Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

What stupid shit has Trump done today?

If I were Puerto Rico I would approach Demark and ask to be one of their territories. Greenland has a poverty rate around 16%. Puerto Rico has a poverty rate of 41%. While Greenland's rate isn't anything to brag about, it is still less than California at 19%. It seems to me that Puerto Rico would be much better off, and the Danes could have visa-free access to a warm vacation spot in exchange. If worked correctly, it could be arranged so that the US doesn't get a dime in the deal.
The US Virgin Islands were once Danish territory, so the idea of Puerto Rico becoming Danish is plausible. Perhaps poor states like Mississippi might also consider becoming Danish too.
 
The arrogance and ingratitude, the disregard for any rules or consequences - he really is a disgrace to the office, and the standard hasn't been particularly high before him. What accomplishments can he claim: 'made America great again'? He's fucked up everything he turned his attention to. Played to a gallary of racists, doomsday cultists and conspiracy theorists. The country could end up as a backwater of inequality and barbarism.
 
The arrogance and ingratitude, the disregard for any rules or consequences - he really is a disgrace to the office, and the standard hasn't been particularly high before him. What accomplishments can he claim: 'made America great again'? He's fucked up everything he turned his attention to. Played to a gallary of racists, doomsday cultists and conspiracy theorists. The country could end up as a backwater of inequality and barbarism.
The antics of Trump show that there is something fundamentally wrong with the Constitution of the USA, when there is no mechanism to remove an incompetent President from office.
 
The antics of Trump show that there is something fundamentally wrong with the Constitution of the USA, when there is no mechanism to remove an incompetent President from office.


They can be removed by impeachment or , presumably, by being declared medically incapable of fulfilling his duties.

The best way, though, is by election. Better to have an elected incompetent than a system where unaccountable opponents can depose with ease.
 
They can be removed by impeachment or , presumably, by being declared medically incapable of fulfilling his duties.

The best way, though, is by election. Better to have an elected incompetent than a system where unaccountable opponents can depose with ease.
So, in other words, Trump is not so bad.
 
So, in other words, Trump is not so bad.

Not as bad as a system in which unelected elites can subvert the will of the electorate. If they want the latter can get rid of him in just over two months.

Giving Congress, also popularly elected to impeach, is what they currently have, and that's a good enough check
 
Not as bad as a system in which unelected elites can subvert the will of the electorate. If they want the latter can get rid of him in just over two months.

Giving Congress, also popularly elected to impeach, is what they currently have, and that's a good enough check

Impeachment. Get witnesses to come forward and testify. It may just work...
 
If the pilot of an aeroplane was drunk you would not ask the passengers to decide if he should be removed from the cockpit.
 
Not as bad as a system in which unelected elites can subvert the will of the electorate. If they want the latter can get rid of him in just over two months.

Giving Congress, also popularly elected to impeach, is what they currently have, and that's a good enough check
When you have the current state of play where there are two entranched partisan parties running proceedings and it's the party backing the defendant who has control of the conviction process and votes against it, that pretty much makes a mockery of the whole system. So he got impeached in congress... Functionally useless if he doesn't get convicted by the senate. This check has proven to be, as so many others have over the past few years, utterly ineffective.
 
Impeachment. Get witnesses to come forward and testify. It may just work...
Unfortunately, not possible, when the GOP control the senate. And unfortunately, the situation in America, and their electoral system, makes that a more likely scenario than not, most of the time.
having said that, there's an outside chance the Senate will flip in November.
 
Last edited:
When you have the current state of play where there are two entranched partisan parties running proceedings and it's the party backing the defendant who has control of the conviction process and votes against it, that pretty much makes a mockery of the whole system. So he got impeached in congress... Functionally useless if he doesn't get convicted by the senate. This check has proven to be, as so many others have over the past few years, utterly ineffective.
Precisely.
 
Unfortunately, not possible, when the GOP control the senate. And unfortunately, the situation in America, and their electoral system, makes that a more likely scenario than not, most of the time.
having said that, there's an outside chance the Senate will flip in November.

Yeah, was being sarcastic. Impeachment doesn't seem to work... farcical and all forgotten. :(
 
When you have the current state of play where there are two entranched partisan parties running proceedings and it's the party backing the defendant who has control of the conviction process and votes against it, that pretty much makes a mockery of the whole system. So he got impeached in congress... Functionally useless if he doesn't get convicted by the senate. This check has proven to be, as so many others have over the past few years, utterly ineffective.

It's shit, but the generals deciding to put things right is shitter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
Not as bad as a system in which unelected elites can subvert the will of the electorate. If they want the latter can get rid of him in just over two months.

Giving Congress, also popularly elected to impeach, is what they currently have, and that's a good enough check

I am not suggesting dictatorship. I was making the point that there is something wrong with a Constitution that does not allow the removal of someone who is unable to perform their job. In a parliamentary system, a Prime Minister can be removed by his/her party if he/she loses the confidence of the party. This does not create a constitutional crisis, and does not lead to dictatorship. As for the “elites” you mention: Trump is himself one of the elite.

How is it that Trump has any power? I thought that the principle of the “separation of powers”, on which the US Constitution is supposedly based, specifies that the Executive is separate from the Legislature. This surely means that the President merely implements the policies decided by Congress, and does not actually implement any policies of his own.
 
. As for the “elites” you mention: Trump is himself one of the elite.

The phrase I used was "unelected elites" . Trump was elected

How is it that Trump has any power? I thought that the principle of the “separation of powers”, on which the US Constitution is supposedly based, specifies that the Executive is separate from the Legislature. This surely means that the President merely implements the policies decided by Congress, and does not actually implement any policies of his own.

Trump has power because the constitution grants him power. In the UK executive power is in the hands of the government; Prime Minister and Cabinet. Presumably, you would never say that the British government has no power. The US President (and, indeed, the French President) have similar powers but are weaker because they do not necessarily have the parliamentary majority that a British Prime Minister has, something further complicated by the fact that neither legislative chamber has supremacy over the others. The President can make executive orders but these can be struck down by the courts if they are considered to violate the constitution or to conflict with existing legislation. The President is also limited by the fact that so much power is exercised at a state rather than a federal level. So the President constitutionally has power to implement policy, those policies can often be stymied fairly easily, which is why many Presidents including Trump and Obama actually achieve so little, and also why Trump spends so much time fulminating at press conferences and on twitter.
 
Back
Top Bottom