is it really that hard to understand that there are lots of people in America who genuinely believe in Trump's vision for America.

Is it really that hard to understand that there are lots of people in America who find his dream their worst nightmare, and see no benefit in reaching out for a cuddle with the people who despise them, and in some cases would gleefully see them prevented from voting, sent to prison, deported or killed?

Look, we KNOW the figures. It isn't that trump got a majority of the poor voting for him, it's that he got ENOUGH of the working class voting for him. Anyway, to your last point - I asked the question before: if you don't want to engage with those who voted Trump - and the reasons they did - what's your strategy? Finding a way to overturn voter suppression and encouraging all the 'progressives' to vote? Is that it?

 

[Brainaddict]

Spies have ‘considerable intelligence’ of collusion between Russian officials and Donald Trump team

When he started attacking the intelligence agencies I thought that I would not do that unless I were pure as the driven snow, because any skeletons they will know about. Trump is obviously a long way from being pure as the driven snow, which does suggest that he's really quite impressively stupid. Almost his first act in the Whitehouse was to start attacking the people who had all the dirt on him. Frankly I think if it wasn't this Russian stuff it would be something else. His days are numbered unless he can make friends with the intelligence agencies again, pronto. Hopefully he's too dim to see that.

 

[Wilf]

Look, we KNOW the figures. It isn't that trump got a majority of the poor voting for him, it's that he got ENOUGH of the working class voting for him. Anyway, to your last point - I asked the question before: if you don't want to engage with those who voted Trump - and the reasons they did - what's your strategy? Finding a way to overturn voter suppression and encouraging all the 'progressives' to vote? Is that it?

Oh, yes, and if they voted Trump because they are racists and homophobes, when did they become those things? Were they racists and homophobes in 2008 and 2012?

 

[coley]

When he started attacking the intelligence agencies I thought that I would not do that unless I were pure as the driven snow, because any skeletons they will know about. Trump is obviously a long way from being pure as the driven snow, which does suggest that he's really quite impressively stupid. Almost his first act in the Whitehouse was to start attacking the people who had all the dirt on him. Frankly I think if it wasn't this Russian stuff it would be something else. His days are numbered unless he can make friends with the intelligence agencies again, pronto. Hopefully he's too dim to see that.

TTT is as dim as a cheap lightbulb, but those pulling his stings aren't. Hence the 'precedetial' address last week.
Though they do need to take his phone off him when he goes to the bog in the mornings.

 

[belboid]

Trump supporters live in the Fox News bubble. Or the Breitbart bubble.

Then stfu and fo you hypocrite

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

What gets me about these entitled US oligarchs is their unbridled hubris. You're right about Trump and his dirty laundry, but there's also Wilbur Ross and his connections to the Russian-money-laundering Cyprus bank. Normal people with those kinds of skeletons in closets wouldn't put themselves up for high public position; but these entitled billionaires consider themselves to be either immune, or above such petty concerns as ethics and morals.

 

[yield]

Oh, yes, and if they voted Trump because they are racists and homophobes, when did they become those things? Were they racists and homophobes in 2008 and 2012?

Why did Trump win over a lot of white working-class Obama voters?

Is it because they are a "Racist, Sexist, Homophobic, Basket Of Deplorables"?

Is it because they live in rust belt states in the throes of an opiate epidemic?

Is it because Trump made a load of promises about economic renewal he has no intention of keeping?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Then stfu and fo you hypocrite

What happened to 'it's better to win someone over by making them your friend'?

 

[CRI]

Oh, yes, and if they voted Trump because they are racists and homophobes, when did they become those things? Were they racists and homophobes in 2008 and 2012?

If I had a quid for every time I heard someone say something to the effect of "Trump tells it like it is," I'd be rich now.

He is the big mouthed, even more unguarded version of the Tea Party. He's given the people who yes, are racist, are homophobic, are misogynist, etc. the "courage" to wear the views they've always held on their sleeves.

If he was so far from that the Republican party is about, why are nearly all Republican legislators backing him to the hilt? It's not just about Trump - it's the party.

I'm still finding it a tad weird that people here who've maybe visited, but never lived in the US, seem to be so sure they understand what American people are like, but the actual people who've live/lived in North America have no idea? Really?

 

[belboid]

What happened to 'it's better to win someone over by making them your friend'?

Ask the person who said it, which wasn't me. Not that facts or accuracy are important to you, but...

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Ask the person who said it, which wasn't me.

You're right: now you mention it, it doesn't seem like something you would say.

 

[coley]

Oh, yes, and if they voted Trump because they are racists and homophobes, when did they become those things? Were they racists and homophobes in 2008 and 2012?

I think the point CRI is making, is that there are an awful lot of racists, homophobes and misogynists in the US and TTTs campaign brought many of them out of thewoodwork and from under the stones from where they had been hiding and it would be pretty pointless trying to reach out to them.

 

[Brainaddict]

TTT is as dim as a cheap lightbulb, but those pulling his stings aren't. Hence the 'precedetial' address last week.
Though they do need to take his phone off him when he goes to the bog in the mornings.

Yes, of course there are more clever people around him. But interestingly Bannon has also stated he wants to take on the 'deep state'. He also is not, I suspect, pure as the driven snow. I wonder how long he'll last too if they really want to keep up their attacks on intelligence agencies.

 

[Pickman's model]

Someone should tell that to those Trump supporters shooting South Asians, mistaking them for Muslims.

go on then

 

[CRI]

I think the point CRI is making, is that there are an awful lot of racists, homophobes and misogynists in the US and TTTs campaign brought many of them out of thewoodwork and from under the stones from where they had been hiding and it would be pretty pointless trying to reach out to them.

Thank you - that is absolutely it. I understand that folks here don't want to believe this to be true. Hell, I wish it wasn't true, but it is.

The other thing many here seem unable to get to grips with is the influence of fundamentalist Christianity in the GOP, particularly amongst the Trump/Pence followers. Fervent belief trumps (pardon the pun) facts, logic and reason. Talk to them and they'll try their damnedest to convert you - to their faith, and their politics.

 

[Pickman's model]

He also is not, I suspect, pure as the driven snow.

how many fascists are?

 

[Pickman's model]

In fairness, how many decent people would want to befriend a genuine Trump supporter?

there is a difference between 'befriend' entirely accept someone as they are, and 'befriend' persuade someone of the error of their ways and turn them into an ally.

 

[Wilf]

Thank you - that is absolutely it. I understand that folks here don't want to believe this to be true. Hell, I wish it wasn't true, but it is.

The other thing many here seem unable to get to grips with is the influence of fundamentalist Christianity in the GOP, particularly amongst the Trump/Pence followers. Fervent belief trumps (pardon the pun) facts, logic and reason. Talk to them and they'll try their damnedest to convert you - to their faith, and their politics.

I'm assuming you are into electoral politics, so, again: how do build towards a majority for 2020 (or the mid terms)? Where does your majority come from?

 

[belboid]

I think the point CRI is making, is that there are an awful lot of racists, homophobes and misogynists in the US and TTTs campaign brought many of them out of thewoodwork and from under the stones from where they had been hiding and it would be pretty pointless trying to reach out to them.

Which is hardly the worlds greatest insight. Those people have nearly always voted republican, so what's changed? Has Trump made lots more people racist? Or did he manage to convince a small but sufficient number of Obama voters to switch sides? something he could do because Obama failed to improve people employability or their wages. And then useless Clinton took them for granted and didn't even bother campaigning in some states.

 

[Wilf]

Which is hardly the worlds greatest insight. Those people have nearly always voted republican, so what's changed? Has Trump made lots more people racist? Or did he manage to convince a small but sufficient number of Obama voters to switch sides? something he could do because Obama failed to improve people employability or their wages. And then useless Clinton took them for granted and didn't even bother campaigning in some states.

CRI - do you disagree with this?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

there is a difference between 'befriend' entirely accept someone as they are, and 'befriend' persuade someone of the error of their ways and turn them into an ally.

Have you ever had a face to face conversation with a right-wing conservative American; or been to one of their towns?

There's a wide gap between the theory and the practice of trying to make them see the error of their ways.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Or did he manage to convince a small but sufficient number of Obama voters to switch sides?

Probably not. Probably, more Democratic voters stayed home - either through choice, or as a result of factors like voter suppression.

 

[camouflage]

You can't avoid the fact, that your descriptions sums many of them to a 'T'

You make it sound like I've got a dog in this thing, I do like the idea Trump had about not having a nuclear war, but I don't mind if they want a one-party state now. I do wonder if the one-party will be called the Republicrats or the Demoblicans though, I wuz just curious.

 

[CrabbedOne]

My post, as per the podcast: one person (the president) can make the decision and order an attack; two people (the president plus one other) are required to authenticate the source of that order.

(The podcast is mainly concerned with the notion of deterrence and alternatives).

Yes but the other person (the guy with the nuclear football) has zero authority to countermand once authenticated. It's by nature a very short fused system not built for debate that anticipates very limited and not mandatory cabinet participation. In an emergency situation there's a cabinet rank pre-delegated emergency coordinator. But as they say in the podcast the President has sole authority and that alone is sufficient i.e. legally the President's orders must be followed. There's no dramatic movie style policy debate about it. Someone in the basement of the Pentagon might drag their feet but I would no count on it.

This is completely different to down the chain with the pairs of guys in the nuclear silos have too concur that they have the resulting emergency action message from the National Military Command Center to launch and one of them is not simply off his rocker and is going genocidally postal and needs shooting.

It's all built for a MAD launch under attack scenario not the dystopian possibility of a mad President surrounded by Breitbartians.

They refer to this:

...
Those seven minutes or so, though, would also eat up the time available to execute a launch under attack. It is totally incompatible with present U.S. nuclear policy. I guess you can criticize a president for taking his time, but it seems to me he would be the sane one and it’s U.S. nuclear policy that’s crazy.

Obviously, launch under attack is only one scenario. In a situation where the president decides to start a nuclear war, he or she has got oodles of time to think about it. But launch under attack also means that the command and control system has been built to take any order and execute it with stunning speed — and that is what Hayden was trying to say. Once a president gives the order to use nuclear weapons, there is no turning back. The system is designed to very quickly render the president’s will into death and destruction on the other side of the world. So maybe don’t elect the guy who melts down on Twitter every other day.
...

 

[Wilf]

Spies have ‘considerable intelligence’ of collusion between Russian officials and Donald Trump team

Well, there may well be evidence of significant collusion and it will probably drag on for a couple of years, maybe even reaching an official conclusion that there was collusion. But it's not going to go anywhere is it? Can't remember the maths, but even if the Dems do well in the midterms, it would only be at that point that they could mount a real impeachment challenge ... by which time it will be old news.

 

[Raheem]

Has Trump made lots more people racist? Or did he manage to convince a small but sufficient number of Obama voters to switch sides?

This is a false dilemma.