The Trump presidency

[8den]

Not heard that, in fact there is quite a bit of (admittedly self-serving) testimony from the likes of Speer and Guderian that he ordered (which they ignored) the destruction of much of what remained of Germany. He gave up the German people as lost (edit) and unworthy, once they failed to win his war for him.

If you've caused the holocaust, getting points for good behaviour for not using mustard gas, is really rather moot.

 

[agricola]

Eukadol more likely.

Rienzi took him most of the way, the drugs only finished him off

 

[8den]

This thread's also about the opposition to the Trump presidency, which makes the election relevant. The Democratic Party has a lot of soul-searching to do about what kind of party they want to be and what kind of opposition they want to present to Trump, which means looking at the reasons why Hillary Clinton's candidacy was an epic failure - especially since Trump appears to have adopted her foreign policy.

Bernie Sanders is very relevant too - in contrast to Clinton, he is still part of the government and has a powerful role in opposing Trump's policies.

Then talk about the Trump presidency not how many electoral college votes Sanders could have got.

 

[8den]

Although speaking of alternative realities I quite like the milliverse.

The Miliverse (@TheMiliverse) | Twitter



it's a twitter account purporting to be an alternative reality where Ed Milliband won the last general election. Join me, it looks so dull and pleasant.

Seriously, I'm reaching a point where trying to design a portal gun ala Rick and Morty to take me there seems like the right move.

 

[CRI]

Although speaking of alternative realities I quite like the milliverse.

The Miliverse (@TheMiliverse) | Twitter



it's a twitter account purporting to be an alternative reality where Ed Milliband won the last general election. Join me, it looks so dull and pleasant.

Seriously, I'm reaching a point where trying to design a portal gun ala Rick and Morty to take me there seems like the right move.

Maybe it's my age, or the perpetual shell shock from the past 10 months or so, but I would heartily welcome "dull and pleasant" right now, I really would.

 

[gosub]

I was wondering about Attlee who served on the Western front and in Mesopotamia as well.

didn't have him on the Western front -Gallipoli,then Iraq, wasn't used by Ottomans

 

[Obediah Marsh]

It is not fully understood, but Hitler's own experience of being gassed probably ensured that they never used it on the battlefield or in bombing raids. It may also have something to have done with them knowing that we had thousands of tons of mustard gas and other nasty stuff on hand and - in the form of Bomber Command - the means to deliver it, whereas they didn't.

That sounds like gas was 'the bomb' of WWII, at least before the summer of 1945. Were people in the 1930s as frightened of gas as the next generation was of nukes?

 

[J Ed]

Although speaking of alternative realities I quite like the milliverse.

The Miliverse (@TheMiliverse) | Twitter



it's a twitter account purporting to be an alternative reality where Ed Milliband won the last general election. Join me, it looks so dull and pleasant.

Seriously, I'm reaching a point where trying to design a portal gun ala Rick and Morty to take me there seems like the right move.

the limits of the liberal imagination

 

[CRI]

This thread's also about the opposition to the Trump presidency, which makes the election relevant. The Democratic Party has a lot of soul-searching to do about what kind of party they want to be and what kind of opposition they want to present to Trump, which means looking at the reasons why Hillary Clinton's candidacy was an epic failure - especially since Trump appears to have adopted her foreign policy.

Bernie Sanders is very relevant too - in contrast to Clinton, he is still part of the government and has a powerful role in opposing Trump's policies.

I'm not buying that Clinton was an "epic fail" candidate, or that anyone has a window into a parallel universe where they can say with confidence she would have been a crap president, worse than Trump or ffs, that she's have pursued an identical foreign policy to Trump. She was a US senator for 8 years and Secretary of State for four, so didn't just fall off the turnip truck.

Okay, Sanders is ranking minority member of the Senate Budget Committee and ordinary member of a few other committees. He sits as an Independent, wasn't popular among Senate Democrats before he joined the party to run, and considerably less popular now. To say he has a "powerful role in opposing Trump's policies," as a Senator with no party affiliation is frankly, wishful thinking. Being popular among his own supporters, and beloved of some left leaning British folk doesn't make him powerful, nor mean he commands support from the Democratic party or Democratic voters.

My own political views are closer to his than Clinton's on many issues, but not enough registered Democrats shared those views in 2016 to get him the nomination, period. He really did use the party as a flag of convenience and didn't acknowledge or respect the grunt work of party activists or Democrats running in state and local elections. He could have engaged with the party's core, shown his genuine commitment to working with them to reform the party, brought along new supporters and could have pulled the party to the left. But, he didn't. Democrats remember how he constantly dissed the party, was vitriolic in attacks on Clinton right up to the convention (and was hardly enthusiastic about getting his supporters to back her), alienated women in the party by suggesting reproductive rights was a negotiable (and still saying that) and alienated minority ethnic supporters by constantly centring on the "plight" of white, working class men (many of whom would never vote Democrat, regardless of who led the party.) His recent, "Trump voters aren't racist," statement made it crystal clear that at best doesn't understand, at worst doesn't care about the most disadvantaged working class people in America and those who are the most faithful supporters of the Democratic party.

During the primaries, the GOP could mostly sit back and let Democratic party infighting go on, knowing it would damage whichever candidate came out on top. The mainstream media kept Bernie's skeletons out of sight and portrayed him as a plausible candidate to make it look like a "horse race" for the clicks and revenue. Had Sanders won the nomination though, the gloves would have come off and he'd have been crucified by the Republicans and the media. Everything from the rape fantasy essays to his support for dumping Vermont's nuclear waste in a poor Texan Latino community would have been thrown out with no mercy. His lacklustre legislative career and seeming lack of success in any field would have been thrown at him constantly.

I doubt he'd have had the Democratic party full on behind him, particularly those grass roots party faithful who hadn't been convinced he had their interests at heart. Without the enthusiasm of the party (not talking about Bernie supporters - many of whom weren't Democrats) Democrats elsewhere on the ticket quite possibly could have lost, meaning a bigger GOP majority in the US congress and statehouses.

I doubt any of this will convince those who think they know best, even if they've never been to America. Funnily enough, they'd probably be the first to slate any American who presumes to know about the British political system without having been outside the US, but hey ho. This opinion piece from a year ago sets out the situation on more detail. It's sad because at that time, I don't think anyone had a clue just how shit things would become.

Too Easy: How Republicans Would Tear Apart an Unvetted Bernie Sanders in the General Election

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The Sean Spicer thing still cracks me up. How he kept digging. News today says that after the unfortunate incident he phoned a man called Sheldon Adelson, a billionaire jewish republican doner, to apologise to him if he has caused any offence.

Adelson has been a big Trump supporter.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

the limits of the liberal imagination

lib·er·al
ˈlib(ə)rəl/
adjective
adjective: liberal

1. 1.
   open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.
   "they have more liberal views toward marriage and divorce than some people"
   • favorable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms.
     "liberal citizenship laws"
     synonyms: tolerant, unprejudiced, unbigoted, broad-minded, open-minded, enlightened; More
     permissive, free, free and easy, easygoing, libertarian, indulgent, lenient
     "the values of a liberal society"
     antonyms: narrow-minded, bigoted
   • (in a political context) favoring maximum individual liberty in political and social reform.
     "a liberal democratic state"
     synonyms: progressive, advanced, modern, forward-looking, forward-thinking, progressivist, enlightened, reformist, radical
     "a liberal social agenda"
     antonyms: reactionary, conservative
   • of or characteristic of Liberals or a Liberal Party.
     adjective: Liberal
   • (in the UK) relating to the Liberal Democrat Party.
     adjective: Liberal
     "the Liberal leader"
   • Theology
     regarding many traditional beliefs as dispensable, invalidated by modern thought, or liable to change.
2. 2.
   (of education) concerned mainly with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training.
   synonyms: wide-ranging, broad-based, general
   "a liberal education"
3. 3.
   (especially of an interpretation of a law) broadly construed or understood; not strictly literal or exact.
   "they could have given the 1968 Act a more liberal interpretation"
   synonyms: flexible, broad, loose, rough, free, general, nonliteral, nonspecific, imprecise, vague, indefinite
   "a liberal interpretation of divorce laws"
   antonyms: strict, to the letter

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

1. 4.
   given, used, or occurring in generous amounts.
   "liberal amounts of wine had been consumed"
   synonyms: abundant, copious, ample, plentiful, generous, lavish, luxuriant, profuse, considerable, prolific, rich;
   literaryplenteous
   "a liberal coating of paint"
   antonyms: scant
   • (of a person) giving generously.
     "Sam was too liberal with the wine"
     synonyms: generous, openhanded, unsparing, unstinting, ungrudging, lavish, free, munificent, bountiful, beneficent, benevolent, big-hearted, philanthropic, charitable, altruistic, unselfish;
     literarybounteous
     "they were liberal with their cash"
     antonyms: careful, miserly

noun
noun: liberal; plural noun: liberals

1. 1.
   a person of liberal views.
   • a supporter or member of a Liberal Party.
     noun: Liberal; plural noun: Liberals

Origin

Middle English: via Old French from Latin liberalis, from liber ‘free (man).’ The original sense was ‘suitable for a free man,’ hence ‘suitable for a gentleman’ (one not tied to a trade), surviving in liberal arts . Another early sense, ‘generous’ (sense 4 of the adjective), gave rise to an obsolete meaning ‘free from restraint,’ leading to sense 1 of the adjective (late 18th century).

 

[J Ed]

The smug style in American liberalism

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

liberal - definition of liberal in English | Oxford Dictionaries

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

liberal - definition of liberal in English | Oxford Dictionaries

that definition was so smug and liberal I nearly threw my foot stool though my window

 

[CRI]

Are people still not "getting" that liberal means something different in the US from in the UK, even when it's used as an insult? Crikey.

 

[inva]

Are people still not "getting" that liberal means something different in the US from in the UK, even when it's used as an insult? Crikey.

no

 

[HoratioCuthbert]

Are people still not "getting" that liberal means something different in the US from in the UK, even when it's used as an insult? Crikey.

Spending a fair bit of time getting the craic with people on Jacobin FB comments, or the amusing Facebook group "Surely this will stop Trump!" I can honestly say I've never encountered such issues with translation :-D

 

[agricola]

Adelson has been a big Trump supporter.

Any excuse to repost one of the best Daily Show visual gags:

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

(CNN) Republican Ron Estes beat back a surprisingly strong challenge from an unheralded and underfunded Democratic challenger to claim a special election victory in Kansas' 4th district on Tuesday night.

A win is a win -- and Republicans avoided the catastrophic outcome of losing in a congressional district where President Donald Trump won by 27 points last November. But in Estes' victory there are warning signs for Republicans preparing for the first midterm election of the Trump presidency in 2018.

Kansas special election: GOP averts disastes but 2018 looms - CNNPolitics.com

I'm seeing some signs of a push back against Gov. Brownback and his devastating policies. I was down there last Oct. and I didn't talk to a soul who supported him. I don't think its against Trump, per se, but it might be evidence that things are starting to change. This was one underfunded, unknown, Berniecrat. The midterms are going to be interesting if the Bernie wing manages to hold together.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Are people still not "getting" that liberal means something different in the US from in the UK, even when it's used as an insult? Crikey.

The Oxford Dictionary is a British dictionary, though.

 

[J Ed]

Not just Putin then.

Clinton campaign plagued by bickering

“Her aides took the browbeating — one of several she delivered in person and on the phone that day — in silence. They had a lot of their own thoughts on what went wrong, some of which echoed Hillary’s assessment: her message was off for Michigan, and she had refused to go hard against trade; Mook had pinched pennies and failed to put organizers on the ground; the polling and analytics were a touch too rosy, meaning the campaign didn’t know Bernie was ahead; she had set up an ambiguous decisionmaking structure on the campaign; and she’d focused too heavily on black and brown voters at the expense of competing for the whites who had formed her base in 2008. The list went on and on.

The underlying truth — the one that many didn’t want to admit to themselves — was the person ultimately responsible for these decisions, the one whose name was on the ticket, hadn’t corrected these problems, all of which had been brought to her attention before primary day. She’d stuck with the plan, and it had cost her.”

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/328405-clinton-campaign-plagued-by-bickering

 

[Yossarian]

This opinion piece from a year ago sets out the situation on more detail. It's sad because at that time, I don't think anyone had a clue just how shit things would become.

Too Easy: How Republicans Would Tear Apart an Unvetted Bernie Sanders in the General Election

This is the same guy - a Clinton staffer - explaining at the end of August why Trump was going to lose. Predictions are apparently not his strong point.

The current contrast between Hillary Clinton's and Donald Trump's campaigns can be simply explained by the candidates themselves. For Hillary Clinton, she has truly learned the lessons of 2008 and have applied those lessons to her 2016 campaign. She has surrounded herself with young, talented advisors and campaign staff. She has prioritized the swing states, fully staffing those states beginning in April with hundreds of field organizers and has already gone ahead with a full ad blitz nearly five months before the election. At the same time, she has not written off any states and has numerous staff in the suddenly competitive states such as Georgia, Arizona, Missouri, North Carolina, and Utah. All of these efforts in conjunction with a 50-state strategy has made the Clinton campaign a reflection of the candidate: a methodical, detailed, and driven enterprise geared at not only winning the White House but also flipping control of the Senate and making significant gains in the House as well.

If Sanders could not have succeeded where Clinton failed, are there any Democrats that could have made it that have a shot in 2020? Nobody cares about Martin O'Malley, and putting Lincoln Chafee up against Trump would have just been cruel. Maybe Elizabeth Warren might have had a chance...

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The Government Accountability Office will investigate whether members of President Donald Trump’s transition team followed federal guidelines and ethics rules during the presidential transition, following complaints lodged by Democratic lawmakers in November.

GAO says it's investigating Trump transition team

 

[CRI]

Kansas special election: GOP averts disastes but 2018 looms - CNNPolitics.com

I'm seeing some signs of a push back against Gov. Brownback and his devastating policies. I was down there last Oct. and I didn't talk to a soul who supported him. I don't think its against Trump, per se, but it might be evidence that things are starting to change. This was one underfunded, unknown, Berniecrat. The midterms are going to be interesting if the Bernie wing manages to hold together.

Considering it's only been 5 months since the election, it's an impressive feat in a very pro Trump area. I genuinely hope those who pinned their hopes on Sanders and the more traditional support base of the party can pull together and kick GOP ass in the midterms. They really do need each other if they want to flip enough seats in Congress to make a difference. This will be the way to pull the party to the left.

 

[Pickman's model]

The Sean Spicer thing still cracks me up. How he kept digging. News today says that after the unfortunate incident he phoned a man called Sheldon Adelson, a billionaire jewish republican doner, to apologise to him if he has caused any offence.

Donor

A doner is a kebab made with slices of unidentifiable meat

 

[Pickman's model]

This is the same guy - a Clinton staffer - explaining at the end of August why Trump was going to lose. Predictions are apparently not his strong point.



If Sanders could not have succeeded where Clinton failed, are there any Democrats that could have made it that have a shot in 2020? Nobody cares about Martin O'Malley, and putting Lincoln Chafee up against Trump would have just been cruel. Maybe Elizabeth Warren might have had a chance...

Let's see whether Trump makes it to 2018 before worrying about 2020

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Considering it's only been 5 months since the election, it's an impressive feat in a very pro Trump area. I genuinely hope those who pinned their hopes on Sanders and the more traditional support base of the party can pull together and kick GOP ass in the midterms. They really do need each other if they want to flip enough seats in Congress to make a difference. This will be the way to pull the party to the left.

Its not a complete surprise considering that Sanders won the primary in Kansas. It does give some credibility to the idea that a properly supported Sanders campaign might have won the general election last Nov.

 

[J Ed]

Considering it's only been 5 months since the election, it's an impressive feat in a very pro Trump area. I genuinely hope those who pinned their hopes on Sanders and the more traditional support base of the party can pull together and kick GOP ass in the midterms. They really do need each other if they want to flip enough seats in Congress to make a difference. This will be the way to pull the party to the left.

The candidate received very little funding because he was a Berniecrat. Another Clintonite stab in the back.

 

[CRI]

This is the same guy - a Clinton staffer - explaining at the end of August why Trump was going to lose. Predictions are apparently not his strong point.



If Sanders could not have succeeded where Clinton failed, are there any Democrats that could have made it that have a shot in 2020? Nobody cares about Martin O'Malley, and putting Lincoln Chafee up against Trump would have just been cruel. Maybe Elizabeth Warren might have had a chance...

Let's go back to the 2016 election. I don't think there was any Democratic candidate that would have been a shoe in. Trump's blow hard bossy bullshitting captured the hearts of people who hated Obama and the shame of having a Black president with an absolute passion. They loved that Trump didn't pussy foot around when making it clear he shared their resentment of Muslims, Mexicans, African Americans and women who didn't know their place. His pussy grabbing didn't bother them a bit.

It was a mistake on the part of Democrats to assume Trump's behaviour and proposals were so preposterous that no one would really take him seriously. It was their mistake appealing to the "better nature" of conscientious Republicans, thinking they would reject Trump. In reality, Republicans liked his policies, if not all his manners. Some held their noses and voted, others did it with a whoop whoop. It was also their mistake to think that facts would overcome fears for those enthralled to Trump's vision. They also counted on the media to at least attempt to uncover the truth, which was admittedly naive.

I don't know who would stand the best chance as Democratic nominee in 2020, but it's not just about who's elected President. As I've said all along, the next step is focussing on the 2018 mid terms, channelling the energy from the town halls, phone jamming, marches, etc., getting the message to those who didn't vote last time and helping those who were prevented so they can vote next time. Leave the Trump voters, including those who let their hatred lead them to vote against their own interests, to stew in their juices.