The Trump presidency

[stupid kid]

Oh yeah, Trump let Ryan unveil the final solution to Affordable Care. And it's terrible.

 

[bimble]

Trump administration has done something right: I still don't know how to link from phone but - Israel made noise few days ago about annexing the West Bank. The idea was I think that under trump they could do whatever they feel like. Of course the annexing idea came with the clear proviso that none of the new 'citizens' would be able to vote.
Someone in trump administration called and said that there would be an immediate crisis in the relationship with the US were Israel to go ahead so now they're falling over themselves to say that they aren't planning to do it.

 

[Pickman's model]

Not a problem with "accepting someone as they are" just if they happen to enthuse the opinions of TTT, then acceptance doesn't include "befriending' them or wanting to be in the same room as them.

Ttt? The Thompson twins?

 

[Pickman's model]

Trump administration has done something right: I still don't know how to link from phone but - Israel made noise few days ago about annexing the West Bank. The idea was I think that under trump they could do whatever they feel like. Of course the annexing idea came with the clear proviso that none of the new 'citizens' would be able to vote.
Someone in trump administration called and said that there would be an immediate crisis in the relationship with the US were Israel to go ahead so now they're falling over themselves to say that they aren't planning to do it.

It's a slippery slope, bimble. Get off it now.

 

[Dan U]

Clearly, so me here think I'm making too big a deal about the impact of institutional racism in the US.

I mentioned it further upthread but I'm curious, have any of you seen the Ava DuVerney documentary 13th yet? It's on Netflix. If you haven't, I strongly recommend it.

It's well researched and methodical and explains how and why white supremacy is embedded within the fabric of the USA, from the African slave trade to the prison industrial complex and the racist rhetoric of Trump in the election, eaten up like candy by his supporters.

Watch this and then come back to me and tell me race is just a "side issue," in American politics.

watched that the other night, truly fascinating documentary. some stuff I didn't know as well.

 

[newbie]

Ttt? The Thompson twins?

not just me then. I was about to post that I'm loving the latenight posting frenzies coley gets up to but have no idea what TTT stands for.

Also, since I'm here, could N American posters please consider that some of us have little idea who the people they quote are. A little clue would be handy- one I looked up seemed to make his living by hitting a ball with a stick.

 

[chandlerp]

Tangerine Tosspot Trump?

 

[newbie]

I really sympathise, I live, work, and politic ( or used to) in the socialist republic of SE Northumberland and would have dearly liked some Genuine Tories to rail against, as opposed to the embedded Neo liberals masquerading as 'labour politicians'

yeah, the People's Republic of Lambeth has been something like that for many a year, with perhaps a few local quirks but recently it's not tories coming out, it's people spouting about SJWs, political correctness and you can't say anything without being called racist or sexist. All a bit odd really.

 

[DotCommunist]

I'm assuming Coley was refering to the now off-the-cards TTIP thing?

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm assuming Coley was refering to the now off-the-cards TTIP thing?

I thought for a moment he might be talking about the TTTTF stem rust

 

[2hats]

Tangerine Trump T-something-or-other?

e2a: might be The Tangerine Twat.

 

[CRI]

Republicans reveal how badly they misunderstand America

A new survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds Republicans are far more likely to cite a culture grounded in Christian beliefs and the traditions of early European immigrants as essential to U.S. identity.

Democrats are more apt to point to the country’s history of mixing of people from around the globe and a tradition of offering refuge to the persecuted.

Dress it up however you like, but this is racialism, if not all-out racism. When race and religion are inherent in your definition of American identity, by definition you reject a colorblind society. Republicans used to say that America is not based on who you are, what class or what race, but on the idea that all men are equal before God and endowed with those inalienable rights. Republicans, at least a majority of them, don’t embrace that fully.

 

[belboid]

Liberals demanding we be colourblind. Ohh the irony

 

[gosub]

Fancy explaining it in detail on the financial explosion thread,
Ta.

Unless he goes really mental and starts haggling with bond holders its more a political meltdown than a financial meltdown. But if he did default the bond market....We're going to need a bigger thread

 

[camouflage]

Liberals demanding we be colourblind. Ohh the irony

Care to elaborate?

 

[CrabbedOne]

In Vanity Fair DONALD TRUMP’S WORST DEAL
The President helped build a hotel in Azerbaijan that appears to be a corrupt operation engineered by oligarchs tied to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.

...
Alan Garten told me that the Trump Organization checks to see if potential Trump partners are on “watch lists and sanctions lists,” and that the company knew nothing of Ziya Mammadov’s relationship to the Darvishis until 2015, when it learned that “certain principals associated with the developer may have had some association with some problematic entities.” And yet, by that point, the U.S. Embassy cables had been online for four years. Garten insisted that the Trump Organization still has no idea if the association between the Mammadovs and the Darvishis is real, or if it’s simply an allegation “spread by the media.” I recently spoke with Allison Melia, who until 2015 was one of the C.I.A.’s lead analysts of Iran’s economy; she now works for the Crumpton Group, a strategic advisory firm whose services include conducting due diligence for companies. She told me that her team could have compiled a dossier on the Mammadovs and their connection to the Revolutionary Guard in “a couple of days.” She said that any reputable investigative firm conducting a risk assessment would have advised a U.S. company to avoid a deal with a family connected to the Revolutionary Guard.
...

Swampy dealings on a epic scale here with added Iranian knuckle draggers.

 

[Wilf]

Just a thought - some folks here keep insisting the Democrats need to listen to and take on board the views of disaffected blue collar Trump supporters, right? Otherwise, they'll never get back into Government.

Do they also think that the Labour party needs to listen to and take on board the views of disaffected working class supporters of UKIP or Britain First? Do they think that's an important strategy for getting back into Government here?

Answers on a postcard please.

Of course they fucking do. Needless to say, they shouldn't accept the views or policies of ukip or the far right, but they need to understand what lead to people supporting them (or, more importantly, why they have abandoned Labour and voted brexit - regardless of specific support for ukip). To be honest that distinction has been made to you over several pages, but you persist in saying I and others simply want to move onto ukip, trump or whoever's ground. We don't and that should be obvious.

 

[belboid]

Care to elaborate?

It's typical liberal hypocrisy really. If you're colourblind, you can't recognise racism.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's typical liberal hypocrisy really. If you're colourblind, you can't recognise racism.

The statement would work if you added 'the idea(l) of / aspiration for a' before 'colourblind society'. A more charitable reading of that would think that this is what they meant.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On Politico Trump plan pays for immigration crackdown with cuts to coastal, air security

...
Overall, DHS would get a 6 percent boost to its budget, to $43.8 billion. But to help pay for that, the administration would slice the budget of the Coast Guard and cut 11 percent in spending from the TSA — reductions that critics say would weaken safeguards against threats arriving by sea or air.

OMB also wants to cut 11 percent from the budget of FEMA, which oversees the national response to disasters such as floods and hurricanes.

The budget gambit is sure to meet fierce opposition at the hardest-hit agencies and on Capitol Hill, where a leading Republican is accusing White House budget officials of living in "la-la land."

“It is ignorant of what constitutes national security," said retired Adm. James Loy, a former Coast Guard commandant who served as deputy homeland security secretary and TSA administrator under President George W. Bush. "They simply don’t understand the equation.”

Loy and others argue that hiring more border agents and building a wall are likely to increase the need for guarding ports and coastlines. And they contend that the Coast Guard, which intercepted more than 6,000 illegal migrants in 2016, is already overtaxed in interdicting illegal drugs and people from Central and South America while defending ports of entry from terrorist attack. Under its current budget, they say, it can’t afford to buy the new helicopters and ships it needs.

"As you harden the land border you open up the maritime border," argued Stephen Flynn, a retired Coast Guard commander who is director of the Global Resilience Institute at Northeastern University. "It makes no sense. You are going to have this balloon effect."
...

All Trump is really doing with his stupid wall and "Muslim Ban" is expensively making good on popular campaign promises to victimise out groups regardless of the insecurity he adds.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On Politico The Trade Deal We Just Threw Overboard

...
What is clear is that Trump won’t be able to snap his fingers and redesign NAFTA the way he might decide to redecorate a hotel. It’s complicated. Trade talks are multidimensional poker games involving hundreds of stakeholders, thousands of products, millions of jobs and the ever-present risk that an unpopular concession at the table can bring down the government of your negotiating partner. They hinge on arcane details like the difference between the “net-cost” and “build-down” approaches to calculating how much of a car has been manufactured in a free-trade zone. They get hung up on obscure disputes like a pitched TPP battle over whey, a dairy product associated primarily with Miss Muffet before Obama had to raise it in multiple discussions with foreign leaders. And in today’s hyperconnected global economy, unilateral bullying has its limits. Poor countries with weak militaries still get to influence outcomes.

Still, forward progress is possible. Obama’s team eventually did persuade Canada to phase out its barriers to American whey exports. And after multiple rounds of mostly dull, occasionally dramatic, round-the-clock negotiating sessions, the Americans secured a slew of other advances from NAFTA in TPP. But Trump threw all that three-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust work into the dustbin of history, so the NAFTA in place today is the same NAFTA envisioned by Ronald Reagan, negotiated by George H.W. Bush and signed into law by Bill Clinton. Trump might want to revamp it or even walk away from it, but like Obamacare, NAFTA would be extremely disruptive to repeal and extremely difficult to replace. The best way to understand how Trump might struggle to renegotiate it is to understand how Obama already did.
...

Interesting idea that parts of TPP foreshadow the hard grind of negotiations that will happen if Trump tries to tweak NAFTA.

Reagan's visionary dream of a Common Market of the Americas meets that Brexit++ Trump promise of brave new world of bilateral deals that he assumes he can magic into existence simply by bullying smaller countries as just as he frequently screws over Trump contractors. It is not going to be as simple as welching on deal with the decorators. In the process it'll be very easy to bugger up complex supply chains in the process which will screw over a lot of the Blue Collar people who voted for him. In these things there are always losers and Trump will be seen to be picking them just as Bill Clinton was when he signed up to NAFTA.

And there's this part:

...
At his Senate hearing, Trump’s pick for commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, suggested that the administration wants to strengthen rules of origin for all manufactured goods in NAFTA. That would presumably boost production in North America and reduce Chinese imports. But it’s not clear why the additional jobs would go to the United States rather than cheaper factories in Mexico. Perhaps Trump’s proposed new taxes on Mexican imports could tip the scales. But many congressional Republicans oppose them, and they sound a lot like tariffs that could violate NAFTA and World Trade Organization rules. There’s also speculation that Trump will demand that the new rules include a large percentage of specifically American-made content. But why would Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto agree to that? Or to put it another way: How huge a landslide would carry Peña Nieto out of office if he did agree to that? Former President Calderón recently suggested that if Trump insists on renegotiating NAFTA, Mexico should demand a renegotiation of U.S.-Mexico cooperation on immigration, drug interdiction and national security, as well. His point was that Mexico has sovereignty, too.
...

My bold, various parts of South America are falling apart in not so different a way to the ME. North America has a barrier against this mounting chaos. It's called Mexico which is building up its Southern border security and making nice with Uncle Sam on these things.

 

[Lord Camomile]

Just a thought - some folks here keep insisting the Democrats need to listen to and take on board the views of disaffected blue collar Trump supporters, right? Otherwise, they'll never get back into Government.

Do they also think that the Labour party needs to listen to and take on board the views of disaffected working class supporters of UKIP or Britain First? Do they think that's an important strategy for getting back into Government here?

Answers on a postcard please.

I agree with Wilf (et al) on this one. I don't understand where the notion of winning people over with an argument has gone. It feels like everyone has become entrenched in their little camps and it's just about getting more of "us" than "them" out to vote/protest/whatever.

You can point to electoral v popular vote, but the facts are that Trump is President and we're headed out of Europe, so I'm minded to think it's a good idea to understand why those votes ended up the way they did and see if we can't encourage people to change their thinking. Otherwise those votes will be replicated again and again.

Coincidentally, I was recently listening to a podcast interviewing Daryl Davis, an African-American who over a number of years sat down with various leaders within the KKK and managed to get some of them to give up their robes.

Well worth a listen if you have the time.

The Silver Dollar | Love + Radio
How to Argue | Love + Radio

 

[CrabbedOne]

In The NYRB Russia: The Conspiracy Trap

...
For most of its history, the strategy was a colossal waste of money and human resources, probably because Soviet understanding of Western political systems was exceedingly poor. Judging from the memoirs of Soviet defectors, their masters imagined the West exactly as it was portrayed in Soviet propaganda. In a popular 1984 miniseries called “TASS is Authorized to Declare,” for example, a heroic KGB officer exposes an American spy in Moscow. The spy’s handler, an American named John Glabb, not only organizes pro-American military coups in small African countries but also traffics in heroin, which he smuggles in the bodies of babies purchased from impoverished families and killed for CIA purposes. Modern Russian spymasters get their ideas about the West from the West itself—they are generally convinced that the American political system is accurately portrayed by House of Cards. If Russian disruption efforts were more successful during the 2016 American election, it was not because the Russians have become so much better at what they do or have finally developed a sophisticated understanding of American politics—it is because American politics have come to resemble the TV caricatures.

Trump and his entire campaign team are precisely the kinds of fringe characters that Russians have traditionally cultivated, to no measurable effect. Even the insiders on Trump’s team were outsiders: Jeff Sessions was seen by his Senate colleagues as a crank and an extreme outlier on immigration and other issues; General Mike Flynn had been fired by the Obama administration for insubordination that stemmed from his penchant for conspiracy theories. Others, like foreign policy adviser Carter Page, had never been allowed at the grown-up table before. One-time campaign manager Paul Manafort, for all his supposed Republican/Washington credentials, was basically a paid hack for a succession of the world’s crooks. And Steve Bannon, above all, had turned being a fringe character into a profession.

And then this campaign staffed with bottom-feeders won, and talk of Russia’s influence on the outcome—though the Kremlin itself by every indication seems to have assumed a Clinton presidency—has finally reached the point of pushing leading members of Congress to call for an investigation by a special attorney. If a causal relationship between Russian interference and Trump’s 70,000-vote, three-county edge exists, the likelihood that such a relationship can be proved is vanishingly small. Failing that, what might an investigation find? Undoubtedly, it can find that Trump’s associates lied about their contacts with Russian officials—as they lie, habitually, about a great many things. What makes the Russia lies worse than any other?
...

I suspect the Trump Presidency is an increasingly unpleasant surprise for The Kremlin just as it is for most people.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

TTT, Bannon et all will all be gone, or seriously sidelined within a year, they have, I suspect, to the great surprise of the GOP, managed to keep all three parts of the US govt in the hands of the GOP, now the 'useful idiots' have done the business, it will be time to sideline or remove them, so the adults can get back to the business of sucking the US dry.

Looking at the policies they've proposed, it appears that "the children" are quite capable of sucking the US dry. As long as the old GOP profits, they'll go along. The only way they won't, is if it becomes so politically untenable to keep Trump that doing so will cause long-term damage to the GOP.

 

[CrabbedOne]

On War On The Rocks WILL POLITICS TRUMP PROCESS? DEBATING GRAND STRATEGY TODAY

In this episode of Pacific Pundit, we debate whether grand strategy under Trump is possible, and the role that his new national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, will play. Our history segment recalls the national security policy processes Henry Kissinger ran during the Nixon administration. Next, in a wide ranging conversation with Hal Brands (of the School of Advanced International Studies), we talk about what grand strategy is good for, and why Trump’s “operational code” on foreign policy is scary as hell. We also introduce two pieces of scholarly commentary explaining why “Trump won’t get the best deals,” and how loose and inconsistent presidential rhetoric is feeding the worst predatory excesses of international anarchy.

Brands starts from about 8 minutes in and is well worth listening to. Not optimistic that McMaster can ride herd on Trump. That if Trump implements half of what he's obsessed on for thirty years it will wreck the international order. Points out the contradictions that are inherent in Trump's consistent advocacy of certain policies. That fighting a damaging trade war with Mexico will actually cause floods of illegal Mexican immigration. That Trump like many Presidents comes into office thinking the last guy was a useless jerk but may be forced to return to norms by the same constraints Obama faced. Trump's no on my watch one China gambit which seems to have been reversed after Xi gave him the silent treatment may be an example.

Couple of other interesting points. Trump thinks he's a fabulous negotiator but he's the privileged son of a powerful slum real estate tycoon who often had a lot of advantages in his dealmaking particularly dad's political clout in NYC. It's often the environment of deals that shapes their outcomes not the deal maker. Trump intends to reshape the international order in the US's favour. But much of what exists is in fact hugely favourable to the US (e.g. NATO) as it was negotiated at the apex of US power during the Cold War. Revisiting such arrangements as a hesitant hegemon may only lead to great disappointment.

 

[camouflage]

In The NYRB Russia: The Conspiracy Trap
I suspect the Trump Presidency is an increasingly unpleasant surprise for The Kremlin just as it is for most people.

I actually reckon the Kremlin would have preffered Clinton as POTUS, even with the anti-Russian rhetoric the Kremlin would probably have regarded her as a known quantity. Plus she's venal, so if they'd paid the necessary amounts to the relevant bank-accounts... besides which Citizens United makes it nice and straight-forward for customers to bid for the preferred policy doesn't it. Trumps noises might have sounded nice, but who knows what the capricious maverick man-child Donald of Orange will actually do. Better the devil you know really.

 

[CrabbedOne]

Trump administration has done something right: I still don't know how to link from phone but - Israel made noise few days ago about annexing the West Bank. The idea was I think that under trump they could do whatever they feel like. Of course the annexing idea came with the clear proviso that none of the new 'citizens' would be able to vote.
Someone in trump administration called and said that there would be an immediate crisis in the relationship with the US were Israel to go ahead so now they're falling over themselves to say that they aren't planning to do it.

You do realise that there would have been no need for such an intervention if clever old Trump with his masterly deal making skills hadn't given the Israelis the distinct impression any sort of one state solution was fine and they really could do no wrong in his eyes.

It's rewarding a child for setting the cat on fire but then peeing on the blaze.

 

[CrabbedOne]

I actually reckon the Kremlin would have preffered Clinton as POTUS, even with the anti-Russian rhetoric the Kremlin would probably have regarded her as a known quantity. Plus she's venal, so if they'd paid the necessary amounts to the relevant bank-accounts... besides which Citizens United makes it nice and straight-forward for customers to bid for the preferred policy doesn't it. Trumps noises might have sounded nice, but who knows what the capricious maverick man-child Donald of Orange will actually do. Better the devil you know really.

I said the same half a year ago. It's rather borne out by increasingly nervy Russian reactions to President Trump.

I don't think Putin is that stupid. He's a cautious calculating chap not about to gamble wildly on Trump who has untrustworthy nutter written all over him despite the Russo-phile fawning. This isn't a man you'd trust to watch your luggage. You could slip him a few billion and he'd still be looking to screw you. He has no impulse control. No one in their right mind would want Trump's treacherous tiny hands near the nuclear football or even messing recklessly with world trade. The Russians want a controlled adjustment to their status with their American enemies not a faux friendship they've no faith in or a complete collapse of the globalised system.

Clinton on the other hand is a dead eyed cold fish like Putin. Likely to be a bit more drama than Obama but a predictable enemy who can be methodically pushed into a corner. Also likely to have been a weak President as she'd have been attacked as illegitimate by every means available from day one by Trump and all his angry supporters. Even Trump seemed to expect things to play out that way and it would have been better for his frail mental health if it had. Now that's something the GRU&FSB could have safely had fun with.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Trump adviser spoke with Russian ambassador five months before the election

 

[CRI]

The statement would work if you added 'the idea(l) of / aspiration for a' before 'colourblind society'. A more charitable reading of that would think that this is what they meant.

You mean the use of "colorblind" in the report of the AP/NORC survey on differing beliefs of Republicans and Democrats? Generally speaking, Republicans would say they are "colorblind" which it comes to race equality. Everyone has an equal chance to succeed in America, race isn't a barrier and it's lazy to say it is. Democrats would be less likely to take a "colourblind" approach, but rather acknowledge the legacy of racism in America, and it's impact on opportunities and barriers today, supporting policies that "level up" chances for folks who are marginalised.

The report shows Republicans see Christianity and "Early European Immigrant Traditions" (aka "whiteness,") as intrinsic to American identity. This demonstrates that even the limp claims to be "colorblind" by some Republicans is a total sham. Their ideal America is white supremacist, period.